I don't understand how Asus can completely VOID our warranties for unlocking our devices. I can see how the warranty could be VOID as far as software issues but not hardware. The way I look at it is like a car warranty. If you modify your car with an aftermarket exhaust, it is illegal for them to VOID your warranty. However, if you tear the engine apart and add cams, pistons, etc. your warranty is legally and completely VOID. I think it should be illegal for them to VOID our warranty against a screen going out or an antenna going bad or something similar. It is complete and utter B.S. If my hardware fails, I promise you, they will get it back one way or another and I will get another Prime without paying for it. If software screws up, that's my fault and I'll deal with it. Also, if they are going to VOID our warranty, we should at least have FULL ACCESS to NVFlash. Not this half-assed bull****!
Gary Key: Please do what you can with this because I believe that I have some VERY valid points and I am sure that many others will agree with me here on this. Anything would be greatly appreciated. Even some insight from yourself that isn't company related.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
I do agree, I think its not correct to void warranty completely especially with known wifi problems and maybe a possible fix on the way.
However leaving certain parts out of the warranty which could be damaged by functions added via other ROMs makes sense, i.e. CPU due to overclocking.
greetz
Why would you guys even take a chance knowing all the problems going on with the Prime no one to blame but yourselves if you get screwed out of a warranty.
This is the sole reason I have yet to buy one yet. Was at the store day contemplating whether or not today...I will not buy and keep it stock...but out of fear of broken pixels on the screen or other hardware issues that have popped up I can't bring myself to purchase until this is cleared up. But if it ever is, without question I will be purchasing one that day.
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
They can do whatever they want. You agreed to the terms.
You hit the nail on the head. The reason is when you use a custom rom you could potentially be stressing the hardware. (Overclocking etc..) Asus doesn't want to be out money to have to fix peoples primes who unlock bootloader and install custom roms.
Why is this so difficult? If you AGREE that you warranty is completely void and unlock the bootloader, then how can you possibly complain about it?
Legally, they can't. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits issuers of warranties (in the U.S.) from excluding warranty coverage from modifications made by customers unless it can be proven the modifications caused the issue/problem. So if your screen dies, unless Asus can prove it was due to you unlocking the bootloader, they can't deny coverage. Of course if they do it'll be you vs. a multi-billion dollar corporation but if you took it to the mat you'd win.
Here's a wiki of the act...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act
The aftermarket auto parts industry relies heavily on Magnuson-Moss because if it didn't exist auto manufacturers would drive them out of business by unilaterally voiding people's warranties. This article focuses on the auto industry but the same applies to other product categories also. I highlighted the relevant parts.
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
The relevant legislation here, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty - Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act of 1975, protects consumers from being wrongfully denied warranty coverage by new car dealers.
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act states, in part, in Title 15, United States Code, Section 2302, subdivision (c):
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name; except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the [Federal Trade] Commission if —
(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted product will function properly only if the article or service so identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and
(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public interest. The Commission shall identify in the Federal Register, and permit public comment on, all applications for waiver of the prohibition of this subsection, and shall publish in the Federal Register its disposition of any such application, including the reasons therefore.
Under this federal statute, a manufacturer who issues a warranty on your motor vehicle is prohibited from requiring you to use a service or maintenance item, unless such item is provided, free of charge, under your warranty or unless the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) waives this prohibition against the manufacturer.
Further, under the act, aftermarket equipment that improves performance does not automatically void a vehicle manufacturer's original warranty unless it can be proven that the aftermarket device is the direct cause of the failure.
Specifically, the rules and regulations adopted by the FTC to govern the interpretation and enforcement of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act are set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16 - Commercial Practices, Chapter I - Federal Trade Commission, Subchapter G - Rules, Regulations, Statements and Interpretations under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Part 700 - Interpretations under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Contained within these rules and regulations is Section 700.10, which states:
No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance. For example, provisions such as, "This warranty is void if service is performed by anyone other than an authorized 'ABC' dealer and all replacement parts must be genuine 'ABC' parts," and the like, are prohibited where the service or parts are not covered by the warranty. These provisions violate the Act in two ways. First, they violate the section 102(c) ban against tying arrangements. Second, such provisions are deceptive under section 110 of the Act, because a warrantor cannot, as a matter of law, avoid liability under a written warranty where a defect is unrelated to the use by a consumer of "unauthorized" articles or service. This does not preclude a warrantor from expressly excluding liability for defects or damage caused by such "unauthorized" articles or service; nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.
Under the Magnuson-Moss Act, a dealer must prove, not just vocalize, that aftermarket equipment caused the need for repairs before it can deny warranty coverage. If the dealer cannot prove such a claim — or it proffers a questionable explanation — it is your legal right to demand compliance with the warranty. The Federal Trade Commission administers the Magnuson-Moss Act and monitors compliance with warranty law.
That being said, if you choose to modify your car, and suddenly the fancy new electronic control boxes that you added to your car make it run rough, not start when cold, or buck like a bronco, the dealer can and will charge a diagnostic fee to find out what is wrong with your car. If it turns out that your modifications are the cause of the problem, the dealer has every right not only to charge you for the diagnosis and repair, but to also void the portion of the warranty that has been compromised by the use of those aftermarket parts. Likewise, a dealer may refuse to service your car if it is adorned with aftermarket parts to the extent that its technicians cannot reasonably be expected to diagnose what is wrong with your car. As an example, all cars manufactured after 1994 are equipped with OBDII (On Board Diagnostics II) ports that dealers use to read engine diagnostic codes for everything from an engine vacuum leak to a malfunctioning emissions system. If your chosen modification has compromised the dealer service center's ability to scan for these codes (aftermarket ECUs generally do not support OBDII), then there is a strong probability that the dealer service center will
•Deny warranty coverage
•Refuse to service the car
Altering the software can in some cases damage the hardware like overclocking as mentioned in the above post. Id like to see the voided warranty changed to honor hardware fault's that are NON-SOFTWARE related.
I'm a developer and I always unlock my devices in that respect. I know what I'm doing. I bought this device with the knowledge of the bootloader unlocker in mind. The concern I have with my device is that after 2 weeks, the screen may be loosening from it's enclosure.
If that's the case and I decide to return it, ASUS will not honor the warranty if I have unlocked the bootloader. This is absurd. How is modifying the software re unlocking the bootloader in anyway related to a loose screen?
qubit76 said:
Altering the software can in some cases damage the hardware like overclocking as mentioned in the above post. Id like to see the voided warranty changed to honor hardware fault's that are NON-SOFTWARE related.
I'm a developer and I always unlock my devices in that respect. I know what I'm doing. I bought this device with the knowledge of the bootloader unlocker in mind. The concern I have with my device is that after 2 weeks, the screen may be loosening from it's enclosure.
If that's the case and I decide to return it, ASUS will not honor the warranty if I have unlocked the bootloader. This is absurd. How is modifying the software re unlocking the bootloader in anyway related to a loose screen?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not. Unfortunately you agreed that it is.
I DID NOT agree to the terms because I did not unlock my boot loader!
The only thing I did was stating my point of view!
The ASUS terms are like if you buy different rims for your car (i.e. for new winter tires) your car manufacturer denies the warranty for the whole car - which is not correct, and at least in Europe not legally possible - thats all I am saying
qubit76 said:
If that's the case and I decide to return it, ASUS will not honor the warranty if I have unlocked the bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you send it in and they deny your claim, tell them that under Magnuson-Moss they're obligated to tell you how unlocking the bootloader caused your screen issue. I'm sure the repsonse will be "huh?" Take whatever rejection they give you (get it in writing) and then file a complaint with the FTC here. They do act on complaints they receive especially if there's multiple instances from the same manufacturer.
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/FTC_Wizard.aspx?Lang=en
I HAVE NOT unlocked yet either. Also legally I am not a signatory to any contract with ASUS in regard to voiding my warranty. I.e. I have not physically signed a contract with my name and their name in an agreement. The law protects consumers by enforcing warranty treatment on goods and services produced by companies within reasonable cause in Australia.
The point is if you unlock, you agree to their terms. There's no ifs ands or buts about it. They set terms, you have the option to disagree with their terms BEFORE you unlock, and that's it.
If you unlock, that means you agree with your terms and your MM Acts arguments and "it's not fair" arguments mean nothing. It's just what it is.
czerdrill said:
The point is if you unlock, you agree to their terms. There's no ifs ands or buts about it. They set terms, you have the option to disagree with their terms BEFORE you unlock, and that's it.
If you unlock, that means you agree with your terms and your MM Acts arguments and "it's not fair" arguments mean nothing. It's just what it is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not a lawyer but Asus is asking you to obviate your original warranty by you choosing to modify their device. That to me is the same thing as denying coverage unilaterally which is what Magnuson-Moss is designed to prevent. I don't think they can deny all coverage (while it's a nice benefit for them) which was part of the original warranty the device came with no matter what you agree to. It would be the same thing in the car industry where in order to get your car serviced you were forced to sign away your rights to every modifying your car. That I know is prohibited by Magnuson-Moss as it’s an obvious end-run around the act and has been tested (and it failed) before. If there are any attorneys here it would be interesting to see which trumps which (original warranty/Magnuson-Moss vs. Asus' supplement).
czerdrill said:
The point is if you unlock, you agree to their terms. There's no ifs ands or buts about it. They set terms, you have the option to disagree with their terms BEFORE you unlock, and that's it.
If you unlock, that means you agree with your terms and your MM Acts arguments and "it's not fair" arguments mean nothing. It's just what it is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BarryH makes a good point with the MM arguement. This would supersede those terms by ASUS. Also you can not be forced to contract without 2 signatures. Pressing an icon after reading some outrageous terms does not equal a contractual agreement.
jdbaker82 said:
Why would you guys even take a chance knowing all the problems going on with the Prime no one to blame but yourselves if you get screwed out of a warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As in why the Hell did we buy this thing in the first place when we knew about all the issues?
Quite a few of the issues can be resolved by the devs here on XDA. Case in point, one dev has already fixed the screen flicker that Asus can't be arsed to fiddle with.
