On 15 Aug, 18:25, chilly wrote:
The Todal wrote:
wrote:
Nice little scam the mobile phone suppliers have going. My son's
Samsung E900 developed a fault after 5 months. Phoned Phones4U...went
through a well rehearsed ( no doubt scripted) conversation where the
caveats were explained in detail. I agreed to go ahead and was sent a
pre-paid envelope with yet more explanation on caveats. Sent the phone
off, phoned them 2 weeks later for a status check. " Your phone has
suffered liquid damage and deemed beyond economical repair". I can
understand the phone being beyond economical repair due to the fault
as we live in a throw-away society, but they say the warranty is
invalidated due to the liquid damage and are refusing the claim. I pay
£17.35 and have the phone returned and a "technical report". They
won't say what the report will contain, they don't allow you to speak
to anyone more senior and give a different phone number/email contact
for complaints.
Seems phones have little dots that turn red when immersed in water OR
when moisture has been present at some stage ie the last few weeks
when the UK has been soaking. They seem to be using the red dots as a
warranty get-out.There are likely millions of phones with dots that
have turned red and still work normally, but as soon as your phone
develops a fault they have a ready made warranty escape
I'd like to take the issue further and ask for evidence of the liquid
damage eg photo's of the corrosion or damage to the components, but I
suspect me paying the £17.35 will only get me a standard letter saying
there's evidence of liquid damage and maybe showing the red dot. Any
advice on wording or the line to take when writing my complaint would
be gratefully received

I wonder if the dot turns red if the phone is in a humid room (eg a
bathroom after someone has had a shower) or a humid pocket of a shirt
when someone has been sweating a lot.

If your son is sure that he did not submerge the phone in water or leave
it out in the rain, then I think you should insist on a refund from the
supplier. I'd just buy another one, and claim the purchase cost of the
old one from them by (if necessary, and after a suitable ultimatum)
suing using Money Claim Online.

Any corrosion or damage to the components is likely to be hidden. And so
not obvious to the layman.
I was not aware that mobile phones contain such indicators, but I can
understand why the manufactures feel they are necessary.

No one is going to confess to soaking their mobile phone when sending it
in for warranty repair!!

Look at it this way before you waste money on Money Claim Online. They
have proof that it has been soaked (the red dots). Can you provide any
proof that its has not?

Chilly- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Read this then if you don't know about the dots.
http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/?p=143 30 years in the IT
industry and associated customer service tells me they are trying it
on and most people buy it. In the olden days, hardware used to come
with a similar red dot system indicating the kit had been tilted more
than 45 degrees and the manufacturers claimed the kit could not be
installed and had to be written off. Of course, 99.9% of the time the
kit was fine , but they had a get-out from a warranty claim or so they
thought. When the buyers tried to claim on their insurance or against
the transport companies insurers the loss adjustors got involved and
invariably the kit was installed and worked fine for years rather than
the insurers paying out. The costs are of course vastly different, but
in law the principle is the same. Just because some chemical has
changed to red because it has been exposed to a degree of moisture( in
the plant of manufacture ?) does not give them grounds to reject a
warranty claim. They must prove that the liquid damage has caused
component failure leading to the fault on the phone. Of course they
make it very difficult to claim on warranty........they now have my
handset, I can't talk to anyone with any decision making-authority,
they demand £17.35 for a technical report they won't tell me what will
be included in that report, they have successfully rejected 1000's of
similar claims so they think they can carry on.
Did the banks not get away with charging ludicrous amounts for going
overdrawn for years ? When challenged in the courts, they were stuffed
because what they were doing was not reasonable. I suggest that the
mobile phone suppliers are acting just as unreasonably.
A red dot merely indicates moisture at some level has been present
at some time. I want to challenge their right to reject my warranty
claim. They must be able to prove that the "liquid damage" is the
cause of the fault on the phone , otherwise they are acting
unreasonably.