Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2600
Inactive user


  Reply # 572798 24-Jan-2012 15:15
Send private message

Intermittent faults aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Much easier to fix something when 100% not working

2784 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 121


  Reply # 574013 27-Jan-2012 11:17
Send private message

When I worked in retail, if we sold an item that failed within the first couple of days of having been purchased, we would offer a refund or a new item ex stock on the spot otherwise we'd expect the justified wrath of the customer. Whether or not the law is on your side, surely it's just good customer relations to sort it out when it's an out-of-the-box fault.

If it turns out that the customer immediately took it home, tried to modify it and stuffed it up, that's another story.

At least they didn't try to get her to sign away her rights like the Lambton Quay Vodafone store did when I bought an iPhone from them a couple of years back.




 
 
 
 


3042 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 467

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 574057 27-Jan-2012 12:56
Send private message

peroski:
Shock:
peroski: The problem is substantial as
  • she wouldn't have bought the goods if she'd known about the fault.  
  • The goods are substantially unfit for purpose i.e it doesn't work.
If the problem is substantial, you can:
  • Reject the product and choose a replacement of the same type or similar value or a full refund of your purchase price


You are overstating the scale of the problem. No one would buy a good if they knew it was faulty, that is a completely ridiculous point to make.  

Doozy has summed it up nicely and Telecom would be returning the device to the manufacturers approved repair company. It is their right under the CGA to do so.

It comes across that you are just trolling Telecom who are only trying to help with a single faulty device.


Read prior posts and you might understand the point I was making.
I was qualifying her problem as 'substantial'
"A reasonable consumer wouldn't have bought the goods if they'd known about the fault."
http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/consumer-guarantees-act/putting-it-right

As the problem is 'substantial' under the CGA she does not have to wait for Telecom to return the device to the manufacturer, she can reject the item and get a full refund
http://www.consumeraffairs.govt.nz/for-consumers/law/consumer-guarantees-act/got-a-problem-with-goods



You're deliberately misrepresenting the law.  Under the Consumer Guarantees Act, you can only refuse to accept the goods if the supplier cannot remedy the situation in a reasonable timeframe, or the product has a significant problem that specifically makes it unsafeThis specific section of the CGA is the one applicable here - it does not have provision for you to reject something just because of a significant defect, unless that defect makes it unsafe or the supplier can't fix it.

245 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 574061 27-Jan-2012 13:01
Send private message

Kyanar:
peroski:
Shock:
peroski: The problem is substantial as
  • she wouldn't have bought the goods if she'd known about the fault.  
  • The goods are substantially unfit for purpose i.e it doesn't work.
If the problem is substantial, you can:
  • Reject the product and choose a replacement of the same type or similar value or a full refund of your purchase price


You are overstating the scale of the problem. No one would buy a good if they knew it was faulty, that is a completely ridiculous point to make.  

Doozy has summed it up nicely and Telecom would be returning the device to the manufacturers approved repair company. It is their right under the CGA to do so.

It comes across that you are just trolling Telecom who are only trying to help with a single faulty device.


Read prior posts and you might understand the point I was making.
I was qualifying her problem as 'substantial'
"A reasonable consumer wouldn't have bought the goods if they'd known about the fault."
http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/consumer-guarantees-act/putting-it-right

As the problem is 'substantial' under the CGA she does not have to wait for Telecom to return the device to the manufacturer, she can reject the item and get a full refund
http://www.consumeraffairs.govt.nz/for-consumers/law/consumer-guarantees-act/got-a-problem-with-goods



You're deliberately misrepresenting the law.  Under the Consumer Guarantees Act, you can only refuse to accept the goods if the supplier cannot remedy the situation in a reasonable timeframe, or the product has a significant problem that specifically makes it unsafeThis specific section of the CGA is the one applicable here - it does not have provision for you to reject something just because of a significant defect, unless that defect makes it unsafe or the supplier can't fix it.


I had an iPod die on me a few years back (we had a great sentimental attachement as we had been through Europe together). I bought it from DSE and returned it to magnum mac who confirmed it was dead after a few days and arranged a replacement (great service btw guys) It is highly likely that given the age of the unit all that will happen is the apple authorised service department will confirm that it is seriously dead and you'll get a new one.






Load & Performance Tester/PHP/JSP/C/PERL/MYSQL/LoadRunner8->11/HTML/CSS/XML/XSLT/2B|!2B/Cervelo Soloist/EMC Equip4/ Samsung Galaxy S /Darkys 10.2 Extreme

Do androids dream of electric sheep?
use strict;
my $sheepCount;

Yes, they can.

2784 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 121


  Reply # 574141 27-Jan-2012 15:46
Send private message

Kyanar:
You're deliberately misrepresenting the law.  Under the Consumer Guarantees Act, you can only refuse to accept the goods if the supplier cannot remedy the situation in a reasonable timeframe, or the product has a significant problem that specifically makes it unsafeThis specific section of the CGA is the one applicable here - it does not have provision for you to reject something just because of a significant defect, unless that defect makes it unsafe or the supplier can't fix it.


We used to have a printout of the CGA that we kept in the store that we pulled out when customers were being blatant idiots and wanting us to fix things that they'd obviously stuffed up due to neglect, for free. They'd say "The CGA says..." and we'd say "Certainly, if you'd just like to point out where it says that...".

It was only brought out on a couple of extreme cases, customers don't seem to appreciate having it pointed out to them that they are in fact muppets and that we don't appreciate people trying to rip us off. The result was generally covering our bare minimum legal requirements and suggesting that in future, they may wish to go elsewhere. 
 
Don't cite a law unless you understand it.
 




3100 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1570


  Reply # 574455 28-Jan-2012 19:23
Send private message

Excuse me as I have not read every detail in this thread...But my new iPhone lasted 5 days. Had to be returned to the service agent in Auckland. Once it was confirmed faulty, and that the fault was not through neglect (i.e. water damage or dropped) then it was replaced promptly with a new one. Took around 5 days. As annoying as that was I think that it is reasonable for the manufacturer to confirm the fault before making good on the warranty. This process IMO clearly fits within the CGA. Yes the OP phone was only a few hours old, but what if they had dropped it in the toilet or something? I think the manufacturer has a right to check it first.






Always be yourself, unless you can be Batman, then always be the Batman



14442 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1893


  Reply # 574469 28-Jan-2012 20:28
Send private message

scuwp: Excuse me as I have not read every detail in this thread...But my new iPhone lasted 5 days. Had to be returned to the service agent in Auckland. Once it was confirmed faulty, and that the fault was not through neglect (i.e. water damage or dropped) then it was replaced promptly with a new one. Took around 5 days. As annoying as that was I think that it is reasonable for the manufacturer to confirm the fault before making good on the warranty. This process IMO clearly fits within the CGA. Yes the OP phone was only a few hours old, but what if they had dropped it in the toilet or something? I think the manufacturer has a right to check it first.




In theory yes, but isn't that treating your customer as a liar? Sure a very small percentage may drop it down the bog, and say that it was dead by itself, but the odds of that after just one day would be minimal. And that is a type of fraud is it not?
They could always do a straight swap instore, but say they will also send the other to be checked for abuse, and if it has shown to be abused, they would need to charge their credit card for it.
The OP said Apple did a straight swap, and appear to have overuled telecom. I do know from someone who purhcased one from an apple store in the USA, that they u just dida stright instant swap instore, after his was DOA

27250 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6684

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 574473 28-Jan-2012 20:44
Send private message

mattwnz:
The OP said Apple did a straight swap, and appear to have overuled telecom. I do know from someone who purhcased one from an apple store in the USA, that they u just dida stright instant swap instore, after his was DOA


The key difference being it was an Apple store. These don't exist in NZ.

Most Apple stores have a Genius Bar where you can take your Apple product and they'll replace it on the spot with a refurbished or new product if it's a valid warranty claim.

14442 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1893


  Reply # 574474 28-Jan-2012 20:48
Send private message

sbiddle:
mattwnz:
The OP said Apple did a straight swap, and appear to have overuled telecom. I do know from someone who purhcased one from an apple store in the USA, that they u just dida stright instant swap instore, after his was DOA


The key difference being it was an Apple store. These don't exist in NZ.

Most Apple stores have a Genius Bar where you can take your Apple product and they'll replace it on the spot with a refurbished or new?product if it's a valid warranty claim.


Although the OP said they contacted Apple NZ/Aus direct from here in NZ, and they would organise for it to be switched, so the same sort of thing. Purchasing an apple product is all about the experience, which is why apple stores are so good, especially compared to many NZ retailers.

27250 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6684

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 574485 28-Jan-2012 21:16
Send private message

mattwnz:
sbiddle:
mattwnz:
The OP said Apple did a straight swap, and appear to have overuled telecom. I do know from someone who purhcased one from an apple store in the USA, that they u just dida stright instant swap instore, after his was DOA


The key difference being it was an Apple store. These don't exist in NZ.

Most Apple stores have a Genius Bar where you can take your Apple product and they'll replace it on the spot with a refurbished or new?product if it's a valid warranty claim.


Although the OP said they contacted Apple NZ/Aus direct from here in NZ, and they would organise for it to be switched, so the same sort of thing. Purchasing an apple product is all about the experience, which is why apple stores are so good, especially compared to many NZ retailers.


Apple may issue advance RMA phones, but based upon the number of people I know who have had iPhone 4's replaced under warranty (I'd estimate I know at least a dozen people who've had their phones fail), most have had to return their phones for assessment first. A few have had advance RMA handsets sent out from Apple but unless things have changed recently this was the exception rather than the norm. I know a couple of the advance RMA's were the home button stuck, which seems to still be an exceptionally common problem.

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

  Reply # 574528 29-Jan-2012 04:45
Send private message

My sister dropped her iphone 4s which shattered the front of it, walked into Covent Garden Apple store and they replaced it on the spot.

As if that wasn't enough she did exactly the same thing a few months later...and they replaced again on the spot.

Now that's service..

1411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 229


  Reply # 574565 29-Jan-2012 11:42
Send private message

Drop a phone and they break. Don't make them like they use to, even though they can do more.
I've dropped an old dumb phone several times and still goes good as gold. Cdma so phone lasted longer then what that network will.

I'd be annoyed at waiting 5 days, and if they break that easy hmmm, think i won't have iphone as next purchase option.  Unless all modern phones are that weak.

27250 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6684

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 574567 29-Jan-2012 12:03
Send private message

rugrat: Drop a phone and they break. Don't make them like they use to, even though they can do more.
I've dropped an old dumb phone several times and still goes good as gold. Cdma so phone lasted longer then what that network will.

I'd be annoyed at waiting 5 days, and if they break that easy hmmm, think i won't have iphone as next purchase option.  Unless all modern phones are that weak.


If impacted face down or on a corner there is around a 99% chance any modern phone with Gorilla Glass will suffer the same damage. This is the only flaw with Gorilla Glass - and I'd never buy another phone that doesn't use it, because it's vastly superior anti scratching properties make it the best option for a phone.


1411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 229


  Reply # 574573 29-Jan-2012 12:19
Send private message

Guess i was lucky it always landed on it's back. Hit concreate a couple of times and all that happened was battery pack flew off.
Have android now, but never dropped it. Probably clumsier when younger.

I'd probably gumble with retailer, then wait the 5 days, but it would leave bad taste in my mouth.
Had lg tv refuse to give picture through hdmi after couple of days. Rang manufacture, they gave some details, passed details onto store and next day van turned up with replacement tv.
Seem to get better service going to manufacter then store in some cases, as store wants to know they're not going to be out of pocket before committing to something. 

337 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 1


  Reply # 574574 29-Jan-2012 12:23
Send private message

Need to make a point here. Its easy for Apple to look good - its their product they are replacing.

Retailers such as Telecom have to buy the stock from Apple.
Apple will only reimburse a retailer if the hardware is proven to be actually faulty.
Why would a retailer simply hand over an expensive handset without any kind of assurance that they wont be $800 (or whatever) out of pocket?
Its unreasonable to expect otherwise.




Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.