How can goods be considered "reasonably fit for purpose"?

Goods are considered "reasonably fit for purpose" when they perform as consumers expect based on the seller's representations. This principle is central to consumer protection laws, which ensure that products must meet the quality and performance standards that consumers have been led to believe they will achieve, based on advertising, descriptions, or statements made by the seller. When a seller makes specific claims about a product's capabilities, consumers rely on those assurances when making a purchasing decision. Thus, if the goods do not meet these expectations, they may be deemed unfit for the intended purpose.

The other options do not align with the concept of being reasonably fit for purpose. For instance, competitive pricing does not guarantee that the product will perform as expected; it only reflects its market value. Similarly, selling in a popular store might suggest an element of quality, but it does not ensure the product's fitness for a specific purpose. Finally, while a warranty may offer protection or assurance about the product, it does not inherently make the goods fit for purpose; it simply provides a framework for recourse if the product fails. Therefore, the alignment of a product's performance with consumer expectations, as set by the seller's representations, is what determines if they are reasonably fit for purpose.