Related
will rooting void warranty on n4?
yes
Search
Sent from my A510 using Tapatalk 2
Not necessarily. When unlocking the bootloader it states that it MAY void your warranty. At least that's what it said on the galaxy nexus. Either way you can always flash back to stock with the images provided by Google.
Also you should post questions in the correct section.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
It depends where you life/buy the phone. In the EU, it does not completely void warranty:
http://matija.suklje.name/rooting-and-flashing-your-device-does-not-void-the-warranty-in-eu
Warranty voiding works like this. If it states it will void warranty, it will only void it to where it could have an effect. For example, you unlock boot loader on nexus 7 and a week later your screen starts lifting. Although the boot loader gives you access to a lot of things that could hurt the device. Companies are usually not a ***** and will just not cover if its a brick. If you fried CPU etc by overvoltage...
https://fsfe.org/freesoftware/legal/flashingdevices.en.html
kashsih93 said:
will rooting void warranty on n4?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably technically. But you can unlock bootloader, install factory images, and lock it back. Instant factory state.
As above. If the problem couldn't be caused by rooting then they'll probably still fix it but if you installed a kernel that overclocks the cpu then you send it for repair when the cpu has melted, best of luck.
My Nexus One went poof and even though it was rooted and had CM installed (I couldn't even get it to turn on enough to re-flash stock) HTC still fixed it for free under warranty since it obviously wasn't the custom rom that had caused the problem
MatAuc12 said:
Warranty voiding works like this. If it states it will void warranty, it will only void it to where it could have an effect. For example, you unlock boot loader on nexus 7 and a week later your screen starts lifting. Although the boot loader gives you access to a lot of things that could hurt the device. Companies are usually not a ***** and will just not cover if its a brick. If you fried CPU etc by overvoltage...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Small offtopic: HTC did exactly this to me in UE, i unlocked the bootloader (htc way) a month later my touchscreen stopped working, when i caled them, they asked me if i changed my rom, and told me that this woud void completly the warranty.
(silly of me.. instead i should just flashed a stock rom)
andresbott said:
Small offtopic: HTC did exactly this to me in UE, i unlocked the bootloader (htc way) a month later my touchscreen stopped working, when i caled them, they asked me if i changed my rom, and told me that this woud void completly the warranty.
(silly of me.. instead i should just flashed a stock rom)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't use HTC as an example they are a bit weird with their warranty policy. I have unlocked the boot loader on mine and sent it in because of dust under the screen. It was repaired with no questions.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act
For US consumers, it's important to note that manufacturer's warranties are governed by the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act. In this case, unlocking the boot loader MAY void your warranty in certain circumstances, but only if the defect is proximately caused by the action that voided the warranty.
For example, if you unlock your bootloader, and later flash the wrong radio, resulting in a hard bricked phone, the manufacturer can deny your claim. In this instance, the defect was caused by the consumer, and it would have been prevented had the phone been left in its default locked state with stock Android.
In contrast, if you unlock the bootloader, and flash a custom ROM, you will still receive warranty coverage for a defective screen or broken power button. In this instance, there is no causative relationship between the defect and the consumer's action. And, I've been told by several reputable sources that if you seek warranty coverage for a hardware defect like a screen issue, no attempt is even made to verify whether the phone has been rooted/had its bootloader unlocked.
However, companies still write overly broad warranty language, and sometimes attempt to enforce such language, even where it would violate federal law. This is often a result of employee ignorance rather than corporate policy. For example, I purchased a Netgear MOCA adapter from Amazon. The device was manufactured in 2009, but I made the purchase in 2011, and the warranty policy was 1 year from date of purchase. One of the devices was defective, and I made a claim within a month of my initial purchase, but was told the warranty is actually from the date of manufacture, and had expired. I read the employee the terms of the warrranty, and explained that I was prepared to sue Netgear, if necessary. Within 5 minutes, I had an RMA.
Know your rights, and insist on speaking with a manager. If that doesn't work, send a letter to the executives at the company in question, and CC your congressman, senator, and the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the FTC. I ended up having to do this when Verizon chaged me a $300 ETF for a Verizon FiOS contract. I was told when I signed the contract that I could cancel without an ETF should I move to a location that did not have FiOS availability. I did in fact move a year later to a home without FiOS, and they charged me an ETF anyway. After numerous unsuccessful attempts with FioS customer service, I made a complaint with the FCC, and forwarded the complaint via email to Verizon's CEO, my senator, and congressman, citing to the complaint #. 24 hours later I received a call from Verizon's executive customer support team. They waived all fees and apologized profusely. I ended paying $0.
Note that companies MUST respond to FTC Consumer Bureau complaints in some fashion, and they can face fines and other negative repercussions for failing to adequately resolve consumer complaints. Generally, the employees at this level have far greater authority to resolve your specific issue than a CSR.
If you are dealing with a large entity, consider filing a Better Business Bureau (BBB) complaint. Companies seek BBB certification, and have dedicated employees that resolve such complaints. These employees often have far more authority than regular CSRs. In addition, many companies will go out of their way to resolve these complaints as they are publicly posted on BBB's website, and are used to grade the company by the BBB.
I AM a lawyer, but this should not be construed as legal advice. Just some helpful tips from a consumer that has had to deal with my fair share of crappy situations.
as you know most, if not all, phone manufactures void your warranty when you flash custom software... some, like htc, do it upfront, when unlocking your bootloader... others, like samsung, use flash counters to identify evil custom rom users when faced with warranty claims.
the reason given is always the same: they don't want to pay for (hardware) damage done by the custom software... and most of us would probably object and call bull****, our beloved custom roms aren't doing any damage, with the sole exception of people taking overclocking way too far...
what arguably could be prevented via hardware restrictions by the manufactures if they really wanted to... so if that really is all they fear, no problem here.
But I think the SDS issue adds a new point to the discussion. now we can quite easily construct a case where Samsung could legitimately say that custom software killed the phone: an S3 that would have lived a long and happy life running Samsungs fixed stock kernel, but died because an idiot or an unaware person flashed a kernel without the fix. In other words, the custom software wouldn't really kill the phone... but it would not be preventing it from killing itself
(of course the same applies to simply not updating your phone)
I still think warranty for hardware issues shouldn't be voided if one uses custom software (so please don't kill me), but I guess in this case the manufactures side is understandable as well...
PS: what the SDS issue also shows is the awesomeness of an open platform like android, so Samsung is forced to share their kernel code (hence the fix) with us
Unless you live in the EU, then you can argue your case.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Unless Samsung engineer a problem if you flash custom ROMs then only problems that can be directly caused by a custom ROM or kernel is overheating from over clocking.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
EU "warranty" clarification
blazevxi said:
Unless you live in the EU, then you can argue your case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know this EU "law" (1999/44/EC, to be specific) is referenced quite often around here, but I think it is way overrated and it does not offer as much protection as many people around here seem to think.
First of all, it is not an act you can point to when making your legal case, it is just a directive. A directive is the EUs way of telling its member states to adjust their national law according to the guidelines given by the directive. So national law is likely to be similar to the directive, but the details might vary. In other words, the directive dictates minimal standards for national law, but the specifics are up to the member states.
Also there is no guarantee that every state adapted the directive appropriately. There are some examples where member states refused to do it, were to incompetent to do it properly... or just to slow. Think about the telecommunication data preservation stuff, there are still member states who refuse to implement those directives.
Bottom line: EU directives are worthless, if your country hasn't implemented them yet.
Second point: the EU directive isn't as consumer friendly as many people seem to think.
For starters, it means nothing to manufactures. Samsung does not have to care about it, because it applies to _sellers_, not to manufactures. It says sellers have to provide fault-free products. If they fail to do so, and it gets discovered within two years, they have to refund you. Sounds good, right? Well, there are some drawbacks.
The before-mentioned only applies to faults that have been present at the time of purchase. The implication is, that the consumer will always say, the problem is due to production faults, the seller will always assume the contrary. The catch is, neither of them can prove their point without spending loads of money.
This problem is addressed by the directive in article 5, paragraph 3:
Unless proved otherwise, any lack of conformity which
becomes apparent within six months of delivery of the goods
shall be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery unless
this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods
or the nature of the lack of conformity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
(Source)
So for the first six month you are covered, because if you haven't obviously damaged your device yourself, the seller can't proof it is your fault.
But after that six month, you are pretty much screwed! The directive doesn't get specific on who has to prove what in that case, but because it specifically says the seller needs to provide proof in the first six month, it can be argued that the buyer got the burden of proof afterwards.
This is a perfect example of an issue that should be clarified by national law, when adapting an EU directive (doesn't mean it actually does).
In case of my country (Germany) it got clarified: reversal of the burden of proof after six month
And I think it is a reasonable assumption that it was done in a similar way in other countries, since the directive allows this interpretation and the seller lobbies sure did everything they can to make it that way.
So if your national law doesn't say otherwise, you should assume you only got six month of effective protection.
To sum up: if your government implemented the directive, you are most likely covered for six month, through your seller, not the manufacturer!
So everybody living in the EU (and everybody else who is jealous about this "magical EU law"), please understand: it means almost nothing compared to the warranty given by the manufacturer, which is usually longer and more extensive (around here we usually get 2 years for electronic devices, but that is voluntarily done by the manufactures, they are not forced to).
So the whole thing is pretty much only valuable for people living in EU states where manufactures would normally offer warranties shorter than six month. For everybody else, it is worthless.
Disclaimer: This is just my layman view on the topic, I'm no lawyer or something. Also I'm not too familiar with legal terms in English, so some stuff might be lost in translation. If somebody thinks I got it wrong, please correct me
PS: although the EU directive wouldn't help you legally, it might be worse a try to tell a seller, who is refusing refund, about it... apparently a lot of stores don't know about it... and some surrendered when threatened with "EU law".
Through my cellphone company I pay like 4 euros a month for an extended warranty that covers my broken phone even if it is rooted as long as the problem wasnt caused by the root. Not sure if you can get the same.
Zylian91 said:
Through my cellphone company I pay like 4 euros a month for an extended warranty that covers my broken phone even if it is rooted as long as the problem wasnt caused by the root. Not sure if you can get the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do they specifically say they cover phones that have been tampered with software-wise? Oo
odoto said:
do they specifically say they cover phones that have been tampered with software-wise? Oo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my case the policy says: (between other funny wording): accidental damage, water damage etc.
Therefore, I personally will play same fair game as the sellers and/or manufacturers: if my I9300 would have SDS, semi-death (with download mode available only, showing perfectly that I'm on custom), then, I will "accidentally" will forget to remove the phone from driveaway while taking back with my JAG, or, alternatively, I will give my fishes brilliant opportunity to call Nemo.
First, there is nothing common with the warranty, they will just replace it or repair.
I have no idea about the lobbies in EU, and in my country, bu I always adjust my honesty to the second side of discussion.
O, did I mention that this is an add-on to my bank account, and I have the right to claim twice per year for the phone priced up to approx 1000EUR?
But, going back to the topic, EU law is binding in all EU countries. Furthermore, Samsung can put in the warranty the statement that: inserting the battery will void warranty. But - they HAVE to write as well: above does not affects your statutory rights.
And, they have to honor these rights. therefore if the country law states that the equipment is covered for 4 years - the seller will have to follow that.
spamtrash said:
In my case the policy says: (between other funny wording): accidental damage, water damage etc.
Therefore, I personally will play same fair game as the sellers and/or manufacturers: if my I9300 would have SDS, semi-death (with download mode available only, showing perfectly that I'm on custom), then, I will "accidentally" will forget to remove the phone from driveaway while taking back with my JAG, or, alternatively, I will give my fishes brilliant opportunity to call Nemo.
First, there is nothing common with the warranty, they will just replace it or repair.
I have no idea about the lobbies in EU, and in my country, bu I always adjust my honesty to the second side of discussion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, I wouldn't call it "same fair game" or "adjusted honesty", I'd simply call it insurance fraud, payed for by honest customers. It has nothing to do with getting back at Samsung or the vendor...
spamtrash said:
But, going back to the topic, EU law is binding in all EU countries. Furthermore, Samsung can put in the warranty the statement that: inserting the battery will void warranty. But - they HAVE to write as well: above does not affects your statutory rights.
And, they have to honor these rights. therefore if the country law states that the equipment is covered for 4 years - the seller will have to follow that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
regarding the EU directive in question Samsung can do whatever they want, since it applies to _sellers_, not to manufacturers
odoto said:
well, I wouldn't call it "same fair game" or "adjusted honesty", I'd simply call it insurance fraud, payed for by honest customers. It has nothing to do with getting back at Samsung or the vendor...
regarding the EU directive in question Samsung can do whatever they want, since it applies to _sellers_, not to manufacturers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK then, let's use same measure, and please explain to me what is the difference between (as you was keen to say) insurance fraud, and the warranty fraud by rooting the phone?
sorry, but in my insurance policy there is no such wording like: "except from intentional damage", where in the warranty it is clearly stated.
and of course this is contrary to your assumption from post #1, where you are mentioning custom roms, kernels etc. Wrong. If you have rooted the phone, your warranty is void, period.
If you're trying to hide it, it is a fraud, isn't it?
I definitely agree that Samsung have nothing to do with the phone. The purchase contract was made between the customer and the seller, therefore, seller is fully responsible for any equipment faults over the warranty period (which is much longer in UK, by the way).
spamtrash said:
OK then, let's use same measure, and please explain to me what is the difference between (as you was keen to say) insurance fraud, and the warranty fraud by rooting the phone?
sorry, but in my insurance policy there is no such wording like: "except from intentional damage", where in the warranty it is clearly stated.
and of course this is contrary to your assumption from post #1, where you are mentioning custom roms, kernels etc. Wrong. If you have rooted the phone, your warranty is void, period.
If you're trying to hide it, it is a fraud, isn't it?
I definitely agree that Samsung have nothing to do with the phone. The purchase contract was made between the customer and the seller, therefore, seller is fully responsible for any equipment faults over the warranty period (which is much longer in UK, by the way).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to say I partially agree. Handing in your phone for warranty, although you know you did something that definitely voided the warranty, could be named fraud as well. But I would argue that it is "more okay" than insurance fraud in some way. In case you knowingly killed your phone yourself (lets say you opened it up and intentionally damaged a component), you are a "bad person" if you try to get it repaired under warranty. BUT in case your rooted phone died because the manufacturer screwed up, like with the SDS, you are free to hand it in for warranty in my opinion.
The difference I see is, that in case of a rooted phone your warranty is voided by a technicality that is far from reality. IF the damage done isn't related to you installing custom software, you would be covered otherwise. The problem is that the warranty does not distinguished between cases where root/custom software was the problem and those where it wasn't. Arguably it just isn't possible do to that, or it is just to expensive to trace whether software was the problem or not.
So trying to get warranty despite that is okay in my eyes, because it is trying to "right" a "wrong".
Insurance on the other hand is not, you can't argue you are getting back at Samsung or the place where you bought the phone by getting money from the insurance company you don't deserve. It is not hurting Samsung or the vendors, but other people who need that insurance.
(And in case the vendor sold the insurance to you as well: still not hurting the vendor, they usually just sell insurance contracts of third-party insurance companies)
Damn, didn't mean to get into a lengthy discussion about insurance fraud
odoto said:
I have to say I partially agree. Handing in your phone for warranty, although you know you did something that definitely voided the warranty, could be named fraud as well. But I would argue that it is "more okay" than insurance fraud in some way. In case you knowingly killed your phone yourself (lets say you opened it up and intentionally damaged a component), you are a "bad person" if you try to get it repaired under warranty. BUT in case your rooted phone died because the manufacturer screwed up, like with the SDS, you are free to hand it in for warranty in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why? You shall NOT ROOT your phone, if you want to be honest. and, if anyone would have a residual amount of so-called honesty, after rooting - no one should even think about giving the phone to the service for warranty repair, period.
By the comparison: if you have used your TV set as the rain protection while on camp, I'd say that it would be not very honest to claim 3 dead pixels, huh?
And, you have presumably completely wrong info how the insurance works... read it, and then discuss (a tip: if I pay for the bank account which includes the insurance, if I put my moneys into the bank's account - guess who's paying for the insurance).
Contrary to above, it is sure that as Samsung's solely income is (in this case) by selling SGS's. Therefore, using your own argumentation, it is easily found that for any fraudulently rooted phone repair under the warranty - ALL buyers have to pay, because it is included in the purchase cost, which is paid by mass of the honest users, which even do not know about the phone's rooting possibility and consequences.
Of course, the above will be true unless you are not so naive to believe that Samsung did not included the repairs of some percentage of phones into this price.
Maybe are you thought that any warranty repair decreases the net Samsung's income? :laugh::laugh::laugh:
spamtrash said:
By the comparison: if you have used your TV set as the rain protection while on camp, I'd say that it would be not very honest to claim 3 dead pixels, huh?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course not, because the rain (which is your fault... well, not the rain itself, but the exposure) did kill the device, not the dead pixels. But in case of a rooted phone that died because of a hardware issue, the manufacturer is the one who screwed up, regardless of the software changes you did. If a device dies because of pre-existing hardware issues, what is the difference between custom rom and stock from the manufactures perspective?
spamtrash said:
And, you have presumably completely wrong info how the insurance works... read it, and then discuss (a tip: if I pay for the bank account which includes the insurance, if I put my moneys into the bank's account - guess who's paying for the insurance).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree I don't know for sure how your specific insurance works (how would I?), but I know how those normally work. It usually works like that: some company wants to offer their customers an additional insurance. But they don't have the knowledge to do it themselves, after all they are not an insurance company. So they delegate it to one. They pay the insurance company a fee for every device sold (or some sort of flat fee if it is not device-bound). In return the insurance company is liable for repair/replacement costs if the customer kills his phone. And if people are abusing that insurance, the insurance company has to increase the fees (obviously they don't wanna loose money). So the company who is paying that fee also has to increase prices for their consumers, because they don't wanna loose money as well.
So at the and all customers are paying for it. It always works like that, no company wants to loose money.
spamtrash said:
Contrary to above, it is sure that as Samsung's solely income is (in this case) by selling SGS's. Therefore, using your own argumentation, it is easily found that for any fraudulently rooted phone repair under the warranty - ALL buyers have to pay, because it is included in the purchase cost, which is paid by mass of the honest users, which even do not know about the phone's rooting possibility and consequences.
Of course, the above will be true unless you are not so naive to believe that Samsung did not included the repairs of some percentage of phones into this price.
