Who has to prove what

This is probably the most useful single page on the site. Get this right and every Takealot refusal looks different.

Inside the first 6 months (CPA s56 window)

When you return goods under section 56 of the Consumer Protection Act within 6 months of delivery, you do not have to prove the goods were defective from the moment they left the warehouse. You only have to show that they fail the section 55 quality standard now, while still inside the window.

The practical burden then sits with the supplier to rebut. They have to show that the defect did not exist at delivery, or that it arose from your misuse, unauthorised alteration, or a recognised exclusion (normal wear and tear, electrical surge, consumer damage, sea-air corrosion, consumer modification, or unintended use).

The Consumer Goods and Services Ombud takes the same approach in its Advisory Note 1 on defective goods, and this is how SA academic commentary reads section 56’s structure as an implied warranty — implied warranties by their nature put the practical burden on the warrantor.

This is the most powerful fact in a section 56 dispute. When a Takealot agent says “we’ve assessed it and it’s normal wear and tear”, the follow-up is:

Please send me the assessment. Please identify the specific exclusion you’re relying on, and the evidence for it. Within the 6-month section 56 window the burden sits with the supplier to rebut non-conformity, and a conclusion without evidence does not discharge it.

After 6 months

Once the section 56 window closes, the onus flips back to you. If you’re claiming a defect that manifested at 8 months, 18 months, or two years, you have to prove it was a latent defect — one that existed at the time of sale, was hidden from reasonable inspection, and renders the goods substantially less fit for purpose. You still have rights under the common-law aedilitian remedies (see the 3-year window after the CPA runs out), but the evidence burden is harder.

Technical evidence matters. A written assessment from an independent service centre identifying the fault as a manufacturing defect (as opposed to wear or misuse) is the kind of evidence that carries weight in this window.

Why this matters for timing

Speed matters. If your item fails, log the return inside the 6-month window even if you’re on day 178. The legal weight swings dramatically on the day you cross that threshold.

What “onus” doesn’t mean

The onus point does not mean Takealot is automatically wrong. Some return claims genuinely fail on the facts — wear and tear on a product used hard for five months, a cracked screen from a drop, a PSU blown by a verifiable surge. The onus only means Takealot must show their working. “We decided it’s wear and tear” is a conclusion, not evidence. “Our technician identified scoring on the drive consistent with physical impact, photographs attached” is evidence.

The CGSO view

The Ombud has repeatedly treated unsubstantiated rejections as a ground for finding in the consumer’s favour. A pattern of Takealot-side refusals with no underlying assessment is exactly what CGSO complaints are designed to catch.