So now we have to void our warranty on unrelated issues to get software issues fixed by a 3rd party.
qubit76 said:
BarryH makes a good point with the MM arguement. This would supersede those terms by ASUS. Also you can not be forced to contract without 2 signatures. Pressing an icon after reading some outrageous terms does not equal a contractual agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It can. I just signed my taxes to the IRS with nothing but computer buttons that if I falsify could land me in prison.
The MM argument certainly has credence if you were to find a way to modify the bootloader yourself. Then they would have to prove your modification did cause the issue you ate claiming warranty on to deny it.
But by using their tool you agree to terms of having your warranty void. You are not coerced into agreeing to the terms or unlocking your bootloader, it is a choice that is solely yours to make. I don't agree with the approach of voiding the entire warranty either but the way it is being done does clear them of liability.
I can speak with a lawyer about it next week as I'm sure many others can but I think it will be fruitless.
rand4ll said:
if you were to find a way to modify the bootloader yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a way of bypassing the agreement page by downloading and executing the code offline?
qubit76 said:
BarryH makes a good point with the MM arguement. This would supersede those terms by ASUS. Also you can not be forced to contract without 2 signatures. Pressing an icon after reading some outrageous terms does not equal a contractual agreement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know how to make it clear to you and BarryH. It's different if you, without the aid of ASUS somehow figure out how to unlock the bootloader. Then no, under MM, they cannot deny you service UNLESS they prove that your unlocking of the bootloader caused the problem.
However, the MM act doesn't apply if they provide a warranty, in writing, of what will happen if you use their tool to unlock their bootloader. Its silly to suggest that a company can't modify their warranty if you agree to their terms. If that was the case, throttling simply could not exist.
This tool was delayed because per Gary Keyes himself, they were working on the "legalese"...you really think they're not aware of the MM act? Of course they are. And of course their lawyers pored over the act, tooth and nail. It's a nice pipe dream to think you can say "Magunson. Moss. Act." and ASUS will scream in fear, but that's not what will happen. What they'll say is "You. Agreed. Man." and there goes that.
I'm sorry but MM doesn't apply here, because you AGREED that it doesn't apply. No ifs, ands or buts.
Related
If you were to use HTCs method to unlock your bootloader, they now have your serial number or other unique identifier for your phone. If you are paying for insurance, Sprint does the warranty work for free, like if the screen suddenly stopped working due to some other reason than mishandling. So, whether you can or can't lock your bootloader back down, HTC has your serial number as one that has been unlocked.
The question is, are they sharing it with Sprint, and will Sprint then not fix your phone like they would have had you not unlocked it at all?
Makes me so thankful I don't have to rely on HTC for unlocking!
hankbear said:
If you were to use HTCs method to unlock your bootloader, they now have your serial number or other unique identifier for your phone. If you are paying for insurance, Sprint does the warranty work for free, like if the screen suddenly stopped working due to some other reason than mishandling. So, whether you can or can't lock your bootloader back down, HTC has your serial number as one that has been unlocked.
The question is, are they sharing it with Sprint, and will Sprint then not fix your phone like they would have had you not unlocked it at all?
Makes me so thankful I don't have to rely on HTC for unlocking!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't believe anybody has the answer to this question. We have to wait and see.
hankbear said:
If you were to use HTCs method to unlock your bootloader, they now have your serial number or other unique identifier for your phone. If you are paying for insurance, Sprint does the warranty work for free, like if the screen suddenly stopped working due to some other reason than mishandling. So, whether you can or can't lock your bootloader back down, HTC has your serial number as one that has been unlocked.
The question is, are they sharing it with Sprint, and will Sprint then not fix your phone like they would have had you not unlocked it at all?
Makes me so thankful I don't have to rely on HTC for unlocking!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I don't understand is why would any of us care??? Since we have our own method of getting S-OFF, why would we even consider doing what HTC wants. There is nothing, NOTHING, that HTC will offer with their bootloader unlocking that is positive to the modidng community.
At this point, I wouldn't worry about it since the tool isn't out yet, and we have a way of reverting back to S-ON and RUU'ing to a stock phone.
Some brave soul will take the bait later down the road and will be a guinea pig for us to see what will happen once they surrender their info to HTC.
I don't plan to use their F-OFF tool unless my phone magically takes an OTA or I get a replacement and cant F it OFF myself.
Why would it matter for insurance. Insurance is insurance not warranty service. I can take my phone and throw it on the ground as hard as I can and call Assurion and they will replace it whether its rooted or not. I'll have to pay the $100 deductible but it won't matter if I'm rooted or not.
Now if your going to make a warranty claim and HTC has your SN and has marked it in the system as not being authorized for warranty work then yes your screwed.
I used revolutionary S-off and then flashed the Eng hboot. I won't be using htc's OTA.
cruise350 said:
Why would it matter for insurance. Insurance is insurance not warranty service. I can take my phone and throw it on the ground as hard as I can and call Assurion and they will replace it whether its rooted or not. I'll have to pay the $100 deductible but it won't matter if I'm rooted or not.
Now if your going to make a warranty claim and HTC has your SN and has marked it in the system as not being authorized for warranty work then yes your screwed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Sprint Total Equipment Protection(TEP) insurance is comprised of the Equipment Service & Repair Program(ESRP) and the Equipment Replacement Program(ERP). ESRP covers warranty issues during and after the manufacturers warranty and ERP covers accidental damage(water, theft, and total destruction). I wouldn't want to be paying $8 per month and find out that the ESRP portion is worthless.
Hmm anyone worried we had to give our serial number in order to use the Revolutionary tool, kind of like what HTC wants us to do, hmmm (being paranoid).......
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
I have a crazy idea here. Why not call Sprint and ask? Just say "Hey, I'm thinking of unlocking my bootloader which will void my HTC warranty and I am wondering if I am still covered under your insurance?"
I mean...its just a thought... But it might be better to take the advice of random strangers who may or may not know the real answer.
ExploreMN said:
I have a crazy idea here. Why not call Sprint and ask? Just say "Hey, I'm thinking of unlocking my bootloader which will void my HTC warranty and I am wondering if I am still covered under your insurance?"
I mean...its just a thought... But it might be better to take the advice of random strangers who may or may not know the real answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In theory you are right. But in practice you will get a different answer from every rep you speak with.
firemedic1343 said:
In theory you are right. But in practice you will get a different answer from every rep you speak with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Document document document...write down the time, date, rep name, etc. Or if they say no it is not covered, have them tell you where it states that in the agreement so you can read it yourself.
ExploreMN said:
Document document document...write down the time, date, rep name, etc. Or if they say no it is not covered, have them tell you where it states that in the agreement so you can read it yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That and a nickel will get you...well, a nickel. Sprint reps give different answers on existing policy, much less one that probably doesn't exist yet. Someone might have better luck emailing every Sprint Exec they can find, including Dan himself, to get a semi-straight answer. At this point their answer will probably go something like, "We are working on this policy and details will be forthcoming". I was just throwing a scenario out there on one possible way Sprint could screw us over. It's speculative, I know, but entirely possible with Sprint. I don't plan to register with HTC/Sprint, so it was more of a warning to others.
GooseEye said:
That and a nickel will get you...well, a nickel. Sprint reps give different answers on existing policy, much less one that probably doesn't exist yet. Someone might have better luck emailing every Sprint Exec they can find, including Dan himself, to get a semi-straight answer. At this point their answer will probably go something like, "We are working on this policy and details will be forthcoming". I was just throwing a scenario out there on one possible way Sprint could screw us over. It's speculative, I know, but entirely possible with Sprint. I don't plan to register with HTC/Sprint, so it was more of a warning to others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if that is the view, then even getting an "experienced" response on here would be just as worthless. I think you would do much better to document your call, question and response as I suggest rather than waiting until after the fact and saying "But GooseEye on the XDA forums said that HIS phone was covered after unlocking the bootloader." I'm pretty sure that little piece of information would make the Sprint rep laugh before saying no.
ExploreMN said:
Well, if that is the view, then even getting an "experienced" response on here would be just as worthless. I think you would do much better to document your call, question and response as I suggest rather than waiting until after the fact and saying "But GooseEye on the XDA forums said that HIS phone was covered after unlocking the bootloader." I'm pretty sure that little piece of information would make the Sprint rep laugh before saying no.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're applying my response too broadly.
In this specific situation with regard to warranty coverage through paid Sprint insurance, documenting a rep's response about whether warranty work will or won't be covered on a HTC unlocked bootloader phone, without existing policy in place, will mean nothing. A honest rep should say there's no policy in place yet to answer that question, in which case documentation is moot. A dishonest or misinformed rep could give you wrong info, and while documented by you, will really get you nowhere. Time will pass, account notes will expire, apologies will be issued, but the promise won't be honored. If you put up a good fight, they might end up honoring it, for that one time only.
On a broader scale, and with existing policy, it's always a good idea to document. I do it myself and it's paid off numerous times. But I've always used the "experienced" responses from this and other forums to know what the existing policy is, what to ask for, and whether the rep's response holds any weight or whether they're just blowing smoke. Not all reps interpret all policy correctly, store reps being notoriously bad, so it helps to know whether they're giving you empty promises.
I assume you're just hypothetically using my name in your insurance coverage example but I have to say that I never stated anywhere in my posts that Sprint insurance warranty coverage w/unlocked bootloader will in fact work a certain way. In fact, I was cautioning that there could be other, as yet unverified ramifications, other than the HTC warranty. A pessimistic view for sure, but one that doesn't tend to leave people with false hope.
just got a call from gloria of the fcc saying that they are serving verizon wireless with violations of the locked bootloader on moto devices!
I want to say, "woot!", but I'll remain skeptical.
Me too, but was completely caught off guard by the call and thought I was in trouble of some sort of trouble.
davwman said:
Me too, but was completely caught off guard by the call and thought I was in trouble of some sort of trouble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would the FCC call you?
I filed a complaint against verizon and moto and the woman gloria needed to know what company i wanted it filed against, I said both and she followed with " the fcc will be serving appropriate paperwork for violating regulations about the bootloader" Again im not making this up and was completely suprised myself by this.
davwman said:
I filed a complaint against verizon and moto and the woman gloria needed to know what company i wanted it filed against, I said both and she followed with " the fcc will be serving appropriate paperwork for violating regulations about the bootloader" Again im not making this up and was completely suprised myself by this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, I did just a bit of digging.
