The OP mentioned the UK, and that's why I said it's got a 2 year warranty - sorry for confusion

The local consumer laws is one of the reasons Nokia does not want N9 in UK or US.

Imagine the situation with N9 with its limited production volume.

I'll gladly update the article if I find it.

Actually, US consumer protections are very weak compared to other countries, like the UK.

It's:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_N900#Known_Issues

"Nokia declines all such requests" is w/rt getting back the old N900 - the warranty makes it their property, so unsurprising, but the bolded bit is definitely wrong. The replacement doesn't come with a fresh warranty, either - it inherits the remaining warranty time of the device it replaces - as stated in the warranty text.

Honestly, I do despair sometimes at wikipedia.

I sent my N900 back last week, they gave me a F**kin N8... I managed to get them to arrange a door swap for an E7, at least it has a great keyboard, but my N900 will be sadly missed Gonna just hold onto the brand new E7 I get for a bit and see what develops for the MeeGo side, possibly buy an N9 or maybe see if I can get my hands on an N950 when developers move onto more lucrative projects..

I wonder if I called them tomorrow, whether I could throw a tantrum and say that ive changed my mind and demand an N9 or N950 from them as after reading reviews from the E7 and having a play with a friends one, I am not happy and its not a replacement, or should I wait till ive got the E7 then call and demand that I get a different phone and this is just in no way at the same level as my N900??

Some help would be much appreciated Moan and try for an N9 or something now, or wait till after I have the E7 and then moan and try to swap it??

Just a note: The EU consumer protection directive requires all countries to provide an at least two years long consumer protection, which many countries implement by requiring a standard two year warranty for this kind of products.

But not all counties in EU are equal. Some do it better. Finland, for example, has this protection defined in a consumer protection law, which has nothing whatsoever to do with a manufacturer warranty or any claim by the manufacturer. Instead, the seller of goods has the responsibility for a device to work as long as is reasonable to expect it to do so. In a clear design or manufacturing error, this law-based protection will last for years. For example, a phyical USB interface should work for many years, not just a year, as probably a warranty might imply. And after all those years, the seller of the device is the party responsible for the issue.

And of course, the seller, manufacturer, or anyone else can not decide that a functionally different or inferior product would suffice as a replacement.

And If there are discrepancies, a court is not the first step (who would really bother?). Instead, all municipalities are required to employ officials who help people with these matters.

Nokia offers the 2-year warranty as a result of the 1999 EU directive, yes (I forget the exact number). However, the warranty they give is a legally binding contract, in addition to any statutory rights legislation may give you, so if the EU directive isn't in law in your particular jurisdiction (the UK has only partly implemented it), the terms in the warranty document still apply.

Alternative approaches, such as the sale of goods act in the UK, give you additional and extra rights on top of the warranty (if the USB port breaks a year after the 2-year ELW expires, I will be asking the retailer I bought it from to repair / part replace it free of charge, for instance - which will probably get interesting).

Not sure what you mean about "who'd bother to go to court" ? - it's the standard remedy in cases of breach of contract where the other party refuses to remedy the breach. ADR is fine in some circumstances, and should be offered in any letter before action as a matter of course, but I can't see Nokia accepting it.

for £500, being willing to issue a case in the small claims court (or your local equivalent) is eminently well worth it, if you think you've got a decent chance of winning. Not only does the simple act of informing the company that you're willing to do so to get the breach of contract remedied usually work wonders, but if it actually comes down to it, the process is simple and costs are low for both parties, win or lose. The entire system is set up precisely to ensure that claims of this sort of size are worth doing.

godofwar424 - I'm afraid I've no idea what kind of grounds you have to stand on, having initially accepted an E7 as a replacement. It "looks like", having been accepted, nokia fulfilled the warranty - but I really don't know. A dedicated consumer advice forum or $other_source (CAB?) might be able to help you out more.

i am given a fresh n900.. i had the usb problem and slide lock problem.. earlier they were offering an e7.. but later they gave n900. but no warranty on it.

Yeah I don't think I have any grounds after accepting it :P

Tbh I loved my N900, but after using the Refreshed Symbian for the past few days, I found out I do miss having a phone that lasts with a day full of phone calls and random internet use, I am NOT putting down the N900, just saying sometimes having a phone to use as a phone, is more helpful to me then a computer for a phone

Gonna look into getting an N950 or something similar soon as I can find one :P