Maybe are you thought that any warranty repair decreases the net Samsung's income? :laugh::laugh::laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, of course. Like I described above the customers are always paying in the end (or switching to a different company).
BUT Samsungs repair costs are not higher because of rooting/custom software. If nobody would modify the software, Samsung would even have higher repair costs, because in that case they would have to pay for all repairs. If a portion of the repairs can be denied for whatever reason, they save money.
So the fact that some people modify the software does not add to Samsungs repair costs (except for the really rare cases where people actually fry there phone by overclocking all the way to the moon and back), but they still void there warranties, thus saving money.
But they are only saving that money by discriminating against custom software users, for no reason.
So it is not like all customers have to pay more because of custom software users claiming warranty. The contrary is true: at the moment all "normal" users are saving money due to custom rom users, because those get there warranty voided for no factual reason.
Of course Samsung (and other manufactures) state that there is a reason, that they would have higher repair costs because of custom software users. But I think that is a groundless claim, just made to safe money or because of missing knowledge. (I'm talking _hardware_ warranty here! Of course they would have higher costs if they would fix phones where people messed up the software). So because of the unfounded fear of manufactures that custom software users will kill lots of their devices, we get denied rights that all other users have. I'd call that discrimination.
Just curious, now that we know what's causing the problem, is there a way to trigger a brick on my phone *immediately* and have them replace it with an updated motherboard while it is still in warranty… rather than to have a ticking time bomb that may or may not go off and can potentially still fail just outside of warranty?
Will a zero wipe on /emmc do?
wshyang said:
Just curious, now that we know what's causing the problem, is there a way to trigger a brick on my phone *immediately* and have them replace it with an updated motherboard while it is still in warranty… rather than to have a ticking time bomb that may or may not go off and can potentially still fail just outside of warranty?
Will a zero wipe on /emmc do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try hard bricking it, It can't be hard, purposely disconnect the cable when a PIT flash operation is in progress?
Off course I would rather take a chance that it may not break for MONTHS instead of it breaking and Samsung may not replace it.
wshyang said:
Just curious, now that we know what's causing the problem, is there a way to trigger a brick on my phone *immediately* and have them replace it with an updated motherboard while it is still in warranty… rather than to have a ticking time bomb that may or may not go off and can potentially still fail just outside of warranty?
Will a zero wipe on /emmc do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. we have an idea what subsystem is likely causing the problem... that's all.
2. you _might_ be able to advance faster towards triggering the bug by doing a lot of write ops, but that is just a guess (and certainly not immediately)
3. chances are good your phone can live a long and happy life with a fixed firmware, even if it got the buggy chip
4. you would risk getting another mainboard with an affected chip...
5. there is always a risk of Samsung not accepting your claim (happened to some people here)
6. if your phone doesn't encounter SDS within a 2 year warranty period, it probably never will
7. don't do it! your would risk ending up without a phone now, to avoid a small risk of loosing your phone somewhere in the future. if you can't stand having a phone that might brick (what I understand), sell your phone (or get a refund if you still can)
wshyang said:
Just curious, now that we know what's causing the problem, is there a way to trigger a brick on my phone *immediately* and have them replace it with an updated motherboard while it is still in warranty… rather than to have a ticking time bomb that may or may not go off and can potentially still fail just outside of warranty?
Will a zero wipe on /emmc do?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try it ... and let us know :laugh:
More seriously : thanks to odoto for this thread and for information on EU "law" limitations ..
philgalaxs3 said:
More seriously : thanks to odoto for this thread and EU "law" limitation ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know what you you meant, but that sounds almost like the EU law limitations are my fault
odoto said:
I know what you you meant, but that sounds almost like the EU law limitations are my fault
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Corrected , hope that sounds better. Sorry for my poor english .... und danke sehr :good:
AW: some thoughts on warranty, custom roms and SDS
I just thought it was funny
And your English seems totally okay, no worries
odoto said:
Of course not, because the rain (which is your fault... well, not the rain itself, but the exposure) did kill the device, not the dead pixels. But in case of a rooted phone that died because of a hardware issue, the manufacturer is the one who screwed up, regardless of the software changes you did. If a device dies because of pre-existing hardware issues, what is the difference between custom rom and stock from the manufactures perspective?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very simple. Please write here procedure for overclocking without the root, and I will tell that you're right immediately.
odoto said:
I agree I don't know for sure how your specific insurance works (how would I?), but I know how those normally work. It usually works like that: some company wants to offer their customers an additional insurance. But they don't have the knowledge to do it themselves, after all they are not an insurance company. So they delegate it to one. They pay the insurance company a fee for every device sold (or some sort of flat fee if it is not device-bound). In return the insurance company is liable for repair/replacement costs if the customer kills his phone. And if people are abusing that insurance, the insurance company has to increase the fees (obviously they don't wanna loose money). So the company who is paying that fee also has to increase prices for their consumers, because they don't wanna loose money as well.
So at the and all customers are paying for it. It always works like that, no company wants to loose money.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what is the difference between the warranty?
odoto said:
True, of course. Like I described above the customers are always paying in the end (or switching to a different company).
BUT Samsungs repair costs are not higher because of rooting/custom software. If nobody would modify the software, Samsung would even have higher repair costs, because in that case they would have to pay for all repairs. If a portion of the repairs can be denied for whatever reason, they save money.
So the fact that some people modify the software does not add to Samsungs repair costs (except for the really rare cases where people actually fry there phone by overclocking all the way to the moon and back), but they still void there warranties, thus saving money.
But they are only saving that money by discriminating against custom software users, for no reason.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It seems that you did not understood the rules at all. Therefore, just short comparison:
INSURANCE: someone is paying additionally to the price of unit to be covered against unintentional, caused by lack of care, or ANY OTHER DAMAGES, unconditionally.
WARRANTY: You are purchasing the Unit for a price, in which the free repair is covered conditionally, if you are obeying the T&Cs of warranty. It is your choice if you will, but, INTENTIONAL void of the warranty by rooting and then trying to hide it is a fraud.
Comparing to the cars, you can have comprehensive insurance, yes? This is your free will to buy it. and, you have the car warranty. If you are honest, would you claim the corrosion caused by driving your car on a seaside on the background of warranty or insurance? Looking at your posts, you probably would call the insurer aproach a fraud, same time cleaning mud, alga and fishes and shouting that your car never has been contacted with salt water and this ugly dealer have to repair it under the warranty.
