I will never buy another Acer Laptop again

Forums › Laptops and mobile computers › I will never buy another Acer Laptop again

rickdias099

14 posts

Geek

#114389 18-Feb-2013 14:45

I have sent my laptop for repair 3 times in 3 weeks since I purchased in end of last year.

1st issue: The laptop would switch off itself if I tab the touch pad. Acer identified HDD fault and replaced the parts
2nd issue: I could not install MS Office and the touch pad problem came back. I could not even restore the Laptop to factory state. Acer identified some "system" fault and repaired.
3rd issue: I experienced blue screen once a while when the laptop was waken up from sleep mode.
**This time they identified it as a software issue (like 2nd repair) and conclude its user issue. They also accuse me of opening the laptop since the "sticker" is broken. They said I should have checked the sticker when I picked up the laptop. However, who will check the bottom of laptop if I went for system error? And why would this be my responsibility to check if they could not finish their job properly?

Since Acer is not very friendly so I took the laptop back to the retailer PB Technologies and hope they can help me or refund the laptop. Unfortunately they said they could not refund since I need at least 3 hardware faults before I can claim a stock credit.

Now I have left the faulty laptop at PB since I don't want to be accused of opening it up again. However, it looks like they will not give me a refund unless Acer approves it.

I have posedt a FB message on Acer NZ page about this and they blocked me from making further comments so I assume they will never approve the credit since they are angry too.

What should I do apart from dispute tribunal?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#764200 18-Feb-2013 14:53

Bring up the CGA with PB tech

rickdias099

14 posts

Geek

#764209 18-Feb-2013 15:08

I did, but they just keep repeating the same answer : we cannot do anything without Acer's approval. I said this is not right since this is between the buyer and seller but again they repeat the same answer again.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#764214 18-Feb-2013 15:20

This page has the info you need...

http://www.consumeraffairs.govt.nz/for-consumers/law/consumer-guarantees-act/got-a-problem-with-goods

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

theEd

341 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 26

Trusted

#764218 18-Feb-2013 15:25

Unfortunately, PB Tech are known for trying to "opt out" of warranties and the CGA. Unfortunately, most people put it in the "too hard" basket and just take it.

If you're willing to battle, an invitation to the Disputes Tribunal might be a good place to start.

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#764223 18-Feb-2013 15:30

Print out the CGA and take it to them

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80653 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41045

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#764224 18-Feb-2013 15:30

Also remember the CGA only applies for consumer goods - if the laptop was invoiced in a company's name, then it won't do you any good.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#765205 18-Feb-2013 15:30

I would write them a letter (and hand it to the store manager in person) stating you are requesting a full refund under the CGA as the laptop is not of acceptable quality and not fit for purpose. Outline you have already given the manufacturer a chance to rectify the issue and that it has not been satisfactorily resolved.

Request they provide a full refund by x date (Give them maybe 5 business days), or a letter stating why they are refusing the claim under the Consumer Guarantees Act.

Also remind them that it is an offence under the act to provide incorrect or misleading information about your rights, and breaches carry a significant fine.

Twitter: ajobbins

theEd

341 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 26

Trusted

#765207 18-Feb-2013 15:34

freitasm: Also remember the CGA only applies for consumer goods - if the laptop was invoiced in a company's name, then it won't do you any good.

This is a very important fact. The number of people who try to claim CGA on distributors...

allan

2073 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 899

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#765229 18-Feb-2013 16:05

I just recently did battle with First-in, one of the one-day-sales outfits over an 11 month old Galaxy Tab, that they refused to consider repairing. It would no longer charge or recognise any peripheral devices. After much to'ing and fro'ing I lodged a Disputes tribunal claim and on the day before the dispute was due to be heard, they offered a full refund and asked for the device to be returned to them at their cost - so the process works.

However, there was an ironic sequel, in that after it was returned, I got a phone call saying they had found a loose piece of rubber internally which they had now removed and it was working fine.

