When goods supplied to a consumer fail a consumer guarantee, the supplier must, on the consumer's request, remedy a failure that is not major within a reasonable time by curing title, repairing, replacing with an identical type or refunding (ss 259(2) and 261); if it refuses or delays, the consumer may have the failure fixed elsewhere at the supplier's cost or reject the goods. For a failure that cannot be remedied or is major (goods a reasonable consumer would not have bought knowing the failure, significant departure from description or sample, substantial unfitness not easily remedied, or unsafe, or several failures together; s 260), the consumer may reject the goods or claim compensation for reduced value. On a valid rejection the supplier must, as the consumer elects, refund the price and other consideration in money (not store credit) or replace with goods of the same type and similar value if reasonably available, and must collect at its own expense goods that cannot be returned without significant cost (s 263). The supplier is also liable for reasonably foreseeable consequential loss (s 259(4)). Rejection is barred after the rejection period, or if the goods were lost, disposed of, damaged after delivery for unrelated reasons, or attached and cannot be removed without damage (s 262). Replacement goods carry fresh guarantees (s 264); connected service contracts may be terminated with a refund (s 265); gift recipients have the same rights (s 266); the consumer may act whether or not the goods are in original packaging.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.