Post by account_disabled on Jan 31, 2024 9:00:40 GMT
The fact that a store offers three days to exchange defective products does not prevent the item from being replaced within the deadlines provided for in articles 18 and 26 of the Consumer Protection Code (CDC). With this understanding, the 3rd Panel of the Superior Court of Justice reinstated the sentence that had dismissed as unfounded a public civil action proposed by the Public Ministry of Rio de Janeiro for alleged illegal conduct by a large retail store of offering a three-day deadline for the exchange of defective products. According to the MP-RJ, the store chain would limit the exchange of products purchased at the establishment to just three days, counting from the issuance of the invoice.
After the deadline, the store would inform Buy Phone Number List consumers that checking for any defects and carrying out repairs would primarily be the responsibility of technical assistance, exempting themselves from any responsibility. In the action, the MP-RJ asked that the company be obliged to remedy any defects or exchange the products within 30 days, in the case of non-durable products, or within 90 days, in relation to durable products, under penalty of a fine of R$30 thousand. The MP also asked for compensation for collective moral and material damages of R$500,000.
Possibility of exchange In the first instance, the judge dismissed the requests as unfounded as he understood that the routine adopted by the store does not exclude the possibility of the consumer, after the three-day period, making the replacement in accordance with what is established by the CDC. The Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro partially amended the sentence to determine that the store chain should send any defective durable and non-durable products to technical assistance within 30 or 90 days, depending on the case, under penalty of a fine of R$50 for each refusal of service.
After the deadline, the store would inform Buy Phone Number List consumers that checking for any defects and carrying out repairs would primarily be the responsibility of technical assistance, exempting themselves from any responsibility. In the action, the MP-RJ asked that the company be obliged to remedy any defects or exchange the products within 30 days, in the case of non-durable products, or within 90 days, in relation to durable products, under penalty of a fine of R$30 thousand. The MP also asked for compensation for collective moral and material damages of R$500,000.
Possibility of exchange In the first instance, the judge dismissed the requests as unfounded as he understood that the routine adopted by the store does not exclude the possibility of the consumer, after the three-day period, making the replacement in accordance with what is established by the CDC. The Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro partially amended the sentence to determine that the store chain should send any defective durable and non-durable products to technical assistance within 30 or 90 days, depending on the case, under penalty of a fine of R$50 for each refusal of service.