Once again, this is your choice: apply warranty T&C's and then claim on base of such, or buy the additional insurance and do whatever you want.
odoto said:
So it is not like all customers have to pay more because of custom software users claiming warranty. The contrary is true: at the moment all "normal" users are saving money due to custom rom users, because those get there warranty voided for no factual reason.
Of course Samsung (and other manufactures) state that there is a reason, that they would have higher repair costs because of custom software users. But I think that is a groundless claim, just made to safe money or because of missing knowledge. (I'm talking _hardware_ warranty here! Of course they would have higher costs if they would fix phones where people messed up the software). So because of the unfounded fear of manufactures that custom software users will kill lots of their devices, we get denied rights that all other users have. I'd call that discrimination.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once again: please give me an example of overclocking without the root, first.
Secondly, you have of course the right to disagree with the T&Cs of warranty. It is very simple: do not buy the product, which is related with unacceptable by you warranty terms. You have even wider choiche: you can buy it and you have the free will to ignore T&C's. The fraud starts when you're voiding knowingly these T&C's, and then you are trying to use (violated by you) warranty.
Third, of course you can call it discrimination, but the manufacturer and seller has right to set the purpose of the device. This is not discrimination, but the AGREEMENT between the customer and seller/manufacturer. Same way you will most likely call discrimination the fact that most of manufacturers are putting the water damage indicators to their devices. (Funny thing by the way, years ago it was no such things in phones. But amount of people like you, who submerged their units into water and then claimed it under the warranty - enforced the manufacturers to do it).
As I said above, your screams are like: I have bought a BMW, then I tried to reach my friend in a yacht in the middle of harbor in it, but it become rusty in result, therefore I need it repaired under warranty.
Finally, I think that you should read the Chainfire's statement related to it on his portal.
Hey guys. Couple of quick questions. Cant seem to find the answer im after anywhere.
1. Is there any way of rooting my note without voiding warranty?
2. I found this guide which states that this method will not void warranty
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/5...3-lte-n9005-root-prerooted-stock-firmware.htm
However. The firmware they have linked to is this one 'SM-N9005XXUBMI7-ROOTED-KNOX_FREE.rar'
My baseband version is n9005XXUBMI6
My build number is JSS15J.N9005XXUBMI7
Will that firmware be compatible with my device. Really appreciate your help guys. Apologies if its all a bit noobish:silly:
Any tampering will trigger the counters and in turn, void your warranty. I emailed Samsung to see if triggering the Knox counter alone is enough to refuse a warranty repair and they confirmed that indeed it does.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 4
Here's my question. Do these other root methods work with sprints note 3?
Sent from my SM-N900P using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Consumer statutory rights
RavenY2K3 said:
Any tampering will trigger the counters and in turn, void your warranty. I emailed Samsung to see if triggering the Knox counter alone is enough to refuse a warranty repair and they confirmed that indeed it does.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the UK, Samsung as the manufacturer may well be able to deny a consumer any rights which it has offered (such as a special Samsung manufacturer's warranty) where such rights are additional to the customer's statutory rights under the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973, the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, and the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.
However, neither Samsung nor the retailer can remove your statutory rights as a consumer against the retailer (including to ask for a repair or a refund) in relation to a product which you bought from a retailer. I very much doubt that Samsung will have said in its email to you that you will lose your statutory rights, though it may legitimately have said its own warranty would be invalidated by flashing alternative firmware. In brief, if there is an underlying fault in the product not caused by any change you have made to it, in the UK at least you may still have a perfectly good right to a repair or refund (perhaps only partial, depending on circumstances of the fault), whatever the status of the manufacturer's warranty.
For a useful layman's summary of UK position, see http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/738369/738375/OFT002_SOGA_explained.pdf.
dxzh said:
In the UK, Samsung as the manufacturer may well be able to deny a consumer any rights which it has offered (such as a special Samsung manufacturer's warranty) where such rights are additional to the customer's statutory rights under the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973, the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, and the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.
However, neither Samsung nor the retailer can remove your statutory rights as a consumer against the retailer (including to ask for a repair or a refund) in relation to a product which you bought from a retailer. I very much doubt that Samsung will have said in its email to you that you will lose your statutory rights, though it may legitimately have said its own warranty would be invalidated by flashing alternative firmware. In brief, if there is an underlying fault in the product not caused by any change you have made to it, in the UK at least you may still have a perfectly good right to a repair or refund (perhaps only partial, depending on circumstances of the fault), whatever the status of the manufacturer's warranty.
For a useful layman's summary of UK position, see http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/738369/738375/OFT002_SOGA_explained.pdf.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is interesting to know, but from the retail side of things, all they'll do is send the faulty item to the manufacturer for the assessment and repair, so won't they just tell "us" to jog on as soon as they see the counters, statutory rights or not? I'll copy the text from their reply into this post in a mo. Admittedly I'm not really wide to the ins and outs of the political side of all of this.
This is the reply I got from Samsung when I asked whether just triggering the Knox counter alone would void the warranty.
-----------------------------
Customer reference number:**********
Please quote your customer reference number when contacting Samsung*
Email response ID:**********
Dear *********
Thank you for contacting Samsung Customer Support.*
I am sorry you are experiencing issues with the information for your Samsung Galaxy Note 3. I can understand why you would like confirmation of your warranty status on the device.*
Any form of rooting the device will void the warranty on your handset. This includes both hardware and software warranty.*
You can read more information about our warranty policy at the following link:*
http://www.samsung.com/uk/support/warranty/warrantyInformation.do?page=POLICY.WARRANTY*
If there is anything else we can help with, please let us know.*
Our Customer Support Team love feedback! Share your thoughts on this response by completing the survey at the bottom of this page.*
Kind regards,*
Louise*
Online Support Team*
SAMSUNG Customer Support Centre*
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 4
I really think this is BS. This is Android and is it known that we love root and testing new things on our devices.
I have not had an Android device long without root! Going on 4 days with this Note 3 and just biting my fingers wondering if I should just root.
@dxzh is right but it's a matter of evidence. They will no doubt try to link the root to the fault you're claiming for. It will be up to you to show they are unrelated.
