Please help! Samsung D900i with cracked LCD

elljay20

thesaint wrote: »

No, the consumer would just have to reasonably show that the product isn't fit for purpose. Mobile phones should survive 'Normal' use.

The D900/D900i is well documented for having this problem, so it wouldn't be hard to get a separate retailer to provide a letter documenting this.

If the retailer did take it to court, I think they'd lose.
For the amount involved, most will simply replace the phone. Going to court costs them a few hundred, replacing the phone £70 give or take.

As they say over the pond "You do the math".

thanks for that. the thing is, i've sold hundreds of d900's and only ever had one or 2 back with cracked screens and you could clearly see damage on the handset:rolleyes:

thesaint

elljay20 wrote: »

thanks for that. the thing is, i've sold hundreds of d900's and only ever had one or 2 back with cracked screens and you could clearly see damage on the handset:rolleyes:

It depends whether you call nicks and scratches as the cause of the screen cracking.

Most people do not know their rights so do not return the phone.

Most retailers do not know their customers rights, so reject the few consumers that do return the phone.

If a customer is persistant, the retailer will in 9 out of 10 cases capitulate because it's not worth having to pay a solicitor to defend a case where a customer only wants something worth relatively little.

If the retailer lose, they will have to pay their solicitor, the court fees, replace the phone and also any costs of specialist reports if they have asked the customer to get them. :A

d123

thesaint wrote: »

No, the consumer would just have to reasonably show that the product isn't fit for purpose. Mobile phones should survive 'Normal' use.

The D900/D900i is well documented for having this problem, so it wouldn't be hard to get a separate retailer to provide a letter documenting this.

I can guarantee you would not get a retailer, a Network, or even Samsung to provide you with such a thing. Do you really think a retailer or manufacturer will open themselves up to future claims against broken LCDs? Or the wrath of a manufacturer when a retailer unrealistically rubbishes a product? Remember Gerald Ratner?

LCDs are inherently weak to impact or pressure, when I worked in the industry (for a Network, not a retailer) we regularly had people ring in with no real legal knowledge beyond the words "sale of goods act" and "not fit for purpose", unfortunately as sure as the sun will rise in the morning LCD damage and liquid ingress will never be covered by a warranty, and fit for purpose won't cover the OP's daughter's LCD that probably was in the blazer pocket when the blazer fell off the back of the chair, or got banged on a wall as she walked.

It happens, and most times the kids are too scared to admit it to the parents.

d123

KeithP wrote: »

I am not a lcd screen expert, but is it possible that the screen had a hidden fault that over time became visible? I don't know. Maybe it was cracked but there was no noticable effect.

The point is though, the legislation I quoted tells us quite clearly that it is the retailer's responsibility to prove that the screen was not so damaged at the time of sale.

If the problem was an inherent fault, yes. But if there is "bleeding" of the LCD it shows something else has occurred.

When an LCD is damaged there is a clear delineated crack from which the "bleed" occurs. it would have been extremely evident at the time of sale, and couldnt actually happen without some form of external pressure.

thesaint

d123 wrote: »

I can guarantee you would not get a retailer, a Network, or even Samsung to provide you with such a thing. Do you really think a retailer or manufacturer will open themselves up to future claims against broken LCDs? Or the wrath of a manufacturer when a retailer unrealistically rubbishes a product? Remember Gerald Ratner?

How can you guarantee that a retailer would not write such a letter?
I am not talking about a national chain, believe me if you want something, it's possible to get it.

d123 wrote: »

LCDs are inherently weak to impact or pressure, when I worked in the industry (for a Network, not a retailer) we regularly had people ring in with no real legal knowledge beyond the words "sale of goods act" and "not fit for purpose"

People who ring in are easily fobbed off. I do not complain over the phone, it's a waste of time. I require a written response to my letters, retailers soon get sick of writing back and come to their senses.

Whether they have real legal knowledge is neither here nor there, the small claims court does not require them to do so. The chance of them ever reaching SCC is miniscule, because as I said, it's cheaper to pay out.

d123 wrote: »

unfortunately as sure as the sun will rise in the morning LCD damage and liquid ingress will never be covered by a warranty,

If you read my previous post, you will see that the warranty is irrelevant, the S.O.G.A is the law that governs of the land(This does not effect your stautory rights).

d123

thesaint wrote: »

How can you guarantee that a retailer would not write such a letter?
I am not talking about a national chain, believe me if you want something, it's possible to get it.

To get a letter from the "bloke down market" will hold no weight at Court, you would need to get the letter from a recognised specialist Repairer (the same ones who have the contracts with the manufacturers), or from the Head Office of a national chain (not your mate who works part time down the local Phones4U). Do you think anyone with the knowledge of how LCDs work, and how easy they can be broken with external force is going to make that sort of statement? Or a manufacturer like Nokia or Samsung wont bring in their experts to dispute this (especially as you are actually wrong about this being a fault, and not user damage). Especially if you think of the cost ramifications of user damage like LCD breaking or Liquid ingress suddenly becoming part of their warranty?

thesaint wrote:

People who ring in are easily fobbed off. I do not complain over the phone, it's a waste of time. I require a written response to my letters, retailers soon get sick of writing back and come to their senses.

Whether they have real legal knowledge is neither here nor there, the small claims court does not require them to do so. The chance of them ever reaching SCC is miniscule, because as I said, it's cheaper to pay out.

Why don't you either try and institute a claim like this, or find a link to ANYONE who has successfully brought such an action. You will find there isn't one. You cannot sue to recover damages caused by your own stupidity or negligence (well, not yet, give it a few more years and who knows. Perhaps in 5 years we will have people suing because their coffee was hot, just like the US).

thesaint wrote:

If you read my previous post, you will see that the warranty is irrelevant, the S.O.G.A is the law that governs of the land(This does not effect your stautory rights).

