The idea that one can take the goodwill, such as it is, and the assets of a company that has gone into liquidation or receivership, but leave the debts and the warranty laibilities and all other detritus for others to shoulder strikes me as totally unfair
In particular, awards won by the old company should die with the company and to try to claim them as relevant in current advertising is wrong
It does seem a valid point that a new firm having aquired the rights to the name of a firm that has ceased trading, should not be allowed to 'trade' on the alleged good points of the old one, or if they do. they must assume the mantle of the previous firms warrenty liabilites. Perhaps a letter to Advertising Standards may be in order. See also click here
like anything else on the market, punters will say they look good and hence buy one, those that know a bit about PC's would know better and give them a wide berth.. and no doubt in time the whole lot will go down the kermit once more.
I'm kind of in the middle here. I do wish them luck and will wait and see how they fair but saying they have 19 years experience and have won awards is to me a bit out of order. If they were the same company that won these awards then they would have to be the ones to honour the warranties. Since they are a different company and do not have to honour any warranties I feel that its wrong for them to make these claims. It seems to me as if they are wanting it both ways which I think is wrong.