What is more interesting but hasn't yet been tested in UK law is the question of whether the devices should be capable of root without voiding the warranty for a consumer. That question is much more interesting, patricularly where they are using an open source OS and they release the kernel source for it.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 4
RavenY2K3 said:
That is interesting to know, but from the retail side of things, all they'll do is send the faulty item to the manufacturer for the assessment and repair, so won't they just tell "us" to jog on as soon as they see the counters, statutory rights or not? I'll copy the text from their reply into this post in a mo. Admittedly I'm not really wide to the ins and outs of the political side of all of this.
/
Any form of rooting the device will void the warranty on your handset. This includes both hardware and software warranty.*
You can read more information about our warranty policy at the following link:*
http://www.samsung.com/uk/support/warranty/warrantyInformation.do?page=POLICY.WARRANTY*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In brief, it is the responsibility of the retailer to sort out repairs or refunds for defective products under UK consumer law. If the problem with the product is not caused by the consumer, then the consumer may well have a good case against the retailer. The retailer's statutory obligations are not likely to fall away if the consumenr simply flashes new firmware which causes no damage to the product.
The link given by Samsung seems to be a general description of the additional manufacturer's warrany and how to claim under it, not the detailed wording of the warranty itself. Digging out my old SGS2 manufacturer's warranty card received from Samsung in the box, there is at the end a typical statement that:
"This warranty does not affect the consumers statutory rights nor the consumers rights against the dealer from their purchase/sales agreement."
While the manufacturer's additional warranty set out on the warranty card (or wherever) on whatever terms it chooses may be lost by rooting, etc, I would take some comfort knowing that the important and valuable statutory rights a consumer has under the relevant local legislation, in the UK at least, subsist independently, primarily against the retailer. The consumer does not even need to go looking for the wording mentioned above in the manufacturer's warranty as, whether it is there or not, is not relevant to the continued existence of your statutory rights against the retailer.
From a retailer perspective, the obligations which they have to the consumer will depend on the circumstances. For example:
- if there was an underlying fault (such as duff pixels or a defective switch unconnected with the software loaded onto the device) or the device was not "fit for its purpose" or it was misdescribed, then the retailer (not its distributor or Samsung) is the one under an obligation to arrange a repair or refund in accordance with the legislation, irrespective of any manufacturer's warranty.
- if the problem is caused by the consumer dropping the phone or frying the CPU by overclocking it, then that is a matter not typically protected by the legislation. In this type of circumstance the loss of the additional rights might be significant, perhaps because additional accidental damage cover offered with the phone in the form of a warranty or insurance is invalidated or has exclusions linked to the modification of the device. However, even then the consumer's position may not be completely hopeless if:
** a term dening the warranty or insurance could be deemed unfair under UCTA 1977 (or similar legislation) - for example, it might be unfair to be denied accidental damage coverage for damage caused by dropping a phone in water if the reason coverage is denied is simply because the phone had been previously rooted. Warning: this type of claim based on unfairness though is not an ideal path to follow as outcome is uncertain (given legal judgement call) and journey there likely to be time-consuming; or
** a retailer (or the repairer on its behalf) does not associate revisions to the firmware with the problem resulting in the claim or chooses not to enforce the exceptions for some reason (eg the retailer is nice, incompetent, values ongoing relationship, has better things to do than argue, etc).
The OFT guide to the position of a UK retailer (http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/738..._explained.pdf) mentioned in my earlier post seems to be informative and written in plain English and gives, I believe, a really useful indicator of the grounds for returning goods for repair or refund in the UK and of a few extra rights a consumer might have when buying remotely - many of these rights will exist in a similar form throughout the EU, though implemented in a different way. Whether or not the average high street employee of the retailer in the UK is aware of the obligations of the retailer is a bit of a lottery, but someone in its head office will be and it is to the head office that the consumer may have to turn if the store itself is unhelpful. Fortunately in the UK at least, it is not generally the consumer's problem as to how the retailer sorts out with its distributor or the ultimate manufacturer (in this case Samsung) which of the retailer, distributor or manufacturer ultimately pays for the repair or refund where there is a good statutory claim.
dxzh said:
In brief, it is the responsibility of the retailer to sort out repairs or refunds for defective products under UK consumer law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for that thorough explanation, well see what happens if it dies before I get the Note 4
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 4
dxzh said:
However, neither Samsung nor the retailer can remove your statutory rights as a consumer against the retailer (including to ask for a repair or a refund) in relation to a product which you bought from a retailer. I very much doubt that Samsung will have said in its email to you that you will lose your statutory rights, though it may legitimately have said its own warranty would be invalidated by flashing alternative firmware. In brief, if there is an underlying fault in the product not caused by any change you have made to it, in the UK at least you may still have a perfectly good right to a repair or refund (perhaps only partial, depending on circumstances of the fault), whatever the status of the manufacturer's warranty.
For a useful layman's summary of UK position, see http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/738369/738375/OFT002_SOGA_explained.pdf.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dxzh said:
In brief, it is the responsibility of the retailer to sort out repairs or refunds for defective products under UK consumer law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As you said, Samsung can legally choose to take NOTHING to do with you unless you bought the phone from them directly. The retailer is solely responsible for repair or replacement of faulty goods. In terms of liability, the manufacturer's involvement is incidental, as often they're best-placed to provide repair services. Of course, the manufacturer *may* choose to intervene and repair a product at their expense as a customer service gesture.
Good link, it could come in handy! Thanks!
RavenY2K3 said:
Any form of rooting the device will void the warranty on your handset. This includes both hardware and software warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, warranty is not the same thing as invoking your statutory rights under the sale of goods act. It may well be the first point of call that your phone goes for warranty repair and is denied. The next step is to escalate the issue from routine warranty service to a you seeking redress under the relevant statutes.
This process can take months. To be honest, my personal opinion is that you're better threatening to stop paying contracts than threatening legal action, the latter means they'll probably refuse to talk to you from that point on and you'd have to liaise with their legal department. By that point you could be heading for the small claims court (as your next logical step) which isn't necessarily a bad thing but it does have some initial outlays. I think it would be preferable to get a resolution from customer services rather than a court.
Source: I've worked for a major retailer and been involved in two cases in small claims court (the customers lost both!). Also, I got a reasonable resolution once with a rooted HTC that T-Mob's repair centre refused to fix.