WHICH ONLY COVERS FAULTS, NOT USER DAMAGE.

And as has been said, you have no chance of getting anywhere with such a case. if you have a spare few minutes, why not ring TS tomorrow and ask their opnion on user damage to LCDs in phones.

KeithP

Fiona11 wrote: »

...However, when she rang them up the next day, as soon as she mentioned cracked LCD, they said this has never happened to a Samsung phone before and it must have been done by applying undue pressure to the phone or dropping it from a considerable height. (I can guarantee this was not the case). They have said they are not interested. The phone is only 2 months old and my mother has taken out a 12 month contract. Now we have no phone.

Any advice would be great!

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

There seems to be some doubt/disagreement about whether the phone supplier will accept this as a faulty phone. I am not a phone expert or a lawyer. I can see that you have two choices -
1) Take the phone to your supplier (not Samsung), tell him the phone has developed a fault. As in my earlier quote, ...when the buyer is a consumer and returns the goods in the first six months from the date of the sale, and requests a repair or replacement or, thereafter, a partial or full refund. In that case, the consumer does not have to prove the goods were faulty at the time of the sale. It is assumed that they were. If the retailer does not agree, it is for him to prove that the goods were satisfactory at the time of sale. For goods returned after six months the normal rules apply so that it would be for the consumer to demonstrate they were faulty when sold.
Tell him he needs to prove to you that the fault wasn't there when it was sold to you. Leave the phone with the supplier (or send it to him).
2) Accept that the fault is a result of user damage. If the screen is the only damage it may be worth getting it repaired. A replacement screen can be got on ebay for £30 - £50. Maybe you need an expert to fit it though - I don't know.

d123

KeithP wrote: »

There seems to be some doubt/disagreement about whether the phone supplier will accept this as a faulty phone. I am not a phone expert or a lawyer. I can see that you have two choices -
1) Take the phone to your supplier (not Samsung), tell him the phone has developed a fault. As in my earlier quote, ...when the buyer is a consumer and returns the goods in the first six months from the date of the sale, and requests a repair or replacement or, thereafter, a partial or full refund. In that case, the consumer does not have to prove the goods were faulty at the time of the sale. It is assumed that they were. If the retailer does not agree, it is for him to prove that the goods were satisfactory at the time of sale. For goods returned after six months the normal rules apply so that it would be for the consumer to demonstrate they were faulty when sold.
Tell him he needs to prove to you that the fault wasn't there when it was sold to you. Leave the phone with the supplier (or send it to him).
2) Accept that the fault is a result of user damage. If the screen is the only damage it may be worth getting it repaired. A replacement screen can be got on ebay for £30 - £50. Maybe you need an expert to fit it though - I don't know.

The screen is available on Ebay for around £32 post free, but it is not a job for the inexperienced, I have seen it done and as I recall, needs a soldering iron to complete.

Unfortunately, it's easy for the retailer to prove the "fault" wasnt present at time of sale:

"See the big crack down the middle of the LCD, was it there when the phone was sold? No? sorry but you have broken it! User Damage"

thesaint

d123 wrote: »

<snip>
Why don't you either try and institute a claim like this, or find a link to ANYONE who has successfully brought such an action. You will find there isn't one. You cannot sue to recover damages caused by your own stupidity or negligence (well, not yet, give it a few more years and who knows. Perhaps in 5 years we will have people suing because their coffee was hot, just like the US).<snip>

You keep on mentioning Manufacturers and the like. You don't seem to grasp that a manufacturer will not go to court and employ an expert to disripute my claim and the one from my dodgy retailer for the sake of a £70 phone.
They will replace it and say that it is a 'Goodwill' gesture and admit no liability.

I have never said anyone is suing anyone for a consumer stupidity or negligence.

A phone has to survive everyday use, this includes being in a pocket and being bumped, and being dropped from short distances. Everyone does it, so, that is considered 'normal'.

I asked Virgin to replace my battery after it failed to hold it's charge.
They replied that it was well out of it's warranty, so I would have to purchase a new one. I told them that it was out of 'their' warranty period, but it should last longer than 2 years. I explained that I paid full price for the phone, and expected it to last 3 or 4 years.

This went back and forth for a few weeks. Eventually I received a battery with a letter saying that they "Misunderstood" what I had told them and gave me the battery at no charge to myself.

This cost them a few pounds, but it worked out better for them because I stayed a customer, and still purchase phones from them and subsequently took out a contract.

It's called "Good business sense".

I would guess when you worked in the industry,it wasn't for Virgin. :A

Fiona11

d123 wrote: »

I can guarantee you would not get a retailer, a Network, or even Samsung to provide you with such a thing. Do you really think a retailer or manufacturer will open themselves up to future claims against broken LCDs? Or the wrath of a manufacturer when a retailer unrealistically rubbishes a product? Remember Gerald Ratner?

LCDs are inherently weak to impact or pressure, when I worked in the industry (for a Network, not a retailer) we regularly had people ring in with no real legal knowledge beyond the words "sale of goods act" and "not fit for purpose", unfortunately as sure as the sun will rise in the morning LCD damage and liquid ingress will never be covered by a warranty, and fit for purpose won't cover the OP's daughter's LCD that probably was in the blazer pocket when the blazer fell off the back of the chair, or got banged on a wall as she walked.

It happens, and most times the kids are too scared to admit it to the parents.

I refer to your last paragraph.

I hope you are not calling my daughter a liar. There is not a single mark on the outside of the phone. It is 100% damage free on the outside. I have absolutely no reason to believe that my daughter would lie to me. In the past if she has made a mistake, she has always told me about it, we have an honest and open relationship. She is in no way scared of me!