Is there a product that is not a "goods" under the BPCPA?

The defendants also submit that their position is supported by the decision in Bryan v. Gill, 2013 BCSC 1898. However, the “goods” at issue in that case was a medical device used during an emergency procedure which the court found was supplied to the doctor rather than the plaintiff. The court held that the device in the case was not provided to the plaintiff, indirectly or otherwise and was, therefore, never subject to a consumer transaction. Again, this is different than a fireplace that has been installed in a home specifically for purposes that are primarily personal, family or household within the meaning of the BPCPA.