The Auswine Forum

adventures in the corkage debate (continued) - most wineries have replaced my corked bottles, some quickly & professionally, some after weeks of reminders & gentle harassment. Crappiest "service" to date has definitely been Virgin Hills - lost count of the number of phone calls, emails etc I've made to them regarding a bottle of TCA-affected 1991 Reserve Red (carefully nurtured in my cellar until disappointing myself & guests approx 2 months ago) Offered to return the dud bottle, had 2 or 3 replies from them, vague hints of a replacement bottle - net result - zilch! Will never buy another another bottle from them again.

Mark,

This one is slightly different to others discussed, as Virgin Hills is a different company than the one who made and sold the wine.

On the other hand, if the current company took over the name, goodwill, debt and stock from the original company then it could be argued that they are still liable for the satisfactory refund or exchange of your tainted bottle.

I'd suggest making an enquiry with the ACCC or Consumer Affairs in your state on whether the current company is still liable for the warranty rights for your bottle. There's a contact page clickable from the ACCC homepage http://www.accc.gov.au/.

Murray

That is interesting Murray.
What has happened with the ownership of Virgin Hills?
I would have thought ownership of the brand carrys certain responsibilities legally. I saw no specific mention of this in the ACCC material.
regards
michel

Ah, the saga of Virgin Hills/

To quote Halliday "Virgin Hills has passed through several ownership changes in a short period of time".

A couple of years ago Jeni Port wrote a fantastic article about their journey, which was long and tragic and told the tale of one of the owners, which I'll summarise below.

Virgin Hills was taken over by a large concern sometime in the 90's intending to use the name as the flagship for a broader range of labels.

They sunk big bucks into preparing a mid-price ($15) range which used the latest in synthetic cork-style seals.

These wines were released onto the market and it was a complete disaster. The wine was apparently OK, the problem was no-one could get the seal out of the bottle!!!

It was a shambles, corkscrews were being bent in efforts to try and taste the wine.

The company had to recall thousands of cases of cases of wine; which blew a hole in it's overall plan!

One of the owners of Virgin Hills, which I think is the one referred to above is Vincorp. There's an ASX note that says In September 1998 the company made a major acquisition with the purchase of the business and assets of the vineyard and winery known as 'Virgin Hills' at a cost of $5.2 million. Although a further Google Search notes that it sold the vineyards in 2000 to Michael Hope.

So this particular one is a touch curly.

However in the interests of being a good corporate citizen it was some obvious that the best thing the current owners could do would be to gracefully offer a replacement.

[quote="Murray"]


These wines were released onto the market and it was a complete disaster. The wine was apparently OK, the problem was no-one could get the seal out of the bottle!!!


quote]

Now that is a recipe for disaster.!
you would think a trial first would have been prudent.
I wonder if that hit the courts.
But the fact remains someone owns the goodwill and has the legal responsibility unless the owner no longer uses the 'label or entity ' they purchased.
michel

But the fact remains someone owns the goodwill and has the legal responsibility unless the owner no longer uses the 'label or entity ' they purchased.

I'm a bit confused. How does the acquistion of an asset, goodwill, impose such a liability? As you have stated that this is a "fact", I am anxious to understand your reasoning/authority?

Matthew