You filed a consumer complaint, correct??
On consumer complaint, once a complaint is logged, they wait for a response from the company in question. When a response is given, it is reviewed, and then the FCC will determine if the company should be served a forfeiture order.
This order can be anything from financial liability of the company, which then can be pursued by the consumer, to as much as a forfeiture of their FCC regulation status, meaning they no longer can receive FCC approvals.
It's not clear if they're able to force Moto to unlock to bootloaders.
There is some information online about FCC complaints being turned down after the step you just described, because the company provided legitimate documentation of their actions.
There's also no limitation to the timeframe by which this can be completed, at least not as far as I can find.
So this is just a first step, and also a step that MAY have been taken before, and Motorola may have already submitted documentation on this, which means it would be turned down rather quickly.
What we do know is that after you notified of the findings, then you can request a copy of Moto's submission for your records.
That could be very interesting, or it could be a whole lot of nothing. Still it's interesting to hear that they are following through on your complaint.
@garlick, thanks for the info
Sure garlick. But don't you think that Moto (on Verizon Wireless orders) has currently violated an FCC regulation, documented or not?
Even documented, it has been violated and....
1. An international company like Motorola that can't receive FCC approvals is like to fail, so in this case, they will find a compromise with FCC and if not the RAZR, every other device released by Motorola and other companies (everyone has to receive the FCC approval prior selling a mobile device) will be UNLOCKABLE or UNLOCKED at their market release time;
2. Financial damage to a company like Motorola Mobility is a really bad thing: they don't have money to lose (okay, now that they're Google it isn't so much like that). Even if they lose money for the RAZR, they won't for other devices, so that they'll be UNLOCKABLE or UNLOCKED;
3. Surely the FCC will better examinate the next approval they'll give to Motorola, so that at least the next devices will be UNLOCKABLE or UNLOCKED.
What if they simply "lose" the papers where a consumer complains anything?
Oh well, that can lead to other problems, worst than economically damaging a company...
I mean, if this battle won't be win for the Droid RAZR, it will be a win for all the future devices from every company out there wanting to release a device with LTE capabilities in the US.
Received my Prime 2 weeks ago. After finding device unusable due to lag I unlocked bootloader and installed custom ROM. Afetr a few days use I noticed really bad screen bleed on right side of unit due to what seems to be a slightly loosely fitted screen. I called for an RMA confident because I had read lots of stories on here about repairs for free after unlocking. Well its all BS here in the UK, they refused to repair for free, they want £40 for me to send it to Czech Republic, £60 to look at it then £100 for new motherboard to remove unlock (even tho i stated this isnt required they said they have to do it) and then an estimate of £100 to fix screen issue. £300 to repair a £500 item thats 10 days old. Basically, I will never buy an ASUS item ever again. shocking product, shocking service. Actually going to throw it in the bin........
Why not just take/send it back to the retailer?
"If there is an obvious fault with the item at any time within the first 6 months and it has not been caused by wear and tear or misuse, your first port of call must be the shop you bought it from. They have the responsibility to put the matter right, and should not evade this responsibility by referring you to the manufacturer in the context of a guarantee or warranty".
I bought it from VERY and they are saying that because I have unlocked it, it invalidates any form of warranty. They stated that if i had reported issue before unlocking it they could replace it but as I unlocked it I have to go through ASUS.
MarcWhittle said:
I bought it from VERY and they are saying that because I have unlocked it, it invalidates any form of warranty. They stated that if i had reported issue before unlocking it they could replace it but as I unlocked it I have to go through ASUS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell them to sod off. Your unlocking agreement is between you and ASUS. It did not affect your relationship with the reseller in any way what so ever.
MarcWhittle said:
Received my Prime 2 weeks ago. After finding device unusable due to lag I unlocked bootloader and installed custom ROM. Afetr a few days use I noticed really bad screen bleed on right side of unit due to what seems to be a slightly loosely fitted screen. I called for an RMA confident because I had read lots of stories on here about repairs for free after unlocking. Well its all BS here in the UK, they refused to repair for free, they want £40 for me to send it to Czech Republic, £60 to look at it then £100 for new motherboard to remove unlock (even tho i stated this isnt required they said they have to do it) and then an estimate of £100 to fix screen issue. £300 to repair a £500 item thats 10 days old. Basically, I will never buy an ASUS item ever again. shocking product, shocking service. Actually going to throw it in the bin........
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just want to make sure I understand:
1) You unlocked your device and read the official and explicit disclaimers on voiding warranty if you were to proceed with unlocking.
2) You relied upon unofficial anecdotes by forum members suggesting they had success with warranty service despite unlocking.
3) You did not receive an second, official position on the issue from ASUS on unlocking bootloaders.
4) You took and accepted a risk in accepting the unofficial anecdotes that warranty service would be accepted with an unlocked bootloader, knowing full well that was not an official position of ASUS.
5) Your warranty has now been denied.
6) You're now blaming ASUS for poor service.
...Okay.
Sucky as it is that was the risk of unlocking...
But screen bleeding/loosy screen might be easily fixable by opening up your prime yourself (hey, warranty is gone anyway). Can't find the thread as fast but look around (and on youtube) for some guides on opening your prime and fixing lightbleed/wifi.
Forget what you have done - unless you believe that light bleed can be caused by software (if it can then I wonder if software can repair it). I understand that the ASUS warranty conditions are not enforceable in the US - there's an item on it on an Android web site (not a forum). Very are a significant mail order operation. Look at http://www.very.co.uk/help/en/online-help-system.page?choice=group&segment=789 and their statement:
Sale of Goods Act 1979
If any product we supply fails prematurely due to an inherent fault (manufacturing defect), we will provide you with an appropriate remedy e.g. repair, replacement, or refund. Just call us on 08448 222 321.
There is sufficient evidence on this site that light bleed is an inherent fault
teardown:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5286/asus-eee-pad-transformer-prime-teardown
i got insurance on mine covering any accidental damage. Im not advocating fraud but there is incurance out there for tablets...
Depending on the retailer most places have a 14 day return policy (at least around here) for tablets or TV's and other specific items. Always inquire "If i have any defects with this product how long do i have to return it or replace it".
If there is a defect in the screen why tell them you unlocked it? "Hey, i want to replace / return this tablet" "Why" "Mura in the edge of the screen, the light bleed is getting pretty bad and its only getting worse over time"
Thats it. If they ask if its unlocked play dumb. "Idunno, its my brothers, i dont think so"
I dont know what to tell OP other than maybe try closing the ticket and starting a new RMA ticket with a different Asus rep maybe they will be more understanding? Screen bleed cant be caused by unlocking however you did void your warrenty they dont owe you anything.
Let this serve as a lesson to everyone, dont unlock unless your 110% happy with the hardware.
Hawke84 said:
teardown:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5286/asus-eee-pad-transformer-prime-teardown
i got insurance on mine covering any accidental damage. Im not advocating fraud but there is incurance out there for tablets...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right.When I bought mine, as I knew about all the problems this tablet was having I also bought a 1 year insurance(can renew it for 1 more after after the first year) for £60, that covers pretty much everything that happens with the device, caused by myself or not, this service is available for every single electronic equipment bought in Sweden. Hope you have something like this in the UK as well.
I would keep trying with the retailer, unless you actually have them document something with your particular serial number and put a huge red flag on it that every employee will immediately see, I think you will be able to talk to the right person and have them do an exchange for a new one.
Thanks for all the replys guys. I called Trading Standards today and they basically told me VERY dont have a leg to stand on. Unlocked or not, all that does is invalidate contract with ASUS for warranty, under the SOGA very HAVE to replace it. I phoned them back and told them all this and they are still disagreeing!! Spoke to TS a second time and they told me to send it back with a letter telling them they have to replace it, and even linked me to a site to cut and paste some handy legal jargon for them!
deadlocked007 said:
Why the Hell would you tell them its unlocked dumbass...
Sent from my PG86100 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Very needed to contact ASUS and during their call ASUS told them. Dumbass
NeoteriX said:
I just want to make sure I understand:
1) You unlocked your device and read the official and explicit disclaimers on voiding warranty if you were to proceed with unlocking.
2) You relied upon unofficial anecdotes by forum members suggesting they had success with warranty service despite unlocking.
3) You did not receive an second, official position on the issue from ASUS on unlocking bootloaders.
4) You took and accepted a risk in accepting the unofficial anecdotes that warranty service would be accepted with an unlocked bootloader, knowing full well that was not an official position of ASUS.
5) Your warranty has now been denied.
6) You're now blaming ASUS for poor service.
...Okay.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im blaming ASUS partly for releasing this laggy piece of **** that HAS to be unlocked to be usable. Im blaming them for wanting £300 and a trip to Czech Republic for repair. Im blaming them for stating they wouldnt repair just the screen at my cost without replacing motherboard at cost of £100 to remove lock. all on a two week old device! Screw the warranty, I knew what i was doing, I just find it ridiculous they want to make another £300 off me when realistically its a case of removing screen and refitting same screen correctly like they should have done in first place. Ten minutes work for them but justifiable at £300? I think not.
Just cause your happy with your product and service dude, doesnt mean we all have to be.
MarcWhittle said:
Received my Prime 2 weeks ago. After finding device unusable due to lag I unlocked bootloader and installed custom ROM. Afetr a few days use I noticed really bad screen bleed on right side of unit due to what seems to be a slightly loosely fitted screen. I called for an RMA confident because I had read lots of stories on here about repairs for free after unlocking. Well its all BS here in the UK, they refused to repair for free, they want £40 for me to send it to Czech Republic, £60 to look at it then £100 for new motherboard to remove unlock (even tho i stated this isnt required they said they have to do it) and then an estimate of £100 to fix screen issue. £300 to repair a £500 item thats 10 days old. Basically, I will never buy an ASUS item ever again. shocking product, shocking service. Actually going to throw it in the bin........
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You unlocked it. That invalidates the warranty. You can't take what other people on the Internet say over what the unlocker says. Maybe they are charging you a whole bunch; you'd want to speak to their manager for info.
