Mobilefone service or disservice

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › Mobilefone service or disservice

ricksen

1 post

Wannabe Geek

#24629 29-Jul-2008 14:55

I bought 3 identical Samsung 3g moible last year.
One of the phones will not hold charge; so sent it March/April 2008 through retailer as it was under warranty.
Mobilefone repair sent back after a few weeks. Says could not determine a fault after testing.

Same problem on receipt of phone. Swap batteries around the 3 identical phones. The faulty phone drains each battery with 2 days on being swiitched on and left aside without any calls made or received. The batteries would easily last 6 days on the other 2 phones.

Sent back via retailer. Came back after a couple weeks. Same diagnosis!! On receipt of phone, fully charged it and left it aside. Battery went flat in 25 hours!!! Swapped batteries with identical phone - same result.

Called Samsung NZ - very professional and friendly. Advised phone to be sent in the third time. If still not resolved, to have phone (with the log sheets from mobilefone repair) sent in to Vodafone who will forward it to Australia. Also found out from that retailers MUST refund your bond held on collection of phone from retailer.

Just about to send phone in 3rd time to mobilefone repair. (Sigh - What a waste of time and effort so far).
As far as the service of mobilefone repair is concerned, it is very disappointing indeed.

dpresha9

48 posts

Geek

#152496 29-Jul-2008 18:41

Its how monopolies work.. As far as i know, my company (and many others I'm sure) have to use them because they're the only ones providing this service and obviously linked up with vodafone.

At least yours was under warranty. We usually get slapped with a $59 testing fee for some of our ancient phones only to get a "no fault-tested-worked ok" diagnosis at the end, even though the phone clearly breaks down after a day. And lets all remember that should no fault be discovered, everything can be blamed on "liquid damage" which costs beyond the phones worth anyway.

Nothing against the company though, they have fixed some major phone problems in the past for us. I suppose they can't fix em all?

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#152841 30-Jul-2008 22:24

A couple of the logistics guys for the mobile suppliers commented that they would change repair agents if there was another equipped to handle the workload in New Zealand. A few years ago there was a nasty rumour that the technicians were receiving regular job performance reports based on the number of declined warranty jobs. This lead to an unecceptable level of false declines (liquid/impact) and apparently the process was stamped out. I've heard down the grapevine that a similar process has begun again which may lead to an abnormal rate of declined repairs.

Let this me a loud message to any consumer out there that feels they have been wrongly declined. Open the device yourself (this technically invalidates the warranty, though since it has already been invalidated by MFR, it is safe to do so) and inspect the unit for signs of liquid or impact damage. It requires a torx screwdriver set but is relatively straight forward. If they have wrongly declined your claim, they can be taken to small claims court.

Also try to remember, these technicians are required to get through X jobs per day and and cannot always diagnose and repair a fault perfectly.

mikal

172 posts

Master Geek

#152866 31-Jul-2008 01:54

JoeBloggs: A couple of the logistics guys for the mobile suppliers commented that they would change repair agents if there was another equipped to handle the workload in New Zealand. A few years ago there was a nasty rumour that the technicians were receiving regular job performance reports based on the number of declined warranty jobs. This lead to an unecceptable level of false declines (liquid/impact) and apparently the process was stamped out. I've heard down the grapevine that a similar process has begun again which may lead to an abnormal rate of declined repairs.

Let this me a loud message to any consumer out there that feels they have been wrongly declined. Open the device yourself (this technically invalidates the warranty, though since it has already been invalidated by MFR, it is safe to do so) and inspect the unit for signs of liquid or impact damage. It requires a torx screwdriver set but is relatively straight forward. If they have wrongly declined your claim, they can be taken to small claims court.

Also try to remember, these technicians are required to get through X jobs per day and and cannot always diagnose and repair a fault perfectly.

So you work for Vodafone... I don't know if you are from a direct or dealer store but surely you must know that;

1. Vodafone took over, if you call the repair agent number they do not pickup "Hello welcome to MobileFoneRepair"
2. They provide photographic evidence of liquid damage on request (as to where the liquid damage ends up and how it got there can be debated)
3. Sony Ericsson already do not go through the Carbine Rd store but the MobileFoneRescue in ChCh...
4. At what benefit would VF. who run the show now have to sending out false declines? Would this not be hacking off alot of customers who have purchased handsets from VF itself or their agents; what person with any business logic would enforce this sort of policy, officially or unofficially.

dpresha9

48 posts

Geek

#152894 31-Jul-2008 09:27

4. At what benefit would VF. who run the show now have to sending out false declines? Would this not be hacking off alot of customers who have purchased handsets from VF itself or their agents; what person with any business logic would enforce this sort of policy, officially or unofficially.

