Two years after purchasing a £449.99 Rukka jacket, which was apparently reduced from £649.99 (not cheap) and it had a promoted 5 year Warranty by the salesman, which was a deciding factor in buy such an expensive jacket in the first place, even though I didn’t like the colour.
I believed that if a manufacture could put a 5 year warranty on a product then it has got to be good. Not thinking that the supplier/distributer would not honour
It now transpires that ‘Tran AM’ the distributers have said the issues are down to ‘ware and tear’.
In fairness (they are still trying to get money out of me as) they have offered me a discount on a new jacket, to be honest. If Rukka can’t put together a garment that can stay together or hold out water for two years yet they warranty it for 5 and don’t honour a warranty then do I really want to get my self into more time wasting in corresponding with a company that doesn’t support their customers.
My previous jacket was a Richa jacket, it was faultless for 4years and 3 months, it did get treated with nikwax just before I retired it, but it didn’t need it. The best thing it was less than £200, the Richa gloves did 6 years.
I am awaiting to hear the reply, I will keep you posted. While I am waiting I thought I would do some maths relating to the warranty, see what you think?
Doing the maths: 365 day per year, 10 hours of potential ware per day, over 5 years is a potential 18,250 hours of ware that a jacket has the ability to experience with in its warranty period.
My jacket however, I have had 2 years, which is 730 days, I ware it an average of 2 hours a day commute, say 3hours for arguments sake. This equates to 1,460 hours in its lifetime (so far) and that is over estimating it, remember. That translates to 16,790 hours less than what the potential of the full warranty period is. Now that is a fact!
I will bring you more on the Tran-AM – Rukka warranty scam.