Colin

From Wikipedia (ok I know it's not a legal journal, but this isn't a courtroom):

"An implied warranty of merchantability is a warranty implied by law that if a merchant (meaning someone who makes an occupation of selling things) sells something, that merchant is guaranteeing that the goods are reasonably fit for the general purpose for which they are sold"

Doesn't the disclaimer suggest they are not "guaranteeing" anything? Anyway, I'm not an attorney so I'm not trying to represent myself as such....

GIBSON6594

so let me get this straight, if you buy a $100 watch with a $20 2 year battery in it included in the $100. The battery only last 1 year, you would expect a free battery and the percentage difference of the value of the watch without said battery returned to you. So you would expect $20 as well as a free battery?

If you answer yes to this you might was well jump off a bridge because you are insane.

Ron Parr

In fact, I can't purchase the option.

What I did purchase was a car that was advertised as having certain capabilities to connect with certain accessories. This capability was supposed to be part of the car.

I don't see how or why the cost of the accessory would have anything to do with this issue. The value of the promised capability is the issue.

Ron Parr

If you google some more, you'll see that in some states, NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY, you cannot escape the implied warranty of merchantability.

In other states, you can escape it only be explicitly and boldly listing that the good is being sold "As Is". Acura does not label or sell cars this way.

Dan Martin

Well, I've said my piece. Still just as amazed as when this thread started, but good luck with your fight.

Ron Parr

Of course, we'd need to define what "2 year battery" means. If it means a battery with a mean life of two years and one year falls within the generally accepted range of life for a "2 year" battery, then there's no issue.

If "2 year battery" means a battery that is promised to last at least 2 years, then I would expect the difference in value between a 1 year battery and a 2 year battery.

Now you've asked something about getting an extra battery in there somewhere. I'm not sure where the extra battery comes from. That would be redundant if you got the cash.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

As a percentage, how big a part was the availability of this accessory in your decision to purchase the car?

Colin

I'll forward this thread to someone in Acura Parts

GIBSON6594

fair enough...1 year is not within the time period, the battery must last at least 2 years and not one day less.

i bolded the most relevant thing, why wouldn't you want a refund on the watch itself? You bought a watch that was supposed to work a certain way and it didn't. The answer is because you were sufficiently compensated by the returned value of the battery.

Just as the returned value of the ipod interface is sufficient

Ron Parr

That's not a relevant question. Suppose the only car in the universe were the Acura TSX. The issue doesn't go away. The promise and obligation remain.

The issue is the difference in value between what was promised and what was given.

Ron Parr

The last sentence is a total non sequitur.

I expect to compensated for the difference between the value of what was promised and what was delivered. This is true for the watch and it's true for the car. I'm not asking to be double compensated in either case.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

It's totally relevant. How much it calculated into your decision will determine just how valuable it was for you.

And if you're embarrassed because you realized you bought the car based solely on the fact that you thought this ridiculous accessory would be available, I understand too.

dj Dozhe

I just came across this thread as I was listening to my iPod in my 06 TSX through the aux input. My question is, what kind of a mental midget pays for an integration that costs the same as the product(the iPod itself) without doing any research? You deserve the irony God hath dealt you my son. sim simma.

I'm an oddity because i bought the car with the options I saw instead of the down-the-line-after-production product that seemed to be crap even before it was released. Does no one remember the threads before it was released that aptly defined this as most likely not worth it?

I appreciate the people who researched it and tried it anyway for the good of the group. I have no sympathy for anyone else. Sorry.

GIBSON6594

you said the price of the link should be refunded as well as the value difference in the car that allows for the capability to use the link should be refunded. Sounds like double compensation to me...

Ron Parr

No. As I already explained the issue would remain if the TSX were the only car one could buy.

Colin

Just to be clear, Ron didn't actually BUY a music link right? He's upset because it's no longer available? This is thread is so long I've forgotten already.

I want to give a shout out to Rick!

Ron Parr

If somebody actually purchased a link that doesn't work, they should be refunded for this. That's a separate event.

I'm talking about the car. People should be refunded once for the difference in the value of the car. I've said this so many times. Why do you keep thinking I'm saying something else?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

And my question would still stand because it is not supposing you were looking at other cars. I want to know just how important this thing really is to you. So quit dodging the question.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Who's Rick?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

Because you refuse to tell us just what value you put on this particular ACCESSORY in your decision on purchasing the vehicle.

Ron Parr

I can't buy a music link. My dealer won't sell one.

The promised availability of the music link did enter into my discussions with the dealer about the value and price of the car.

GIBSON6594

So you are now saying that everyone that bought the 06 should get a partial refund for the incapability for the TSX to pair with the ipod link?

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

We already know that. The question is, of what value was it to you. How much off the price of the car would you have expected if this weren't a feature in the first place?

Ron Parr

The question doesn't make sense. There was never a calculus in which individual features were given percentage scores. I don't even know how that would work. I can't answer a question about a nonsensical event that never occurred.

If your question is whether I would have purchased the TSX anyway if Acura had explicitly said that the TSX would not work with the music link, then the answer is almost certainly yes. However, this simply has no effect on Acura's obligation.

FWIW, I've already said in this thread that if given the choice when I purchased the car, I would have paid at least $50 to have the option of adding the music link later. So, to me the capability is worth at least $50.

Ron Parr

I have no idea what you're talking about. I have been very clear.

Ron Parr

I already addressed that specific question much earlier in the thread.

Ron Parr

Everybody who purchased the car before Acura made the problem known - yes. This is what I have been saying very clearly unequivocally for a long time here. It's not something new.

CGTSX2004

iTrader: (1)

All this for $50? Sounds like a mountain out of a mole hill if you ask me.

Colin

Funny, till post #144 I don't recall any $ value placed on the lack of this feature

dj Dozhe

Now that I understand I agree completely. I think we should also be reimbursed for the supposed "electronically controlled lumbar adjustment".

Ron Parr

I said at least $50. It haven't thought it through very much; it could be more.

You say, "all this." All what? Debating with you guys about consumer rights and the right way for a company to handle a $50 situation? Perhaps we call could have spent our time better, but that's often the nature of debates. People get interested in the issues and the sides that they support.

dj Dozhe

FWIW

page 5

now Ron's offering a discount.

Ron Parr

In 75, I mentioned goods with a value of around $50-$100 and suggested a discount be offered on these.

In 108, I mentioned the $50 figure.

Colin

Yes, my apologies, I just re-read that (you beat me to it)

smite

So I have to say that I think all of this is very amusing. Of course, any kind of class action lawsuit would never happen, but I too was extremely disappointed when the music link turned out to be a bust. I'm not even going to begin to try an interpret the law related merits of a hypothetical case, but in the end, I have to applaud Ron for his patience in trying to explain the way he sees things. I'm getting frustrated just reading the logical fallacies thrown at him, and he's handling them like a pro.

Colin

To me, the irony is if the interface worked in the TSX as it does in the TL, I feel he'd even more disappointed with implementation. IMO, this is a blessing in disguise!

weezer80

Yes, very amusing thread indeed! I have had my car for a week now... after waiting more than 2 months for my PWP 6 MT Navi to arrive at my door.

I agreed that Acura dropped the ball on failing to integrate the Musiclink properly... hell, even if they couldn't do that, throw in the darn 3.5mm headphone wire... but anywho, everyone just needs to relax and enjoy what the rest of the car has to offer.

Get over your high horse and you will be a happier camper. Personally, I would've loved having IPOD integration as I love my music (THAT WOULD BE BEYOND COOL). At times though, looking down at the Navi screen a bit excessively can be dangerous. BUT the fact of the matter is, no matter what "that additional value" would be, I still love everything about the TSX. Period.

If you want to find a few more nitpicky things on top of the IPOD fiasco, see separate thread about lack of penholders.

Beoshingus

hergertr

See Apple iPod Link . Apple is clearly advocating iPod integration into many manufacturers cars. In my previous post (#23) I purchased an aftermarket iPod integration product for my 2004 Prius. I did so only after it had been thoroughly discussed on another forum. I am very happy with it but unfortunately the manufacturer only makes interfaces for Toyota products. It integrates with my navigation screen and steering wheel controls. I am currently using the Monster Charging Cable in the 2006 TSX that gives me volume and pause control only. The above web site leaves off the TSX from the Acura products. Between Apple and Acura I suspect there will eventually be a suitable product for the TSX. I am curious as to the satisfaction of other Acura models with the Musiclink product.

Zephrem

It is not an Apple product. ZappTek is the producer of the software plug-in.