VF would obviously have no direct benefit, except that false declines usually may eventuate in the person getting a new phone, most likely from VF to ensure warranty, and future servicing..

Again, im NOT saying VF is doing this at all, because i really doubt any company would want to come out on the other side of this PR battle by actually encouraging this type of behaviour. BUT i agree with joeblogs, I've noticed the number of false declines is increasing, when there is a clear fault with the phone (the phone doesnt always show its fault within the first hour of testing. but then i suppose they dont have enough time to test it throughly..).

My only rant is, if no fault is diagnosed, and I prove otherwise, surely I should get the $59 back for the initial test? except for the way they work, they charge it again. Lucky its a business cost :D

btw: cheers for advising that they provide photographic evidence.. i'm going to start requesting this by default on all phones we send that come back with this problem

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#152899 31-Jul-2008 09:45

1. Vodafone took over, if you call the repair agent number they do not pickup "Hello welcome to MobileFoneRepair"
Vodafone asked the call centre reps to use a different introduction line and changed the formal booking sheets at the stores. Plus now they "look more closely" at what's going on. Nothing has changed.

2. They provide photographic evidence of liquid damage on request (as to where the liquid damage ends up and how it got there can be debated)
Not always. It's certainly well within their rights to decline to do so and I've heard of many cases of this happening - particularly where the customer then took the phone apart and discovered nothing wrong and subsquently received the approrpriate repair.

3. Sony Ericsson already do not go through the Carbine Rd store but the MobileFoneRescue in ChCh...
Some jobs are outsourced by MFR at their discretion.

4. At what benefit would VF. who run the show now have to sending out false declines? Would this not be hacking off alot of customers who have purchased handsets from VF itself or their agents; what person with any business logic would enforce this sort of policy, officially or unofficially.
You would think so but it's important to remember that MFR is a privately owned enterprise. When technicians start approving more jobs, the phone manufacturers lose more money, which leads to all sorts of investigations and reports (not to mention official sanctions and fines now - thanks Nokia

). That's why, to keep their position as the monopolistic repair agency they are, they bend under their customers' whims. This is just smart business, not some sort of conspiracy. I highly doubt that MFR tells their repair guys to 'decline X warranty claims'. Nokia, for example, will know that 5% of handsets at some time get sent to MFR during their lives. Now if that figure jumps to 8% one month (resulting in $X million more spent in repairs), they question MFR closely, who then question the repair guys with some gusto. This is just basic accounting though, which unfortunately doesn't take into account that SOMETIMES more phones just fault. That's life. Declined warranty repairs have jumped around 20% in the last few months. That's your scary figure for the day

'Someone' is saving a LOT of money, I wonder how that came about?

mikal

172 posts

Master Geek

#152982 31-Jul-2008 12:28

So you are saying since Vodafone took over the turnaround times exactly the same as before because "Nothing has changed"?

Your basing information on an observation, basic statistics tells us you cannot establish causation from an observation. Unless there is evidence against this being a coincidence in favor of them sharking consumers then it's just hearsay isn't it?

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#153018 31-Jul-2008 14:44

You're assuming I'm basing this purely on observation. I'm not. Review turnaround times from 2 years ago and you'll note that they're similar to what MFR has now. This became progressively worse culminating in a significant enough loss of customers due to late return that Vodafone 'stepped in'. I'll concede that, yes, turnaround has become better, but I maintain this is not due to Vodafone's efforts, but rather the manufacturers (or perhaps a collaboration). Nokia began fining MFR for late returns.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

mikal

172 posts

Master Geek

#153297 1-Aug-2008 13:22

I'm talking about your 20% claim and the conclusion drawn from that

JoeBloggs

355 posts

Ultimate Geek

#153310 1-Aug-2008 14:04

That wasn't assumed either though the figure isn't exact.