The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 18 October 2019, 08:31 AM   #121
123Blueface
"TRF" Member
 
123Blueface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: USA
Watch: All
Posts: 5,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK797 View Post
Man, that takes me back to studying contract law at Uni, I did a summer placement with a big law firm and after they spent half an hour deciding where to put a comma in a sentence I knew this wasn't the job for me.
__________________
Rolex 228235 DD40 Olive, 126710BLRO, 116710BLNR, 116613LB, 116500LN White, 126610LN, 116500LN Black, 126610LV, 116610LV, 126334 Blue Diamond
Breitling Navitimer 01, Cartier Santos Large
123Blueface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 October 2019, 02:45 PM   #122
marcusp23
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Texas
Watch: Sub, DJ41, CHNR an
Posts: 468
Quote:
Originally Posted by 123Blueface View Post
I disagree.
It says if watch was sold to a consumer whose name appears on the card. Doesn’t say that it must be the that same consumer presenting it for service. If watch sold by AD, with purchaser’s name, and watch then subsequently sold to someone else, where is language to deny such claim?
However, as others have chimed in, who has funds to pursue this ambiguous language? Certainly a class action would be a big aid. BTW, invariably, courts rule on ambiguity in a contract in favor of the plaintiff, not the party writing the contract.
I made a living out of disputing contract language.


I agree with your reading, and your view that the language is ambiguous
marcusp23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 October 2019, 07:11 AM   #123
quakeroatmeal
"TRF" Member
 
quakeroatmeal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: NY
Watch: Mickey Watch
Posts: 488
So my question after reading all these posts...

If a grey sells you a watch and they say "majority of warranty still remaining" and you get that watch, and go get something done under warranty, can the grey get in trouble for false advertising?

I've always operated under the assumption that the warranty follows the watch, I'm guessing this was wrong!
quakeroatmeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.