I say hell with them! I going to root mine. Cant stand having so much bloat on my stuff. Besides, without root is like having no eyes!
I have a 2014 Moto X, 16 GB with the bamboo back, on Verizon. The back is peeling off, and I've just finished speaking with Motorola.
I didn't buy the device - it was traded. Despite the fact that I have the box, the IMEI, and everything except the original order information, they refuse to help me. If I had the order info, I'd be well on my way to a new one, but without it, they're happy to leave me completely swinging by myself.
So if you're thinking about buying one used, or giving one as a gift... I wouldn't recommend it. They don't care, and couldn't be bothered to try and find a solution. Last motorola product I'll ever buy.
Not exactly Motorola's fault.
In what way? Tell me of another company that doesn't honor their warranty if you gift a device. It's not like I don't have the serial number, IMEI, and every other bit of info for the thing. Every other company on the planet uses serial numbers for warranties. It shouldn't matter who owns the device or if they kept their receipt. This isn't a pair of headphones from Best Buy, here.
Not only that, but it's a 2014. It can only be so old. It's not like this might somehow be out of warranty.
most if not all items for electronics.... from my past experience that the warranty is only for the original purchaser, its usually in the warranty policy, I buy and sell a lot of used phones, and I know that`s the chance I take of buying used.
below is from moto website
MOTOROLA MOBILITY INC.
LIMITED GLOBAL WARRANTY
MOBILE PHONES
FOR CONSUMERS WHO ARE COVERED BY CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS OR
REGULATIONS IN THEIR COUNTRY OF PURCHASE OR, IF DIFFERENT, THEIR COUNTRY OF
RESIDENCE, THE BENEFITS CONFERRED BY THIS LIMITED WARRANTY ARE IN ADDITION
TO ALL RIGHTS AND REMEDIES CONVEYED BY SUCH CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS
AND REGULATIONS.
Who is Covered?
This Limited Warranty extends only to the first consumer purchaser of the Product, and is not transferable.
It sucks, but I have never owned an electronic device where the warranty extends to the second hand market
You say it is the last Motorola phone you will ever buy, perhaps a wiser choice would be to make this the last second hand phone you ever buy.
...
Can you not glue the back?
At the minimum you could send it in and they can reglue it or replace the back cover. It will cost you but it's better than nothing. You might be able to negotiate a deal.
You never get warranty coverage without proof of purchase, it's basically Warranty 101. My advice would be to contact the original seller and ask them if they can do a warranty return for you.
I have never heard of a company that warrants an item with no proof of purchase. Even with proof of purchase, the warranty on most consumer goods is not transferable.
Factory warranties on cars is the only case I can think of where they don't care about proof of purchase (because they already know when it was purchased).
One thing to keep in mind is that sometimes your experience will vary from rep to rep.
And also your attitude going into it is important as well.
I have a friend that gets no help ANYWHERE, and it's because of the manner in which he speaks. He's not outright rude, but he's a bit socially inept, so he comes off very abrasive. You can hear kindness. People like to help nice people.
dg4prez said:
In what way? Tell me of another company that doesn't honor their warranty if you gift a device. It's not like I don't have the serial number, IMEI, and every other bit of info for the thing. Every other company on the planet uses serial numbers for warranties. It shouldn't matter who owns the device or if they kept their receipt. This isn't a pair of headphones from Best Buy, here.
Not only that, but it's a 2014. It can only be so old. It's not like this might somehow be out of warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The micro USB port on my black 16gb X broke. I took it to my local brick & mortar Verizon store and they ordered a replacement device, no questions asked. They never asked to see any paperwork.
It sounds like you've got nothing to loose by trying the same thing?
dg4prez said:
I didn't buy the device - it was traded. Despite the fact that I have the box, the IMEI, and everything except the original order information, they refuse to help me. If I had the order info, I'd be well on my way to a new one, but without it, they're happy to leave me completely swinging by myself.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ask the seller for the info. I think it's good Motorola doesn't accept warranty without this information because thiefs will not have this info, only people who honestly bought it...
(btw it's very stupid for a company to not honor warranty, within the normal warranty period, for owners after the first owner because this severly impacts resell price and thus selling price)
You are correct.
Apple don't need proof of purchase for warranty, they have their own database based on IMEI/SN.
So if you purchase iPhone from Craigslist and it is still under warranty, Apple will still honor the warranty.
No Android OEM has this kind of customer service, not HTC/Motorola/Samsung/Google as far as I know.
I have read reports from some folks who successfully applied a small amount of glue under the peeled up wood, might be worth a try
dg4prez said:
I didn't buy the device - it was traded.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um. This is standard operating procedure for most companies.
sxp123731 said:
You are correct.
Apple don't need proof of purchase for warranty, they have their own database based on IMEI/SN.
So if you purchase iPhone from Craigslist and it is still under warranty, Apple will still honor the warranty.
No Android OEM has this kind of customer service, not HTC/Motorola/Samsung/Google as far as I know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Nexus S that I bought used off eBay needed a screen replacement, and Samsung did so - no questions asked. Great experience. I haven't had to deal with an OEM for warranty since.
PhilDX said:
I have read reports from some folks who successfully applied a small amount of glue under the peeled up wood, might be worth a try
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can either remove the whole back and re glue it or just use a very fine felt brush to apply glue to the edge of wood. Worked for me. Sent mine back because a different corner peeled. @dg4prez
Fix it your self, It does suck they wont honor a product under warranty.
I know a lot of companies who follow this rule but there are many companies who don't.
I always try and buy product from companies who have exceptional customer service and warranties, its worth it, even if you pay a little more.
I bought a Moto X for a friend of mine, my card, my email, my delivery address. He broke his screen a week later, he called them up and they asked him to send it in, charged him $120 for a new screen and sent him back a new phone, he never needes the order number or anything.
Last week i tore the leather on my moto x, called motorola, they asked for order number, email, address, charged me $25 and sent me a new phone and i will be sending back the one that has the torn back.
Guess it depends on who you speak with.
Also, as was mentioned earlier Apple warranties extend to any owner of the phone, since their proof of purchase comes up when the IMEI/SN is entered (you can even check warranty status on their website)
Only company that got close to this is samsung, i used to work in a cellphone shop and wed brick ALOT of phones testing things out, including note 3, s5 etc and samsung out always unbrick them for free even though we were not the original buyers.
