Which is bad, from a consumer protection perspective.
The retailer should absolutely be on the hook. They are the ones with a working relationship with the manufacturer, and hence are best positioned to be able to hold the manufacturer accountable.
As an Australian who lives in the US atm, they are right to be grateful for the ACCC (consumer protection watchdog). I certainly am now. In the US you have to rely on retailers who treat good consumer protection as a competitive advantage like Costco, REI, Best Buy, sometimes Amazon, etc. In Australia you can easily hold any retailer accountable (and they’re all just generally better behaved with this stuff anyway, so you rarely have to force them).
> In the US you have to rely on retailers who treat good consumer protection as a competitive advantage
For the most part, credit card chargebacks serve a similar purpose, though of course the retailer may ban you from their store afterwards.
Absolutely agreed that the retailer is on the hook. The customer is not making a deal with the manufacturer to buy the good; the customer is making a deal with the retailer. Along the same line, I dislike it when retailers try to weasel out of shipping issues by blaming it on the parcel carrier. That's only valid if the customer went to ups.com and created and paid for a shipment themselves!
The retailer should absolutely be on the hook. They are the ones with a working relationship with the manufacturer, and hence are best positioned to be able to hold the manufacturer accountable.
As an Australian who lives in the US atm, they are right to be grateful for the ACCC (consumer protection watchdog). I certainly am now. In the US you have to rely on retailers who treat good consumer protection as a competitive advantage like Costco, REI, Best Buy, sometimes Amazon, etc. In Australia you can easily hold any retailer accountable (and they’re all just generally better behaved with this stuff anyway, so you rarely have to force them).