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.
Motorola Warranty
Comments
-
My lap top screen went black after the laptop was lent on.
No sign of damage, no water ingress. No scuffs or scrapes but the pressure had damaged the inner screen.
What proof would there be of user damage except the screen was damaged and a picture of said screen.0 -
No, more like a photo showing it's external damage, cracking on the screen, any signs of external trauma on the device.
CC1 - Owed £4500 ( Now owe £0)
CC2 - Owed £4700 ( Now owe £0)
CC3 - Owed £1800 (Now owe £0)
CC4 - Owed £1500 (Now owe £0)
CC5 - Owed £553 (now owe £0)0 -
It appears the most common cause of flip phone screen not working is damage to internal ribbon cable.
Due to people forcing open/shut or the old star trek flip.
Which is not external damage.
Life in the slow lane0 -
The screen was cracked, so obviously easy to prove. The OP's screen isn't cracked. Two totally different things.
0 -
Oh I agree, the OP isn't in as strong as a position that they clearly think they are afforded by the act, but…unless there's proof provided that there is willful damage then its anyone's guess whats wrong with it.
The fact they gave a repair quote means they know what broke….and they probably hoped they would just get paid for it.
1 -
I am not so sure.
Obviously, if there is a cracked screen, dents, scratches, water ingress or other visible impact damage that would be user damage.
I also understand that modern LCD phone screens are really quite vulnerable and the screens can be damaged if dropped even though no external visible damage is necessarily apparent.
If the screen damage results from the phone being dropped, that would be user damage.
0 -
"… I also understand that modern LCD phone screens are really quite vulnerable and the screens can be damaged if dropped even though no external visible damage is necessarily apparent.
If the screen damage results from the phone being dropped, that would be user damage."
Although being mischievous and playing Devil's Advocate I suppose it could also be taken as evidence that the whole concept and design of the phone was not of satisfactory quality if they are so vulnerable?
(Sorry - I'm being a contrarian - but I think it's a point worth arguing, especially considering the price of these things…)
0 -
A very similar case with us went to small claims at the start of last year, with a customer who took this action to basically prove they were right.
Four/Five month old television where the screen had cracked. They were asked to send in photos of the screen both on and off. It was a wall mounted tv and the repair agents deemed on the basis of photos alone that it was clearly impact damage.
The customer never actually said they hadn’t damaged the screen, they were quite clever in their wording. They obviously had damaged it but they said the same as the OP that we had to prove it didn’t.
The claim was defended due to the cost of the tv being over £1,000 and was ruled in our favour. The repair agents were almost positive it was impact damage based on the photos and they prepared a statement giving their expert opinion on what impact damage looks like and why this wouldn’t be a manufacturing fault. We won the case based on their statement and it had never even been physically looked at.
1 -
Yes, I kind of agree - I did consider adding a note to that vein.
Although I understand the thought you are sharing, I also understand that the consumer desire for ever-lighter phones plus ever more responsive and accurate touch screen features directly drives the screen integrity downwards.
Cast your mind back to the early touch screen sat-navs where the touch was only as precise as a half-inch square icon and compare that to the precision and sensitivity of a modern touch-screen phone. Those early sat nav screens were very tough. AIUI, it is not possible within current technical constraints to achieve a screen that has the robustness of the early sat nav devices plus the precision sensitivity of modern phones.
I don't believe the "not of satisfactory quality" extends to the manufacturer being required to offer a product that is not actually available.
The whole thing about the screen can break but look perfect is a real thing. I dropped my laptop bag while travelling in 2019 and when I arrived at the destination the laptop was working but the screen was just showing wavy lines. Everything on the laptop was perfect insofar as no visible damage. It was inconvenient having to resolve a new screen at emergency prices while travelling.
0 -
No external damage. It was not dropped and no external knock or damage.
The damage to the internal screen was caused by a hand being lent on the laptop.The pressure on the laptop caused the damage.
When opened, the screen displayed the same scenario as the OP described.
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.6K Spending & Discounts
- 247.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.6K Life & Family
- 262.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards