Samsung S3 Cracked Screen, Warranty Issues - any legal minds out there?

Colin3

Interesting comments, keep them coming.

'Bingolingo' is right in one aspect; proving the phone is of satisfactory quality requires evidence from many users, not one disgruntled owner. I have no way of proving my phone wasn’t dropped – it may have received a knock earlier in the day or suffered pressure whilst in my pocket, if so was it excessive or not?

My question remains; is the screen susceptible to damage under normal use? A phone is meant to be handled and most users keep them upon their person or in a bag – the manufacturer should consider that as ‘normal use’ in their design suitability. If you apply excessive force, (bend or drop it above the design limit), or apply the ‘chair test’ adandem, then these are clearly outside the scope of any manufacturer’s warranty. In my case Samsung have refused to expand on is what is normal use or confirm what design tests have been applied – they simply sick to the line that ALL physical damage, internal or external voids the warranty – no exceptions. In my view that’s too blunt an exclusion. Retail products have to be of reasonably quality. That assumption applies equally to the expected handling under normal use, but not excessive force.

JJ_Egan

In my case Samsung have refused to expand on is what is normal use or confirm what design tests have been applied – they simply sick to the line that ALL physical damage, internal or external voids the warranty – no exceptions.

That is Samsung's limited 24 month warranty . Limited with terms and conditions .
That is not the vendors warranty nor your rights under the sale of goods its an additional warranty .

Dinah93

I found this thread through Google, I'm interested as I've just been told my s3 purchased mid august has a cracked screen - cost £123 to repair. I know for a fact I did not drop it. I plugged it in to charge and when I took it off charge it wasn't working. There were no external signs of damage, the screen simply was not working. I had my phone a staggering 5 weeks before it stopped working, it was usually in a coat pocket or bag, but I never dropped it or bashed it off anything to my knowledge. To my mind as well it's not fit for purpose if you can't have it in a handbag without it breaking.

JJ_Egan

One everyone says i did not do it .
Handbag keys and other stuff damages phone screen .

You would need evidence that the crack is a manufacturing fault .

Colin3

JJ_Egan wrote: »

One everyone says i did not do it .
Handbag keys and other stuff damages phone screen .

You would need evidence that the crack is a manufacturing fault .

I'm not so sure I agree. As per previous, if the screen design is so delicate that the phone cannot be placed in a bag or pocket without the risk of damage, then I would argue it is not of satisfactory quality.

I do agree however, proving damage was not due to excessive pressure is difficult, but not impossible. It can also be assumed that because Samsung do not include a protective wallet or advise that one is essential, that the phone is durable under 'normal use'.

I'm will contact my local Trading Standards to invite further comment.

WTFH

As phone screens get larger, the risk of the user damaging them or breaking them becomes greater. A phone with a small screen is less likely to suffer from a broken screen than one with a large one. I guess there is a case of caveat emptor. If you choose a big screen, you need to treat it more carefully than a smaller screen.
It's not a manufacturing defect, it's market forces which are driving some manufacturers to produce bigger and bigger screens.

Buy something smaller, or with a stronger body, or get a good case for it.

Lee9999

It may well be possible for them to examine the casing inside the unit for signs of 'physical damage' but it is extremely unlikely the PCB (printed circuit boards) will show any sign of stress or damage. They're far more robust than previous boards and even trying to snap them is often futile.

There is certainly a tendency for newer equipment to have thinner screens and more and more are becoming smashed and in my opinion a lot are not subject to physical damage but inferior quality materials.

Laptops also suffer from this problem and they're far less likely to be dropped than a phone out of a pocket.

Your best bet is to see how many others are reporting this or ask Samsung under the Freedom of Information Act for the numbers.

MikeWhite

Lee9999 wrote: »

IYour best bet is to see how many others are reporting this or ask Samsung under the Freedom of Information Act for the numbers.

"The Act only covers public authorities"

Colin3

If the moderator is listening, how can we run a pole on this site inviting owners to vote on the number of cracked screens or repairs not covered by the warranty?

Silk

Colin3 wrote: »

If the moderator is listening, how can we run a pole on this site inviting owners to vote on the number of cracked screens or repairs not covered by the warranty?

I fail to see the point of conducting a poll.

As each warranty claim is judged on it's own merits, even if you could prove 50% of people had theirs repaired for free it wouldn't mean yours would be too.

All phones suffer from cracked screens, no matter which phone you put in google most will have stories of cracks which are caused by unknown forces. The most popular phones of the time (sales wise) will have the most reports due to high production/sales figures.

As for making a bomb proof phone that is durable enough to withstand physical abuse then I would imagine it's looks and expence would put it out of most peoples reach and desires.

It's just down to common sense that if you are going to get an expensive delicate bit of kit in the £500/600 upwards bracket, then you should at least take precautions and care over it. You surely shouldn't need instructions from the manufacturer to do so