If you are going to throw it away just because of a light bleed, might as well ship it to me. I'd gladly take it off your hands.
---------- Post added at 07:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:53 PM ----------
MarcWhittle said:
Thanks for all the replys guys. I called Trading Standards today and they basically told me VERY dont have a leg to stand on. Unlocked or not, all that does is invalidate contract with ASUS for warranty, under the SOGA very HAVE to replace it. I phoned them back and told them all this and they are still disagreeing!! Spoke to TS a second time and they told me to send it back with a letter telling them they have to replace it, and even linked me to a site to cut and paste some handy legal jargon for them!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to Very's website, they have to have it returned as is with everything intact. Unlocking it and installing a ROM is not 'as is' and would cost THEM money to undo what you did via unlocking, which means sending it back to Asus and costing them money.
We will replace or refund most items provided they are returned to us within 21 days of receipt complete, unused, in their original packaging and with any security tags intact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They aren't going to foot that bill.
If you really want to repair it, just do it yourself.
Additionally, getting a repair from them means going through Asus. If your warranty is invalidated in any way, they can't do that. You voided the warranty implied via the sale.
You're trying to game the system to have another company pay for repairs when you voided the one year warranty already.
to fix a good percentage of that screen bleed, all op has to do is open up tablet. then loosen the display screws. then retighten them slowly. several accounts of screen bleeds being fixed this way. screen bleed is likely from display screws being tightened to tight. there's a thread, by Erusman I believe, that details how to open prime up without messing anything up.
man they looks like alot of people been getting bad screens im surprised no one has not bought and extra prime switch screens and return the bad one lol i would not do that though lol just thinking lol :angel:
I complained to the FTC
I was just told (yesterday) that because I had unlocked my device my screen failure wouldn't be covered under warranty. They haven't even given me an RMA yet. They just looked it up in their DB and said it was unlocked so I was out of luck.
I filed a complaint with the FTC here in the US but I'm not expecting much.
I'm curious. Do you guys as Internet lawyers think you're smarter then Asus lawyers? Cause let's be honest, Asus lawyers wrote the agreement for unlocking, not some cs rep. None of you have a leg to stand on and the constant whining on this forum about unlocking and voiding your warranty and then Asus not covering it is tiring.
st33med said:
According to Very's website, they have to have it returned as is with everything intact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would suggest that this only refers to returning or exchanging the item. In this case, where the item is damaged / not fit for purpose, I believe the Sales of Good Act / Distance Selling Regulations apply and the OP is entitled to a replacement from VERY.
I think going with Trading Standards is a great idea and I'd be really interested to hear from the OP as to the results of their dealings with TS and VERY.
In an attempt to get an official response from the parties involved with the locking of the phones, I am referencing 47 CFG 27.16 which has the following sections of interest, the former being more relevant than the latter.
(b) Use of devices and applications. Licensees offering service on spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice on the licensee's C Block network, except:
(1) Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the licensee's network, or
(2) As required to comply with statute or applicable government regulation.
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of such handsets on other providers' networks.
(f) Burden of proof. Once a complainant sets forth a prima facie case that the C Block licensee has refused to attach a device or application in violation of the requirements adopted in this section, the licensee shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate that it has adopted reasonable network standards and reasonably applied those standards in the complainant's case. Where the licensee bases its network restrictions on industry-wide consensus standards, such restrictions would be presumed reasonable.
I dont know if I will get anywhere with this but I am working on an open letter to VZW/Samsung (with EFF/FTC/FCC copied) requesting their official legal stance on this issue which will hopefully force them to respond according to part (f). I dont hold too much hope for this in the beginning but I am hopeful that this will gain traction as it seems, to me at least, that locking down the devices and not allowing installation of custom operating systems is in direct conflict with part (b) in that it "shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice".
Let me know what your thoughts are on this. I may be totally off base but I hope that I am not.
smokeyrd said:
In an attempt to get an official response from the parties involved with the locking of the phones, I am referencing 47 CFG 27.16 which has the following sections of interest, the former being more relevant than the latter.
(b) Use of devices and applications. Licensees offering service on spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice on the licensee's C Block network, except:
(1) Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the licensee's network, or
(2) As required to comply with statute or applicable government regulation.
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of such handsets on other providers' networks.
(f) Burden of proof. Once a complainant sets forth a prima facie case that the C Block licensee has refused to attach a device or application in violation of the requirements adopted in this section, the licensee shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate that it has adopted reasonable network standards and reasonably applied those standards in the complainant's case. Where the licensee bases its network restrictions on industry-wide consensus standards, such restrictions would be presumed reasonable.
I dont know if I will get anywhere with this but I am working on an open letter to VZW/Samsung (with EFF/FTC/FCC copied) requesting their official legal stance on this issue which will hopefully force them to respond according to part (f). I dont hold too much hope for this in the beginning but I am hopeful that this will gain traction as it seems, to me at least, that locking down the devices and not allowing installation of custom operating systems is in direct conflict with part (b) in that it "shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice".
Let me know what your thoughts are on this. I may be totally off base but I hope that I am not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon doesn't lock the phones. You can install any operator's SIM and use it. That's what this law is about - it's nothing to do with bootloaders, it's to do with portability of the phone between carriers.
Sorry, you're wasting your time.
k1mu said:
Verizon doesn't lock the phones. You can install any operator's SIM and use it. That's what this law is about - it's nothing to do with bootloaders, it's to do with portability of the phone between carriers.
Sorry, you're wasting your time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that sucks. It seems like the law is referring to more than just the SIM cards because it references "devices and applications" but like I said before, I'm no lawyer. Part (e) is certainly intended to be about the SIM cards but part (b) seems to be a "general statement" In any case...waiting on the EFF response and we'll see where it goes from there. *shrug*
pected eekerman
smokeyrd said:
In an attempt to get an official response from the parties involved with the locking of the phones, I am referencing 47 CFG 27.16 which has the following sections of interest, the former being more relevant than the latter.
(b) Use of devices and applications. Licensees offering service on spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice on the licensee's C Block network, except:
(1) Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the licensee's network, or
(2) As required to comply with statute or applicable government regulation.
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of such handsets on other providers' networks.
(f) Burden of proof. Once a complainant sets forth a prima facie case that the C Block licensee has refused to attach a device or application in violation of the requirements adopted in this section, the licensee shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate that it has adopted reasonable network standards and reasonably applied those standards in the complainant's case. Where the licensee bases its network restrictions on industry-wide consensus standards, such restrictions would be presumed reasonable.
I dont know if I will get anywhere with this but I am working on an open letter to VZW/Samsung (with EFF/FTC/FCC copied) requesting their official legal stance on this issue which will hopefully force them to respond according to part (f). I dont hold too much hope for this in the beginning but I am hopeful that this will gain traction as it seems, to me at least, that locking down the devices and not allowing installation of custom operating systems is in direct conflict with part (b) in that it "shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice".
Let me know what your thoughts are on this. I may be totally off base but I hope that I am not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK this only applies to those phones that make use of the C-block (700MHz band) of the radio spectrum. Only some new phones utilize that frequency range, and I think they also have to be bought off contract from the manufacturer directly. I think the Nexus 7 2013 edition tablet is made to use the C-block spectrum, but even then Big Red found some way to get past and violate the open access policy and disallow those tablets to be used when they clearly can and do work with Verizon.
Basically, what Im saying is Verizon will always find ways to lock everything up and be buttholes about it. Im sure the guy in that Tom's Hardware article (I cant post links yet) is fighting Verizon to get his new tablet working as it should, but like others who have tried, hes apt to fail. We just have to wait and see and count on hackery and our beloved developers to get the things we want.
No letter/petition is ever going to persuade samsung or Verizon to unlock the bootloader. They can do whatever they want and aren't going to listen to a small amount of users who wish to flash custom software. Period.
What is the purpose of a developer edition? Thank you.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using xda app-developers app
richii0207 said:
What is the purpose of a developer edition? Thank you.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly, its just another way for Samsung to earn money. Normally, phones can be unlocked by going to the manufacturer website and using a special tool or some other sort of method. However, Verizon has completely removed that ability. So, Samsung, instead of helping devs by fighting to reverse that, they took it as a way to make extra cash by making a phone without Verizon's custom bootloader security that you buy out of contract from Samsung themselves. You get a completely unlocked phone, and Samsung gets pocket money. Not entirely fair, and it cheats people who need to buy the phone under subsidy, but such are companies like Verizon.
gnubian said:
No letter/petition is ever going to persuade samsung or Verizon to unlock the bootloader. They can do whatever they want and aren't going to listen to a small amount of users who wish to flash custom software. Period.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In this case the goal isnt to politely ask that they stop doing it. The goal is to force them to conform to Federal laws governing their use of the spectrum. That being said, after some input from other members here that looks to be doubtful. I'll still give it a shot and see what turns up. It cant hurt to try.
No can't hurt to try.. Like someone else already stated though.. Neither Verizon or Samsung really care about folks like us who wish to have an unlocked bootloader to flash custom ROMs and such. Were such a small number to them. Sux I know.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Mistertac said:
No can't hurt to try.. Like someone else already stated though.. Neither Verizon or Samsung really care about folks like us who wish to have an unlocked bootloader to flash custom ROMs and such. Were such a small number to them. Sux I know.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One piece of ammo you might want to use is the fact that Cyanogen and its partners are now making phones. CM is a custom ROM to start with and if the carriers don't want the phones on their network, a restraint of trade lawsuit could be in the works.
That said, the letter is still a long shot but nothing ventured, nothing gained.
ky5ever said:
Honestly, its just another way for Samsung to earn money. Normally, phones can be unlocked by going to the manufacturer website and using a special tool or some other sort of method. However, Verizon has completely removed that ability. So, Samsung, instead of helping devs by fighting to reverse that, they took it as a way to make extra cash by making a phone without Verizon's custom bootloader security that you buy out of contract from Samsung themselves. You get a completely unlocked phone, and Samsung gets pocket money. Not entirely fair, and it cheats people who need to buy the phone under subsidy, but such are companies like Verizon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who NEEDS an S4?
If you chose to have someone pay the bulk of the price for you in exchange for you signing a contract dictating usage... Where is your complaint?
I am all for "sticking it to the man", I heavily support us hacking the phones to get what we want... But Its hard to complain the "guy" who paid the bulk of the cost of your phone had a say what is going on.
Contrary to popular belief the a Samsung Galaxy S4 (non dev) does NOT cost $250. Its closer to $700. The difference in cost represents the cost of the restrictions placed on you by re-upping your contract and having limitations/bloatware put on your phone.
scryan said:
Who NEEDS an S4?
If you chose to have someone pay the bulk of the price for you in exchange for you signing a contract dictating usage... Where is your complaint?
I am all for "sticking it to the man", I heavily support us hacking the phones to get what we want... But Its hard to complain the "guy" who paid the bulk of the cost of your phone had a say what is going on.
Contrary to popular belief the a Samsung Galaxy S4 (non dev) does NOT cost $250. Its closer to $700. The difference in cost represents the cost of the restrictions placed on you by re-upping your contract and having limitations/bloatware put on your phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Contrary to popular belief the a Samsung Galaxy S4 (non dev) does NOT cost $250. Its closer to $700.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what subsidy means....correct me if I am wrong?
Also, buying a retail (non-developer) S4 changes nothing. You still get bloatware, and you still get a locked bootloader, nothing changes.
Buying a phone out of contract just means you can go without data on your plan. It also means you do not have to keep paying for two years, obviously.
Buying a dev S4 is NOT done through Verizon. To get the ultra-super-special feature of an unlocked bootloader, you have to get it from somewhere else than Verizon. And that place is Samsung, directly.
Finally, I know nobody NEEDS an S4, I dont know why you had to attack me based on that assumption. I said anyone who needs the phone on SUBSIDY. Because, yeah, the only other option is $700, like you said.
ky5ever said:
That's what subsidy means....correct me if I am wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, 100% wrong.
Look at your sales tax.
You bought a $700 phone and they refunded some money... Thats why you pay the sales tax on full price.
I mean, think of it this way... Find me a brand new S4 for $250 from a retailer. I have only $250 dollars. I will not sign any contracts or do any deals past the one event... Buying an S4. I have $300. Since you can buy S4's for $250, send me a brand new unopened S4 and you can pocket the profit...
But you cannot buy an S4 for $250 alone... So its pretty hard to call that the cost yes? Because no matter what it will cost you more then that to obtain one. You cannot straight trade $250 for an S4.
By definition subsidy is about the price you pay, but not cost.
See the following:
money that is paid usually by a government to keep the price of a product or service low or to help a business or organization to continue to function
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to Merriam-Webster.
The price you pay with a subsity is less then the cost of the good. The cost of the good is what you pay + whatever whoever else pays.
It may chance the price, but the cost
the price of something : the amount of money that is needed to pay for or buy something
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is still what is was before. Just now your not the one paying the bulk of it. Someone else is stepping in and taking up part of that burden.
But the cost the is taken up by Verizon is still recouped.
Firstly, and mostly, by the increase in monthly income due to more people resigning contracts.
Second, by the vendors who pay for their bloatware to be preloaded
Thirdly, by the increase in sales project to occur due to modifications made before sale, i.e. increasing security to make the product more viable for corporate and government use.
The cost is what it is, your price changes as you get someone else to foot the bill.
Hence the extra input from the guy who made up the difference in what you pay and the cost (Samsung is NOT selling the S4 to verizon at no profit, verizon buys phones to sell like any other retailer. Samsung doesn't care about Verizon contracts, only number of units sold to a retailer, on that basis Verizon CAN negotiate a better cost per unit, but that is really the same as any other retailer... Just their size gives them leverage. But Samsung has NOTHING to do with the subsidy. )
scryan said:
Yup, 100% wrong.
Look at your sales tax.
You bought a $700 phone and they refunded some money... Thats why you pay the sales tax on full price.
According to Merriam-Webster.
The price you pay with a subsity is less then the cost of the good. The cost of the good is what you pay + whatever whoever else pays.
It may chance the price, but the cost
Is still what is was before. Just now your not the one paying the bulk of it. Someone else is stepping in and taking up part of that burden.
But the cost the is taken up by Verizon is still recouped.
Firstly, and mostly, by the increase in monthly income due to more people resigning contracts.
Second, by the vendors who pay for their bloatware to be preloaded
Thirdly, by the increase in sales project to occur due to modifications made before sale, i.e. increasing security to make the product more viable for corporate and government use.
The cost is what it is, your price changes as you get someone else to foot the bill.
Hence the extra input from the guy who made up the difference in what you pay and the cost (Samsung is NOT selling the S4 to verizon at no profit, verizon buys phones to sell like any other retailer. Samsung doesn't care about Verizon contracts, only number of units sold to a retailer, on that basis Verizon CAN negotiate a better cost per unit, but that is really the same as any other retailer... Just their size gives them leverage. But Samsung has NOTHING to do with the subsidy. )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First off, what you are saying doesnt make any sense. You said that "contrary to popular belief, the S4 does NOT cost $250, its closer to $700."
Uhm, thats exactly what I said in my first post. So, no, I am not 100% wrong. Not even the slightest bit wrong. I said subsidy. Thats why the phone isnt actually $250. Cause thats what subsidy means. The phone is sold at a reduced price because the rest is paid off by Verizon.
You also stated that the reason there is bloatware and a locked bootloader is because, since Verizon paid half the price (or so), they assume some control over the phone.
My argument to that is, if that is the case, then how come buying the S4 out of contract for full price still gets you a bloated and locked device? The subsidy has nothing to do with bloatware. Verizon is going to bloat and restrict anything they sell THEMSELVES, no matter how it is purchased.
THAT is why, to get a phone sans bloatware and lock, you must get it from another company, and only purchase a SIM card and insert it to the phone.
You also now state that vendors pay Verizon for their bloatware to be preloaded. Uhm, no. Vendors made the phone. They dont have to pay anyone to install their own software on their own device. Verizon actually pays the vendors a small fee to have bloatware installed. That is part of the reason iPhones never have and never will have carrier bloat. Apple refuses to sell the software just so it can be slowed down.
Another thing. Verizon did absolutely nothing towards increasing security for corporate users. Samsung did. Also, Samsung made the bootloader able to boot custom ROMs and kernels, you just lose the ability to make KNOX containers. But, really, what average user is going to do that? The reason most of the average S4 users do not want the KNOX warranty void flag set is because it reduces resell value.
Samsung sells the phones at about $580-$600. Thats some profit off the manufacturing cost, which Im not sure of. Verizon then sells it for $700 plus taxes and all. Thats some profit for them, too. However, that is too high for the average user to pay. So, they have part of the cost paid for, as long as you promise to give them money for two years.
Verizon recovers the lost money from charging ridiculously high prices for CAPPED and SPEED LIMITED data, as well as by forcing the use of some of their services, like making you pay for internet if you have a smartphone. They cost more, so they make you pay for something else, a little over a long time, to recoup what they lost.
They DONT get it back from people resigning contracts. New contracts have nothing to do with phones purchased previously. Once the contract is paid, the phone is paid for, in full. So, starting a new contract starts payments on an entirely new session.
ky5ever said:
First off, what you are saying doesnt make any sense. You said that "contrary to popular belief, the S4 does NOT cost $250, its closer to $700."
Uhm, thats exactly what I said in my first post. So, no, I am not 100% wrong. Not even the slightest bit wrong. I said subsidy. Thats why the phone isnt actually $250. Cause thats what subsidy means. The phone is sold at a reduced price because the rest is paid off by Verizon.
You also stated that the reason there is bloatware and a locked bootloader is because, since Verizon paid half the price (or so), they assume some control over the phone.
You also stated that the reason there is bloatware and a locked bootloader is because, since Verizon paid half the price (or so), they assume some control over the phone.
My argument to that is, if that is the case, then how come buying the S4 out of contract for full price still gets you a bloated and locked device? The subsidy has nothing to do with bloatware. Verizon is going to bloat and restrict anything they sell THEMSELVES, no matter how it is purchased.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When you buy off contract you have the choice of
The phone still "costs" the market clearing price of an off contract S4... Sure that money is not anywhere, but its opportunity costs because they could have sold that unit subsidized for the market clearing price had they chosen.
The off contract verizon S4 still comes with all of that because that is what they decided to do with what they sell. Just like I can go buy a corvette and paint on a race strip and sell it at my dealership. If you want a discount from me on a corvette you need to run a bumpersticker with my logo, and I am forcing you to have a race strip. If you don't want a race strip... Buy from chevy.
ky5ever said:
You also now state that vendors pay Verizon for their bloatware to be preloaded. Uhm, no. Vendors made the phone. They dont have to pay anyone to install their own software on their own device. Verizon actually pays the vendors a small fee to have bloatware installed. That is part of the reason iPhones never have and never will have carrier bloat. Apple refuses to sell the software just so it can be slowed down.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Vendors didnt make the phones. Vendors are:
a person or company offering something for sale, esp. a trader in the street.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The people who make the bloatware profit off their apps or services. Guys who sell services (vendors) pay verizon to put their apps on phones so that the end consumer will hopefully like it and continue using the service.
ky5ever said:
Another thing. Verizon did absolutely nothing towards increasing security for corporate users. Samsung did. Also, Samsung made the bootloader able to boot custom ROMs and kernels, you just lose the ability to make KNOX containers. But, really, what average user is going to do that? The reason most of the average S4 users do not want the KNOX warranty void flag set is because it reduces resell value.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Having Admin rights reduces security. Its just a fact. Its the reason user accounts exist in linux, and why you only become administrator briefly each time rights need to be granted in both android and linux. Your phone is more secure if you don't have to option to mistakenly load something insecure on it. This is simply a fact, you can read it from pretty much any book that discusses the subject. YOU may be super admin, but there is no test before admin rights are given... and if one of your employees is not the super admin he thinks he is, your security has been compromised.
ky5ever said:
Verizon recovers the lost money from charging ridiculously high prices for CAPPED and SPEED LIMITED data, as well as by forcing the use of some of their services, like making you pay for internet if you have a smartphone. They cost more, so they make you pay for something else, a little over a long time, to recoup what they lost.
They DONT get it back from people resigning contracts. New contracts have nothing to do with phones purchased previously. Once the contract is paid, the phone is paid for, in full. So, starting a new contract starts payments on an entirely new session.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They make money in more ways then just monthly contract. Again, do you think they are not paid to load bloat? Do you really not acknowledged that a phone that cannot be modified is more secure from the viewpoint of a corporation issuing phones to random employies? This increases sales and profit.
The fact that its mean kind does not mean a damn thing. Its a deal YOU already agreed was fair, and VZ has your signature to prove it. If it wasn't fair, why didn't you sign up for the better option?
You were presented with, in writing, the fact that you would not be allowed to modify your phone if you asked VZ for help with the price. If you didn't read your contact, or didn't believe they would hold you to it... I don't know what to tell you.
And honestly that is what it comes down to more then ANYTHING.
MAN THE **** UP. You knew VZ locks phones from the get go. They don't hide it. Even if it was unlocked you agreed contractuatlly that you should not be able to modify the phone.
The real difference is that we haven't been able to beat them yet. Be upset about that, but you signed up for what you signed up for man... Very transparent.
15 33663429
scryan said:
When you buy off contract you have the choice of
The phone still "costs" the market clearing price of an off contract S4... Sure that money is not anywhere, but its opportunity costs because they could have sold that unit subsidized for the market clearing price had they chosen.
The off contract verizon S4 still comes with all of that because that is what they decided to do with what they sell. Just like I can go buy a corvette and paint on a race strip and sell it at my dealership. If you want a discount from me on a corvette you need to run a bumpersticker with my logo, and I am forcing you to have a race strip. If you don't want a race strip... Buy from chevy.
Vendors didnt make the phones. Vendors are:
The people who make the bloatware profit off their apps or services. Guys who sell services (vendors) pay verizon to put their apps on phones so that the end consumer will hopefully like it and continue using the service.
Having Admin rights reduces security. Its just a fact. Its the reason user accounts exist in linux, and why you only become administrator briefly each time rights need to be granted in both android and linux. Your phone is more secure if you don't have to option to mistakenly load something insecure on it. This is simply a fact, you can read it from pretty much any book that discusses the subject. YOU may be super admin, but there is no test before admin rights are given... and if one of your employees is not the super admin he thinks he is, your security has been compromised.
They make money in more ways then just monthly contract. Again, do you think they are not paid to load bloat? Do you really not acknowledged that a phone that cannot be modified is more secure from the viewpoint of a corporation issuing phones to random employies? This increases sales and profit.
The fact that its mean kind does not mean a damn thing. Its a deal YOU already agreed was fair, and VZ has your signature to prove it. If it wasn't fair, why didn't you sign up for the better option?
You were presented with, in writing, the fact that you would not be allowed to modify your phone if you asked VZ for help with the price. If you didn't read your contact, or didn't believe they would hold you to it... I don't know what to tell you.
And honestly that is what it comes down to more then ANYTHING.
MAN THE **** UP. You knew VZ locks phones from the get go. They don't hide it. Even if it was unlocked you agreed contractuatlly that you should not be able to modify the phone.
The real difference is that we haven't been able to beat them yet. Be upset about that, but you signed up for what you signed up for man... Very transparent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was gonna just give the f**k up and leave you be, cause Im tired of arguing and I figured youd come to a consensus, and I was even agreeing with many of your points, up until I read the last paragraph.
scryan said:
The fact that its mean kind does not mean a damn thing. Its a deal YOU already agreed was fair, and VZ has your signature to prove it. If it wasn't fair, why didn't you sign up for the better option?
You were presented with, in writing, the fact that you would not be allowed to modify your phone if you asked VZ for help with the price. If you didn't read your contact, or didn't believe they would hold you to it... I don't know what to tell you.
And honestly that is what it comes down to more then ANYTHING.
MAN THE **** UP. You knew VZ locks phones from the get go. They don't hide it. Even if it was unlocked you agreed contractuatlly that you should not be able to modify the phone.
The real difference is that we haven't been able to beat them yet. Be upset about that, but you signed up for what you signed up for man... Very transparent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First off. Verizon does not state that the software cannot be modified. They state that if you do modify the phone, you cannot ask for help fixing the phone or applying further modifications to it with support from Verizon. They will not help you. If they said you cannot root the phone, than a LOT of people would be facing court sessions.
Secondly. Man the f**k up? What made you think I was any bit upset with what Verizon does?
I sure as hell accept it. And I sure as hell cant do anything about it. Thats not the problem here. I was merely telling the other guy that HE is also going to have to "man the f**k up" and deal with it.
Third. VZW just recently started locking phones. And it was not publicized. They dont just up and go "HEY GUYS, WE LOCK PHONES NOW. KTHXBAI." Also, if it was unlocked, then why make an agreement that Im not going to unlock it? Thats right, there was no agreement.
We have beaten them, several times. Not yet for the S4, but we are oh so close. Im not upset about that, far from it, my friend. Im ecstatic. I only wish I could contribute somehow myself.
I signed up for a high end phone on the nations most reliable cellphone network. Any caveats therein are to be dealt with as met.
Fourth. Verizon locking the bootloader when one of the key features of the KNOX bootloader is staying secure while also letting you run proprietary customized ROMs and software IS NOT A SELLING POINT. I dont know WHAT made you think LACK of features was a selling point.
A phone that keeps ONLY THE DATA THEY WANT, to be encrypted, encrypted, while keeping everything else normal, is the best phone.
Most corporate companies are purchasing T-Mobile or AT&T phones, even, because they are more lenient with letting the business customize the phone to their individual needs. Not everyone wants what Verizon wants.
Im done with you. You can type me up another nice long reply and tell me again how wrong I am. I dont care. You believe what you want to believe, and Ill believe what I want to believe. This all started because you misinterpreted my words, anyway. So, please, lets drop this.
It's worth a shot and i applaud u for exercising your 1st amendment and looking out for consumer rights. I'll definitely sign that petition. In addition, I wonder if this also applies to carrier"blacklisting/blocking" equipment imei from being used due to unpaid accounts. I would think that it's common sense and good business to blacklist/block the account holder who has delinquent or unpaid equipment bills instead of blocking the phone from being activated on another account.
////ANDY
First of all I'm am a USA customer and this was my experience. I don't know if it would be different in other countries but I've read a few customer service horror stories from people in other countries. So let's get to it
For anyone interested or considering it I would HIGHLY recommend getting the insurance with ADH (Accidental Damage from Handling) plan through Sony. It is an option when buying the phone through the Sony store and I think even after buying the phone you have either 60 days or a full year from the date of purchase to buy the plan. Anyway here is my experience.
I received my XZU from the Sony store in mid December 2013 I decided to buy the plan with ADH because $80 seemed like a bargain to replace a $680 device. (the ADH plan covers pretty much anything). Well as fate would have it on new years eve I was working during the day and when stopping to take lunch I checked my phone and noticed the screen was cracked and there were only 2 possibilities.
1.) the screen cracked from the pressure of being in my front jeans pocket while working.
OR
2.) while carrying a ladder at work it manged to bang against the phone while it was in my pocket and broke the screen.
So naturally I called Sony and told them possibility #1 lol.
The automated line was easy to navigate through and I was talking to a rep within 5 minutes. They were very thorough and asked several question like what pocket the phone was in. What I had been doing and told them everything I could while still maintaining complete innocence . I was transferred to about 3 reps and had to tell and confirm my story several times but finally the last rep said they would send a brand new phone too my home and all I had to do was put the old phone in the box and ship it back I think I had everything taken care of and was off the phone in about 20 minutes.
They have to receive the broken device within 30 days of shipping you your replacement or you will be billed for a 2nd phone. my replacement arrived in about 4 days and was brand new. The only issue I had was when I received the new device they forgot to send a return label. So I had to call back and get a printable label emailed to me. Which took a long time (5 days) but I shipped my broken phone back and have been using the replacement for about 2 months now with no issues *knock on wood * ((I'm actually writing this thread from my perfectly function 2nd XZU )). I was surprised at how smooth the process went. I was expecting to be put through all kinds of stuff, or expecting to get a refurbished phone but no it was brand new. I don't know how they can afford to hand out high end devices for $80 but I was ecstatic and I never received a bill for a second phone so I couldn't be more pleased with the service from Sony. but I now keep a flip cover on my XZU anytime it isn't on the charger.
One thing to note is that your $80 plan only covers one replacement and you cannot buy the plan twice (I know because I tried) . so if you use the plan and get a replacement phone and then break your replacement device then you have to buy a brand new phone from Sony to buy the ADH protection plan again. So stock up on the $6 leather flip cases on eBay from China lol that's what I've done.
I hope this helps anyone thinking about buying the ADH plan. If I wouldn't have bought it I would be looking at costly repairs or $680 for a new phone after only having it about 2 weeks. So if you're still eligible for the plan go buy it Now and remember if you have to use it, when you call in play dumb and make yourself look as innocent as possible. Had I told them it was probably broke while carrying a ladder I might have been put through some sort of loophole or something.
Anyway hope this helps. And if you have any questions ask away.
Good to hear a positive customer service story, most people just want to ***** about CS and the reps that work there
I'm glad I bought the insurance. Thanks for your experience. Now I feel better about sony customer service after hearing all other stories. But like you did and what I would do to is be calm and nice and do what they say and ask.
Sent from my C6806 using XDA Premium HD app
NuttinSpecial said:
First of all I'm am a USA customer and this was my experience. I don't know if it would be different in other countries but I've read a few customer service horror stories from people in other countries. So let's get to it
For anyone interested or considering it I would HIGHLY recommend getting the insurance with ADH (Accidental Damage from Handling) plan through Sony. It is an option when buying the phone through the Sony store and I think even after buying the phone you have either 60 days or a full year from the date of purchase to buy the plan. Anyway here is my experience.
I received my XZU from the Sony store in mid December 2013 I decided to buy the plan with ADH because $80 seemed like a bargain to replace a $680 device. (the ADH plan covers pretty much anything). Well as fate would have it on new years eve I was working during the day and when stopping to take lunch I checked my phone and noticed the screen was cracked and there were only 2 possibilities.
1.) the screen cracked from the pressure of being in my front jeans pocket while working.
OR
2.) while carrying a ladder at work it manged to bang against the phone while it was in my pocket and broke the screen.
So naturally I called Sony and told them possibility #1 lol.
The automated line was easy to navigate through and I was talking to a rep within 5 minutes. They were very thorough and asked several question like what pocket the phone was in. What I had been doing and told them everything I could while still maintaining complete innocence . I was transferred to about 3 reps and had to tell and confirm my story several times but finally the last rep said they would send a brand new phone too my home and all I had to do was put the old phone in the box and ship it back I think I had everything taken care of and was off the phone in about 20 minutes.
They have to receive the broken device within 30 days of shipping you your replacement or you will be billed for a 2nd phone. my replacement arrived in about 4 days and was brand new. The only issue I had was when I received the new device they forgot to send a return label. So I had to call back and get a printable label emailed to me. Which took a long time (5 days) but I shipped my broken phone back and have been using the replacement for about 2 months now with no issues *knock on wood * ((I'm actually writing this thread from my perfectly function 2nd XZU )). I was surprised at how smooth the process went. I was expecting to be put through all kinds of stuff, or expecting to get a refurbished phone but no it was brand new. I don't know how they can afford to hand out high end devices for $80 but I was ecstatic and I never received a bill for a second phone so I couldn't be more pleased with the service from Sony. but I now keep a flip cover on my XZU anytime it isn't on the charger.
One thing to note is that your $80 plan only covers one replacement and you cannot buy the plan twice (I know because I tried) . so if you use the plan and get a replacement phone and then break your replacement device then you have to buy a brand new phone from Sony to buy the ADH protection plan again. So stock up on the $6 leather flip cases on eBay from China lol that's what I've done.
I hope this helps anyone thinking about buying the ADH plan. If I wouldn't have bought it I would be looking at costly repairs or $680 for a new phone after only having it about 2 weeks. So if you're still eligible for the plan go buy it Now and remember if you have to use it, when you call in play dumb and make yourself look as innocent as possible. Had I told them it was probably broke while carrying a ladder I might have been put through some sort of loophole or something.
Anyway hope this helps. And if you have any questions ask away.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We also have it here in PH., under a xperia shop handed by a telecommunication (or i think its just a partnership). the insurance is called Worry-Free Warranty it will cover up to 2 years warranty on all parts and labor and an accidental warranty in-case your too clumsy. the salesman explain to be even like the warranty is expiring next month and your still under the warranty they will replace it for a same unit OR! if the unit is unavailable they will replace it for a phone with the same price OR you can choose a higher one and just add some cash. and i was like WOAH! thank God i saw this shop. even i paid alot im worry free, BUT there is a catch. Warranty said if I rooted the device and it is still on warranty the whole warranty will be void. kinda hmm kinda sad but happy it is a mix emotion for me but yay i love my Xperia Z ultra w/ Cp12
blueether said:
Good to hear a positive customer service story, most people just want to ***** about CS and the reps that work there
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cameljockey1 said:
I'm glad I bought the insurance. Thanks for your experience. Now I feel better about sony customer service after hearing all other stories. But like you did and what I would do to is be calm and nice and do what they say and ask.
Sent from my C6806 using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Happy to help. I couldn't find many reviews of people's experience with ADH so with as well as my experience went I just had to post it to put people at ease. You can't beat the price for what it offers.
Yeah I am kind of a Sony fanboy. I've owned Playstations, psp, TVs, now a Vaio T that I love, and this phone is the best I've ever owned. And I'm so happy with the CS, I have yet to have an issue with Sony. And yeah as long as your polite and stick to your story they will take care of you.
Thiolo said:
We also have it here in PH., under a xperia shop handed by a telecommunication (or i think its just a partnership). the insurance is called Worry-Free Warranty it will cover up to 2 years warranty on all parts and labor and an accidental warranty in-case your too clumsy. the salesman explain to be even like the warranty is expiring next month and your still under the warranty they will replace it for a same unit OR! if the unit is unavailable they will replace it for a phone with the same price OR you can choose a higher one and just add some cash. and i was like WOAH! thank God i saw this shop. even i paid alot im worry free, BUT there is a catch. Warranty said if I rooted the device and it is still on warranty the whole warranty will be void. kinda hmm kinda sad but happy it is a mix emotion for me but yay i love my Xperia Z ultra w/ Cp12
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I think if you root or alter the phone it voids warranty. Which is why I didn't remove the ASPL on the screen with the oleophobic coating. I just put on a screen protector and it's slick as glass. And the rooting doesn't bother me. I Change the themes, wallpaper, and ringtones and that's good enough for me lol
My story is a bit different
1. I broke my phone
2. called sony same day, after about 5 mins the rep assured me all was set and id receive my phone within a week or so.
3. I called the next day just to be sure since the process went through just a but too smooth. Ofcourse when i called back some rep said, nothing is being shipped to you because you havent spoken to "us" yet. I couldnt get out of him what "us" was and who i spoke to the day before. After some time of back and forth it turned out i also needed to give me CC#, which i did and they assured me the device would be sent soon.
4. Called back 3 days later, they said its being processed.
5. Called back next week, said its still being processed
6. Called back a few days later, still being processed.
7. Back on the 14th day, exactly two weeks later, they assured me the phone would be shipped out next day.
8. !!!! it was, i got it 1 day later!
9. No return label
10. called about return label, they said they would email it
11. called a few days later, they said it would be emailed
12. called a few days later gave them another email as well ....
13. Now its been about 2.5 weeks since i got the replacement phone and they still have not sent or emailed me anything about a shipping label.
All i care is they dont charge me for the replacement. If they do i am going to make a charge back.
All i want to do is send back the old phone and they will not send me a label.
so that has been my experience so far...
What if Z1 Compact was bought on eBay?
If I purchased my phone brand new/sealed on eBay and then buy ADH plan from sony.com, will the support department still honor the warranty in case something goes wrong with the device?
Thanks!
Hi, I just got off the phone with Sony. They got my credit card info, etc and told me that it needs processing and takes about 4-5 business days until I receive a confirmation e-mail from them. Did you have to go through this?
Thanks!!
Mine was replaced via warranty, late last year. Bought off eBay, used via WiFi for a few weeks. Something caused me to call ? Sony, so they e-mailed ? a free shipping label ? , FedEx picked up for free as well. Total turnaround was EXACTLY one week, in which they shipped me my current device , BRAND NEW . A first in my years experience with Sony, was shocked ? and surprised. Now running ? JB since yesterday . Cannot complain, a few things I would have kept that are no longer available . Just have to go through another learning ⤵ curve , no biggie .
Sent from my C6806 using XDA Free mobile app
Sony "Protection Plus" - one time repair??
I purchased a "Sony 2 Yr Protection Plan w/ADH" when I bought my phone, about 14 months ago. Now, it has developed a digitizer problem (large dead spot) that requires repair. Contract details if anyone wants to read them:
We would like to thank you for purchasing a Sony Protection PLUS plan. A contract is now in place, and registration has been completed based on the information shown above for your extended service plan coverage.
Below we have included the contract information and the Terms and Conditions, which will provide you with detailed information about your Extended Service Plan coverage.
Confirmation Number: 000XX000XXXXX00X0000X0X000XXXXXX000X00X
Model Number: SNYUSAssignments
Extended Service Plan SKU: PPSMP2A03
Extended Service Plan Description: 2 Yr Protection Plan w/ADH
Plan start date: 10/07/2014
Plan end date: 10/07/2016
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at 1-855-766-9777, Monday – Friday, 5:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. PT, Saturday – Sunday, 6:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. PT.
Thank you once again for your purchase, and we hope you have a wonderful experience with your product and the Protection PLUS Plan.
Sincerely,
The Sony Protection PLUS Team
Protection PLUS Service Plan + Accidental Damage
[ESC - SONY CONSUMER ELECTRONICS PROTECTION PLAN]
1. The Contract.
These Terms and Conditions govern the hardware service and/or replacement service provided to you for the Sony branded product (“Product”) listed on your proof of purchase (“Proof of Purchase”). Your “Contract” includes these Terms and Conditions and your Proof of Purchase. The provider contractually obligated to you under the terms of this Contract (“Provider”) is Federal Warranty Service Corporation, [P.O. Box 105689, Atlanta, GA 30348-5689], [1-877-881-8578] in all states except in Florida, where the Provider is United Service Protection, Inc., [11222 Quail Roost Drive, Miami, FL 33157], [1-877-881-8578]; and in Oklahoma, where the Provider is Assurant Service Protection, Inc. [P.O. Box 105689, Atlanta, GA 30348-5689], [1-866-266-9459]. Although Sony Electronics, Inc., [16530 Via Esprillo, Bld 1 San Diego, CA 92127] (“Sony”) is not the Provider, and this Contract is between you and the Provider, Sony is the administrator of this Contract and when you need service you should call Sony at [1-855-766-9777]. This Contract is not related to nor an extension of your manufacturer’s warranty, and instead includes only these Terms and Conditions and Proof of Purchase. This Contract is not a contract of insurance. Unless otherwise regulated under state law, the contents of this Contract should be interpreted and understood within the meaning of a "Service Contract" in Public Law #93-637.
2. What is Covered.
The available coverages are listed below. The coverage you purchased will be indicated on your Proof of Purchase.
2.1. Hardware Coverage
This Contract provides coverage for Product hardware failures due to defects in workmanship and/or materials, including power surge while properly connected to a surge protector. You may be asked to provide your surge protector for examination to validate a claim. Your Contract may provide for repairs or, depending on the Product, replacement coverage only. For PC customers, this Contract provides for one replacement of a factory installed rechargeable battery over the life of the Contract. Sony may use non-original manufacturer parts or re-manufactured parts for the repair.
2.2. Accidental Damage
You may also purchase optional coverage for failures due to accidental damage from handling (“ADH”), such as drops or spills that arise from normal handling and use of the Product. ADH coverage only applies to operational or mechanical failure caused by an accident from handling that is the result of an unexpected or unintentional external event that arises from your normal daily usage. If the Product is replaced, all obligations owed under this Contract will have been satisfied.
ADH coverage does not protect you in the cases of (a) theft, loss, misplacement, war, terrorism, fire, abuse, a willful or intentional act, (b) alteration or modification of the Product in any way, (c) damage caused by failure to perform manufacturer’s recommended operating instructions/standards or recommended maintenance, (d) cosmetic damage (e.g., scratches or dents) that does not prevent the proper functionality or use of the Product.
3. If You Need Service
If you need service during the Coverage Term, Sony will either (a) repair the defect, or failure due to ADH, using new or refurbished parts, (b) exchange the Product as a repair solution with an authorized replacement Product that may be new or refurbished, of like quality and functionality (c) replace the Product with an authorized replacement Product that may be new or refurbished, of like kind, quality and functionality not to exceed the purchase price of the Product; or (d) provide you with an amount equal to the purchase price of the Product less any sales tax, shipping, and service claims previously paid. Sony will try to match specific replacement preferences such as equipment color, cosmetics, or features, but this is not guaranteed.
If your Product is un-repairable and Sony replaces your Product, upon receipt of your Product by Sony, the replacement Product will be shipped to you. When you receive the replacement Product, the originally covered Product will become Sony ‘s property. If the Product is un-repairable and Sony replaces the Product all obligations owed under this Contract will have been satisfied.
If your Product is repairable and Sony exchanges your Product as a repair solution, upon receipt of your Product, the exchange Product will be shipped to you. When you receive the exchange Product, the originally covered Product will become Sony’s property. If the Product is repairable but Sony chooses to exchange the Product as a repair solution, this Contract will continue to provide coverage on the exchange Product for the remainder of your Contract coverage.
In the event that you are provided a replacement Product prior to your return of the originally covered Product, a hold on your credit card for an unrecovered equipment fee will be required (“Unrecovered Equipment Fee”). If you do not return your Product within 15 days after receipt of your replacement Product, the Unrecovered Equipment Fee will be processed. Upon timely receipt by Sony of your Product, the hold will be removed. If you do not provide a credit card authorization for the Unrecovered Equipment Fee, you will be shipped a box with a pre-paid postage label to deliver your original Product prior to providing a replacement Product.
If your Product fails three (3) times due to the same part failure, upon the fourth service request for the same part failure, Sony will replace the failed Product with an authorized replacement Product, which may be new or refurbished, of like kind, quality and functionality not to exceed the original retail purchase price of the Product. Replacement of the Product will satisfy all obligations owed under this Contract.
4. How to Get Service.
Call Sony at [1-855-766-9777] Monday to Friday, 5:00 a.m.–9:00 p.m. PST, Saturday and Sunday, 6:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m. PST. All service will be provided by Sony or Sony’s authorized service providers. If you purchased on-site service, but due to special circumstances (such as environmental or technical requirements, if your Product has failed due to ADH, repairs cannot be made on-site, or you are located more than fifty (50) miles from an authorized service provider), this Contract will cover the shipping cost of your Product to an authorized service provider. Sony will inspect the Product and validate that the reported failure is covered under this Contract. If the failure is not covered, you will be responsible for covering the cost of repair at that time or the Product will be returned to you.
5. Coverage Term.
Coverage may begin either on the date of Product purchase or the date of Product shipment (if purchased online) and will end after the expiration of the term listed on your Proof of Purchase (“Coverage Term”). This Contract provides benefits during and in addition to Sony’s manufacturer limited warranty; it does not replace Sony’s manufacturer limited warranty, but provides certain additional benefits during the term of the Sony manufacturer limited warranty. There is no obligation to renew this Contract.
6. Your Responsibilities.
To receive service under the Contract, you agree to:
A. have your Contract number and Proof of Purchase available if requested;
B. provide information about the symptoms and causes of any issues with the Product;
C. respond to requests for information such as Product serial number, model number, any peripheral devices connected or installed on the Product, any error messages displayed, actions taken before the Product experienced the issue and steps taken to resolve the issue;
D. maintain the Product in accordance with the service requirements from Sony under ts manufacturer limited warranty, including care and operating instructions/standards or recommended maintenance provided in the user guide;
E. protect the Product from further damage and operate the Product in accordance with the instructions/standards listed in the user’s guide;
F. back up your data and software before services are performed and remove any and all sensitive data from the Product prior to service. Sony is not responsible for any loss of your data under any circumstances. The contents of your Product may be deleted and the hard drive and/or storage media reformatted in the course of service. All Product settings will be returned to the original Sony default settings. All Product firmware (if applicable) will be updated to the latest official Sony version at the time of service.
G. make your Product accessible to the authorized service provider if your Product is installed within custom cabinetry or in a custom unit;
H. provide a non-threatening and safe environment to the call agent and the authorized service provider and ensure the presence of an adult at the time of scheduled on-site service, and reasonably allow the authorized servicer to perform the appropriate service;
I. provide notice of any defect or deficiency in service within ninety (90) days of discovery;
J. notify Sony if your address changes.
7. Cancellation.
You may cancel this Contract at the location of purchase. If you cancel within the first sixty (60) days of purchase, you will be refunded the full Contract price, less the cost of any repairs made, except as otherwise required by law. If you cancel your Contract after sixty (60) days from the date of purchase, you will receive a pro-rata refund. The effective date of cancellation is the date Sony receives your request for cancellation. We reserve the right to cancel this Contract at any time in the event of fraud or material misrepresentation by you. If we cancel this Contract, you will be provided with a written notice at least thirty (30) days prior to cancellation at your last known address, with the effective date for the cancellation and the reason for cancellation. You will receive a refund of the unearned pro-rata Contract price, less any claims paid, except as otherwise required by law.
8. What is Not Covered.
This Contract does not cover:
A. coverage, components, or products unless sold under a single SKU or “built-to-order,” TV stands or wall mounts, de-installation or re-installation of wall mounted TVs and other products, or inaccessible products;
B. consumable items such as non-factory-installed batteries, printer cartridges, bulbs, screen protectors, accessory cables, removable data storage devices;
C. any repair covered by Sony’s manufacturer’s limited warranty repairs noted in service bulletins and offered by Sony free of charge, repairs initiated by Sony under the manufacturer’s limited warranty or under a recall program, costs associated with Sony’s recommended normal maintenance under the manufacturer’s limited warranty;
D. unauthorized repairs;
E. failures of components such as cabinets, frames, masks, finish defects, glass windows, scratched lenses, cases, bags, accessories purchased with the Product, docking stations;
F. damage or failures caused by conditions beyond our control such as wiring, power supply, rust, corrosion, infestation, negligence, modifications, abuse, misuse, acts of God, power surge where no surge protector was in use, failure to follow Sony’s recommended maintenance, improper installation, non-factory-installed batteries, problems with phone lines;
G. defects that existed prior to this Contract purchase;
H. loss or damage to recording media, software or data, computer viruses, software defects or software-generated problems, software added by you that is not original to the Product;
I. shipping damage to Products by the shipper or resulting from inadequate packaging by you;
J. theft;
K. monitor or screen imperfections, including image burn-in, minor pixel issues that do not affect the overall viewing of the panel;
L. accidental or intentional damage, cracked or damaged monitor, laptop or display screens (except for covered repairs due to ADH if purchased by you);
M. intentional, consequential or incidental damage or gross neglect, including abusive or willful mishandling;
N. data stored on disk drives or other memory devices;
O. normal wear and tear, loss, war, terrorism, or misplacement
P. cleaning of your Product (internal and external);
Q. shipping cost of any Product located outside of the United States of America and U.S. Territories.
9. Contract Transfer.
You can assign your Contract to another person by contacting Sony.
10. Arbitration.
Read the following Arbitration provision carefully. It limits certain of your rights, including your right to obtain relief or damages through court action.
Should a dispute arise related to this Contract or the coverage of your Product pursuant to this Contract, you agree that such dispute shall be decided via binding Arbitration. To begin Arbitration, either you or we must make a written demand to the other party for Arbitration. The Arbitration will take place before a single arbitrator. It will be administered in keeping with the Expedited Procedures of the Commercial Arbitration Rules ("Rules") of the American Arbitration Association ("AAA") in effect when the claim is filed. You may get a copy of these AAA's Rules by contacting AAA at 1633 Broadway, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10019, calling (800) 778-7879 or visiting www.adr.org. The filing fees to begin and carry out Arbitration will be shared equally between you and us. This does not prohibit the arbitrator from giving the winning party their fees and expenses of the Arbitration. Unless you and we agree, the Arbitration will take place in the county and state where you live. The Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 1, et seq., will govern and not any state law on Arbitration. YOU AGREE AND UNDERSTAND THAT this Arbitration provision means that you give up your right to go to court on any claim covered by this provision. You also agree that any Arbitration proceeding will only consider your claims. Claims by, or on behalf of, other individuals will not be arbitrated in any proceeding that is considering your claims. Please refer to the State Disclosures section of this Contract for any added requirements in your state. In the event this Arbitration provision is not approved by the appropriate state regulatory agency, and/or is stricken, severed, or otherwise deemed unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, you and we specifically agree to waive and forever give up the right to a trial by jury. Instead, in the event any litigation arises between you and us, any such lawsuit will be tried before a judge, and a jury will not be impaneled or struck.
YOU AND WE UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT, BECAUSE OF THIS PROVISION, NEITHER YOU NOR WE WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO TO COURT EXCEPT AS PROVIDED ABOVE OR TO HAVE A JURY TRIAL OR TO PARTICIPATE AS ANY MEMBER OF A CLASS OF CLAIMANTS PERTAINING TO ANY CLAIM.
The problem is that Sony is telling me verbally that I get "one bite at the apple" for a claim. In other words, my warranty expires upon their one-time fix to this problem.
I sure don't see that in the terms. Has anyone else had that experience? Thank you.
I see that the OP noted the one-and-done policy for replacement (overlooked that part on my first read). However, it still doesn't make sense to me and the contract, terms posted above, doesn't say that in words I comprehend.
If I have this device repaired, instead of replaced, well the coverage continue for the full 24 months?