|
2010-06-16
, 05:31
|
Posts: 307 |
Thanked: 157 times |
Joined on Jul 2009
@ Illinois, USA
|
#22
|
|
2010-06-16
, 08:14
|
Posts: 3,617 |
Thanked: 2,412 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
@ Cambridge, UK
|
#23
|
If your original device breaks within its warranty period, then the warranty is honored. If they fix it, then you usually have an extra grace period (30-120 days) or the rest of the original warranty period. If they replace it with a new device, the original warranty is usually considered fulfilled since your device broke and they honored it. Now you have a new device with a new warranty. The new warranty will be less than the one year, I'm sure. Probably the same as the grace period they would otherwise extend you.
Nothing really unethical about this. They warranty devices, not purchase dates.
EDIT:
Warranties aren't insurance. If you want insurance, go buy it.
That said, I really do sympathize with your situation. I would be pissed as well. In the end though, I think their policy is reasonable.
The Following User Says Thank You to Rob1n For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-06-16
, 08:24
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#24
|
|
2010-06-16
, 08:37
|
Posts: 3,617 |
Thanked: 2,412 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
@ Cambridge, UK
|
#25
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Rob1n For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-06-16
, 08:40
|
Posts: 278 |
Thanked: 303 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Norwich, UK
|
#26
|
Somebody please go through Nokia's warranty legal papers.. I'm sure they've put this in writing somewhere to cover their a**...
The Following User Says Thank You to nidO For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-06-16
, 08:48
|
Posts: 124 |
Thanked: 52 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Sweden
|
#27
|
|
2010-06-16
, 08:51
|
|
Posts: 857 |
Thanked: 1,206 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Chertsey in the Thames, United Kingdom
|
#28
|
|
2010-06-16
, 08:58
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#29
|
|
2010-06-16
, 09:29
|
Posts: 889 |
Thanked: 537 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ scotland
|
#30
|
Anyways, I finally got someone who realized it wasn't software, but he didn't want to replace it. He said they would only replace it if it was defective. I said it broke in under a year, and that is the definition of defective. He said if it broke in the first 90 days, they would have covered it (I think he was off script). I asked him how many days were in a year cause it was sure as hell more than 90. I asked him where the warranty said anything at all about 90 days. I realized that he would never hang up and decided I wouldn't either. We went around-and-around for a good 45 minutes before he agreed to fix it.
Anyways, these gadgets are nothing compared to my warranty problems today. I have a '01 Honda Odyssey. In 2002, Honda realized that there was a material defect in the transmission on several Honda models (from '99-'01) and they extended the warranty to 7 years or 100K. (In 2006, they settled a class action lawsuit and extended it an additional 9 months or 109K). Well, here I am with only 60K but a 9 year old Honda and the transmission goes out. Technically, I'm out of warranty.
The problem is 100% related to the known defect. Apparently, they now handle these on a "case-by-case" basis rather than outright denying claims. I had to fax them my maintenance records and now I get to wait around to see how much they're willing to spend. Depending on the outcome, I'm looking to spend anywhere between $0-$4,600. On a problem that they know was their own fault.
Ultimately, what's legal in a warranty is a function of how many people are willing to sue and how willing the company is to sacrifice their reputation. In 2001, Honda had the top reputation in the industry (the main reason we chose Honda). Apparently, that reputation is worth less than the cost to fix their own mistakes.
Nokia never had that great of a reputation to start with...