We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Mobile phone stopped working
Comments
-
powerful_R - thank you for the advice.
For clarity, regarding your query over point 2, the points listed were whatt I consider to be the salient points. Point 2 was included only as a statement of fact, and seems to be the most pertinant.
It seems that a manufacturer can discharge their duty regarding warranty based on the fact that an item has already been damaged, regardless of whether-or-not that damage is the root cause of the actual fault.0 -
powerful_R - thank you for the advice.
For clarity, regarding your query over point 2, the points listed were whatt I consider to be the salient points. Point 2 was included only as a statement of fact, and seems to be the most pertinant.
It seems that a manufacturer can discharge their duty regarding warranty based on the fact that an item has already been damaged, regardless of whether-or-not that damage is the root cause of the actual fault.
Absolutely. Virtually all warranties do this, not just mobile phones.
They could even ask you to wear a pink jumper with a sign saying "I love *name of company*" if they wanted too!
Did you register your phone with WileyFox? If you did before all this, then you are entitled to a free screen replacement.
https://www.wileyfox.com/terms-conditions
***Edit - Ignore that, offer has finished***0 -
No. Rather stupidly I didn't.0
-
Since you're utilising the manufacturer's warranty you are bound by its terms - if it says they don't do warranty repairs on damaged phones then that's that.
Your legal rights are against the retailer and entirely separate from the warranty. Within 6 months of purchase any faults are assumed to be inherent and the retailer must provide a remedy, however since you've damaged the phone the retailer is highly likely to say that the faults were caused by you dropping the phone, but they will need to demonstrate this.
The reason cracked screens invalidate warranties is because with many modern phones dismantling them involves removing the screen, often with the application of heat to melt the glue. A damaged screen is unlikely to survive this process and quite likely to be damaged further by being removed.
Your options are to pay for the repair or to seek a remedy from the retailer, which may well be refused if the faults were indeed caused by the drop.0 -
Since you're utilising the manufacturer's warranty you are bound by its terms - if it says they don't do warranty repairs on damaged phones then that's that.
Your legal rights are against the retailer and entirely separate from the warranty. Within 6 months of purchase any faults are assumed to be inherent and the retailer must provide a remedy, however since you've damaged the phone the retailer is highly likely to say that the faults were caused by you dropping the phone, but they will need to demonstrate this.
The reason cracked screens invalidate warranties is because with many modern phones dismantling them involves removing the screen, often with the application of heat to melt the glue. A damaged screen is unlikely to survive this process and quite likely to be damaged further by being removed.
Your options are to pay for the repair or to seek a remedy from the retailer, which may well be refused if the faults were indeed caused by the drop.
Is that strictly true? Won't they say that due to the user damage that is the cause for the fault?
Amazon send you a freepost label so your phone goes to a mobile phone repair warehouse. The op will be in the same situation as they won't open the phone due to the cracked screen.0 -
It's not straightforward...powerful_Rogue wrote: »Is that strictly true? Won't they say that due to the user damage that is the cause for the fault?
Amazon send you a freepost label so your phone goes to a mobile phone repair warehouse. The op will be in the same situation as they won't open the phone due to the cracked screen.
In terms of the legislation, within the first 6 months the burden of proof regarding whether the fault is inherent or not is on the retailer. Faults are assumed to be inherent unless the retailer can demonstrate otherwise. Possibly they can do that without opening the phone - e.g. a statement from the manufacturer that a drop can cause the faults in question, but they'd have to persuade a judge if it came to that.
In terms of the screen, there's nothing in law that allows the retailer to refuse to offer a remedy for an inherent fault because of unrelated damage.
If the quote for repair isn't excessive I'd probably pay it.0 -
£86 for the screen repair. £15 to have it sent back with no repair.0
-
It's not straightforward...
In terms of the legislation, within the first 6 months the burden of proof regarding whether the fault is inherent or not is on the retailer. Faults are assumed to be inherent unless the retailer can demonstrate otherwise. Possibly they can do that without opening the phone - e.g. a statement from the manufacturer that a drop can cause the faults in question, but they'd have to persuade a judge if it came to that.
In terms of the screen, there's nothing in law that allows the retailer to refuse to offer a remedy for an inherent fault because of unrelated damage.
If the quote for repair isn't excessive I'd probably pay it.
It could be argued that if there is no way to open the phone to even test for an inherent fault because of the level of damage then it is not unrelated damage.0 -
£86 for the screen repair. £15 to have it sent back with no repair.
I'd jump at the £86 for an official screen repair. I've previously paid £100+ for screen repairs from independent shops and the quality of work has been shocking.
After 3 x screen repairs on my last phone, insurance in now the answer! £25 excess and all is good.0 -
The opposite would be true, the retailer has to prove fault in the first six months then the dropped and broken screen is all they need forcing the OP to prove otherwise.It's not straightforward...
In terms of the legislation, within the first 6 months the burden of proof regarding whether the fault is inherent or not is on the retailer. Faults are assumed to be inherent unless the retailer can demonstrate otherwise. Possibly they can do that without opening the phone - e.g. a statement from the manufacturer that a drop can cause the faults in question, but they'd have to persuade a judge if it came to that.
In terms of the screen, there's nothing in law that allows the retailer to refuse to offer a remedy for an inherent fault because of unrelated damage.
If the quote for repair isn't excessive I'd probably pay it.
No court would ever say the damaged screen could be unrelated because it probably isn't. Physical damage is a huge factor here that the courts simply couldn't ignore. They would want proof one way or the other and it would fall on the OP to prove their case.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.1K Spending & Discounts
- 246.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.1K Life & Family
- 260.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards