Lack of knowledge is not the whole answer
A seller’s statement that they never knew of the problem does not automatically end the matter. Section 472 of Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code addresses defects that reduce value or fitness for ordinary or contractual use, whether or not the seller knew of the defect. Exceptions, contractual terms and the particular facts must still be examined.
Distinguish a defective item from damage later caused by use or another event. Discovering a symptom after delivery does not itself establish its cause. This article explains general sale rules, not an automatic refund entitlement for any item. Consumer transactions and certain products may involve additional or special legislation.
The buyer’s prior knowledge is a different issue
Section 473 sets out exceptions: the buyer knew of the defect at purchase or should have known with the care expected of a reasonable person; the defect was apparent on delivery and the buyer accepted without objection; or the property was sold by auction. Facts must be matched to the exception. Receipt of an item alone does not resolve every case.
Hypothetical example: a buyer accepts a discounted table after the shop points out a scratch. That does not establish knowledge of every possible hidden problem. If structural cracking is later found, ask whether it is the same disclosed defect, when it was observable and how it affects the agreed use. This example does not determine that compensation is necessarily owed.
Record condition and chronology before repair or return
Keep the order, model, serial number if any, advertised description and communications about intended use, together with payment and delivery evidence. Separate receipt, first use, discovery and seller-notification dates. Images or video should identify the item, defect and context, rather than only close-ups that cannot be linked to the purchased item.
If a technician examines the item, request observed symptoms, tests and limits of the conclusion. Distinguish a possible cause from a confirmed one. Before repair, parts replacement or return, safely preserve its original condition and transfer records where possible. Stop unsafe use rather than taking risks for evidence, and do not manipulate images to exaggerate damage.
Do not confuse warranty periods with litigation limits
Section 474 provides a one-year limit from discovery of the defect for an action based on liability for defects. This differs from a shop’s or manufacturer’s warranty period. Calculation and other possible legal bases need review against actual documents, especially where the discovery date is disputed or there have been repeated repairs.
Do not assume a chat message, complaint or waiting for a response automatically stops time running. Prepare the chronology and obtain legal assessment early. If a deadline may be close, do not wait for every technical report before seeking advice, and do not apply this one-year period to every kind of claim.
Match the request to evidence and review settlement terms
When contacting the seller, identify the purchase, discovery date, effect on use and requested inspection or solution. Distinguish an agreement to inspect, repair, replace or refund. Taking the item back is not necessarily acceptance of all liability. Before signing a document closing the matter, examine its effect on rights and unresolved issues.
If the seller relies on an exception or exclusion clause, bring the full contract and evidence to B Law Firm for review rather than deciding from one chat sentence. Repair, replacement, refund and damages depend on the legal basis and facts. No single outcome can be guaranteed for every sale.
References
"Be your trusted Partner" - we are ready to protect your rights and interests.
Back to all articles