2003vstrom said:
most if not all items for electronics.... from my past experience that the warranty is only for the original purchaser, its usually in the warranty policy, I buy and sell a lot of used phones, and I know that`s the chance I take of buying used.
below is from moto website
MOTOROLA MOBILITY INC.
LIMITED GLOBAL WARRANTY
MOBILE PHONES
FOR CONSUMERS WHO ARE COVERED BY CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS OR
REGULATIONS IN THEIR COUNTRY OF PURCHASE OR, IF DIFFERENT, THEIR COUNTRY OF
RESIDENCE, THE BENEFITS CONFERRED BY THIS LIMITED WARRANTY ARE IN ADDITION
TO ALL RIGHTS AND REMEDIES CONVEYED BY SUCH CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS
AND REGULATIONS.
Who is Covered?
This Limited Warranty extends only to the first consumer purchaser of the Product, and is not transferable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That rule definitely would't survive here in Europe. No matter either written or not. It's against consumer protection regulations. And what is even more weird is that the provision is in direct conflict with freedom of contract principle. Neither state nor any third party could interfere with the contract without clear legal basis. Warranty refers to the sold good not to the person who bought it.
dg4prez said:
In what way? Tell me of another company that doesn't honor their warranty if you gift a device. It's not like I don't have the serial number, IMEI, and every other bit of info for the thing. Every other company on the planet uses serial numbers for warranties. It shouldn't matter who owns the device or if they kept their receipt. This isn't a pair of headphones from Best Buy, here.
Not only that, but it's a 2014. It can only be so old. It's not like this might somehow be out of warranty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Companies warranty to the original purchaser except if it is a gift. Did you register the device with them or did the original purchaser?
My Verizon 10 has formed a yellow band on the right side of the screen. I would like to send it in for repair, but I bought the phone second hand and am not using it on the verizon network.
1) Would Verizon accept my warranty claim without a receipt or VZW account?
2) Would HTC repair it under warranty as if I bought it from them?
3) if the answer to 2) is no, would HTC repair it at a cost, and does anyone know how much a screen replacement costs?
Getting in touch with the original owner is not possible either. Any help would be appreciated!
Update: Just finished speaking with htc, they will accept my warranty claim directly! Hope they don't surprise me with a cost quote now!
Verizon won't do anything for you. The only way they would is if you are the original purchaser, in which case they will replace the device if it's within the manufacturer's 1 year warranty. HTC *might* do something for you, but I'm not too knowledgeable on their warranty policy. There's a good chance they will restrict warranty service to the original purchaser, or tell you that since it's a Verizon phone, you'll have to go through them. HTC does offer a one-time "uh-oh" protection, but that's limited to people who purchased their phone through HTC.com.
You can try it yourself, the digitizer runs around $70 on eBay, but it isn't a simple repair. Otherwise, most screen repair services charge in the $150-$200 range.
Here's the HTC warranty information. It looks like you'll want to have the phone 100% stock with locked bootloader and s-on. http://dl4.htc.com/Web_materials/Ma...evA.PDF?_ga=1.178459428.1435750642.1485623721
From the Warranty disclosure:
"A copy of the original invoice, receipt or bill of sale for the purchase of the Product or Accessory. You
must present a valid proof of purchase upon making any claims pursuant to this Limited Warranty. If no valid proof of purchase is supplied and the Product or Accessory was manufactured more than fifteen (15) months prior to the date the claim is made, HTC has no obligation to provide support under the Limited Warranty."
pastorbennett said:
Verizon won't do anything for you. The only way they would is if you are the original purchaser, in which case they will replace the device if it's within the manufacturer's 1 year warranty. HTC *might* do something for you, but I'm not too knowledgeable on their warranty policy. There's a good chance they will restrict warranty service to the original purchaser, or tell you that since it's a Verizon phone, you'll have to go through them. HTC does offer a one-time "uh-oh" protection, but that's limited to people who purchased their phone through HTC.com.
You can try it yourself, the digitizer runs around $70 on eBay, but it isn't a simple repair. Otherwise, most screen repair services charge in the $150-$200 range.
Here's the HTC warranty information. It looks like you'll want to have the phone 100% stock with locked bootloader and s-on. http://dl4.htc.com/Web_materials/Ma...evA.PDF?_ga=1.178459428.1435750642.1485623721
From the Warranty disclosure:
"A copy of the original invoice, receipt or bill of sale for the purchase of the Product or Accessory. You
must present a valid proof of purchase upon making any claims pursuant to this Limited Warranty. If no valid proof of purchase is supplied and the Product or Accessory was manufactured more than fifteen (15) months prior to the date the claim is made, HTC has no obligation to provide support under the Limited Warranty."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, everything that you said is about what I was expecting myself. But htc surprised me by accepting it as an in-warranty claim. We'll see how it goes.
Tarima said:
Thanks, everything that you said is about what I was expecting myself. But htc surprised me by accepting it as an in-warranty claim. We'll see how it goes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's good to hear. I'd wager it's because the date of manufacture is well within the 12 months, since I don't think the HTC 10 has even been out a year. It says a lot about a company that they're honoring their warranty when, technically, the don't have to.
That's awesome and it definitely says a lot about what type of company HTC is. They have been my go to for years and I'm so happy to continue backing them when they make business decisions like these.
LakesideWiseman said:
That's awesome and it definitely says a lot about what type of company HTC is. They have been my go to for years and I'm so happy to continue backing them when they make business decisions like these.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, I was also impressed when I had my m7 and they offered to fix my purple-tinted camera for free way after the warranty was over (I didn't go for it because they said I would absolutely have to pay to fix my screen at the same time even though I didn't want to). But I've also heard bad things about their customer service (for example at the launch of the 10). This is my first time dealing with a warranty claim with HTC so I'll cross my fingers it goes well.
Update for anyone in a similar situation: HTC replaced the screen and shipped the phone back to me from Texas to Montreal, Canada overnight at no charge. The whole process including my own shipping took only 8 days, pretty impressive. And not a single dent/scratch or other trace of the repair. Very impressed with this service.
Only downside is having to pay 40$ shipping with insurance for a faulty device, but considering I didn't have a receipt I won't complain too much here!