Your argument is specious. In the first case the company has supplies a physical product that is faulty and physically damaged your property. In the second they have not supplied a faulty service. They have supplied a service that worked up until a certain time. Certainly they are not due payment after the time the service stopped but you have not suffered any direct physical loss due the cessation of the service.
As I said to impose liability for all consequential losses from a cessation of service would place an untenable burden on the service provider
|