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#765255 18-Feb-2013 16:28

allan: I just recently did battle with First-in, one of the one-day-sales outfits over an 11 month old Galaxy Tab, that they refused to consider repairing. It would no longer charge or recognise any peripheral devices. After much to'ing and fro'ing I lodged a Disputes tribunal claim and on the day before the dispute was due to be heard, they offered a full refund and asked for the device to be returned to them at their cost - so the process works.

However, there was an ironic sequel, in that after it was returned, I got a phone call saying they had found a loose piece of rubber internally which they had now removed and it was working fine.

If only they had offered to fix it in the first place!

I had issues with DSE repalcing a faulty LCD TV under the CGA. In the end, after much mucking around and refusal to act on their behalf it was lodged with the Disputes Tribunal. The day they got the heading notice in the mail they called me to offer me a replacement of the latest model - much higher spec than the one it was replacing. Turns out it was a known fault with the model I had. If they had read the service bulletin the two times it was sent away for repair (each for over a month), they would have been able to easily fix it.

Twitter: ajobbins

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#765259 18-Feb-2013 16:35

Correction to my statement above, it's actually the FTA they can be fined under for misrepresenting the CGA. You could something like the following line in any letter you write them.

"The Fair Trading Act states you cannot mislead a customer about their rights. The penalties for doing so are substantial - up to $60,000 for an individual and up to $200,000 for a business."

Twitter: ajobbins

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#765287 18-Feb-2013 16:53

----Since Acer is not very friendly so I took the laptop back to the retailer PB Technologies and hope they can help me or refund the laptop. Unfortunately they said they could not refund since I need at least 3 hardware faults before I can claim a stock credit.----

That is not correct. Under the CGA there is no '3 faults' requirement, before you can claim a replacement or refund under the CGA. The retailer gets 1 chance to fix the problem, not 3. I believe is the fault is substantial, you get the choice as the consumer to claim from the retailer either a refund, repair, or replacement. I would suggest you only deal with the retailer, as it is their problem to sort out, and they shouldn't be sending you to the manufacturer. There arrangement between their supplier/manufacturer is their concern, not yours.

If purchased for business, although you won't have CGA protection, you will have protection under the sale of goods act and FTA. Also the manufacturers warranty.

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#765290 18-Feb-2013 16:56

Even if it's not 'substantial', you can still reject the goods after 1 attempt by them to rectify.

Make sure you state in any correspondence that you are 'rejecting the goods as being not of acceptable quality and not fit for purpose' under the CGA. This terminology is important.

Twitter: ajobbins

rickdias099

14 posts

Geek

#765422 18-Feb-2013 21:39

Thanks All,

I have lodged a dispute tribunal claim and hope they will do something before the court hearing like the above examples. I know this is going to be hard so I documented everything to ensure I have enough evidence against my claim.

I did go back to the PB the retailer after 3 repair attempts and they are still asking me to go back to acer while I told them I am not going to deal with their supplier any more.

I asked them what have been done so far and they said they chased Acer for me but unfortunately acer is not approving the credit. I told them Acer has nothing to do with the authority over refund since I am now requesting a refund from PB not Acer. I even offered to purchase another laptop from them and pay the difference but they refused to do it.

They asked me to give acer another go for repair and I may get a refund if I can prove another fault. I said last time I lose important data because of the fault so why would I try again after 3 issues?

Therefore I have no choice but lodge a claim since I have wasted enough time and I have not been able to work with a laptop since Nov last year. This is a pain.

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#765462 18-Feb-2013 22:10

3 attempts is a reasonable number under which to claim. 1 is not enough. Items fail, it's a fact of life, those suggesting a single failure warrants a replacement or refund aren't being reasonable nor following the spirit of the laws. PB work off low margins and therefore you are likely to find them less willing to wear the cost of the replacement. (I am not saying that this is legal) It's a lot easier with a manufacturer who is good to deal with (HP for example have a team in NZ for dealing with these exact issues), but of course, like everything in life, you will mostly get what you pay for. Acer are a discount manufacturer in my experience, they have less margin on their products and therefore won't have teams of people in NZ for this type of thing. I do personally feel that the current laws are bent too far in favour of the consumer, and put an unfair burden on the retailer who isn't guaranteed the same protection from their up-link suppliers.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4