Originally Posted by bcfd29
|
I recently ran the gauntlet with ATT over a warranty exchange fro my HTC Fuze, which developed some cracks in the cover sheet of the touch screen (deemed cosmetic damage) as it was still fully functional.
The warranty exchange was failry straightforward, reciving the replacement (refurb) handset in one day. The challenge came two weeks later, when a crushed box arrived with the first handset, and a letter indicating that it was refused for warranty exchange and I would be billed $455.00 for the replacement.
After several hours on the phone with ATT Warranty department, and having my complaint "escalated" through five different people, the cost was down to the street price of a refurbed handset with no carrier contract (as of yesterday about $150.00 on Amazon with no contract).
IF you choose to go this route, be prepared to aergue your position and stick to your guns. The original replacement charge of $450.00 is clearly several times the value of the acual cost of a refurbed handset (this will continue to drop as the product ages).
NO CLUE why the cover glass cracked; work from home and rarely carry the phone any place. When I do it is in a protective case and pretty secure. Yes, in retrospect perhaps I should have opted for the breakage coverage, but ut seems expensive compared to the acutal cost of replacing completely a handset.
Anyone experieincing bad screens from this vendor? It is quite hot here, perhaps thermal shock going from heat to cold?
|
My husband’s Motorola Tundra was in his pocket. The phone started to burn him while it was in his pocket. There were no incoming calls. He immediately removed his phone and set it down for about thirty minutes. He tried to power the phone up but to no avail. I called AT&T to exchange the phone since it was only about eight months old.
I was told by the Warranty Exchange department that if there were any liquid damage the warranty would be void. Upon looking at the litmus indicator I noticed there were pink speckles. I did not want to pay for a phone that was obviously defective and not abused by my husband.
Therefore, I called AT&T again and explained again that the Tundra was not exposed to water. The representative told me that nothing could be done by AT&T until my next billing cycle when the new phone would be charged to my account. I was told not to worry and go ahead and send the phone in and a Commitment Call would be made to clear up the situation on the next billing cycle if AT&T did not hear from me.
I did receive the new Tundra and returned the damaged phone. The damaged phone was returned to me indicating that the liquid damage indicator was removed. I DID NOT REMOVE THE INDICATOR! I was charged $210.
In the meantime, I called Motorola. The Motorola technician told me that the litmus paper could have been activated by a leaky battery.
I telephoned AT&T today and the $210 was reduced by half. I spoke with three levels of representatives indicating that I did not feel paying anything was acceptable by me based on the principle of this matter. Our original Motorola Tundra was only eight months old and obviously defective. I feel that AT&T is basically accusing me of being dishonest because the liquid damage indicator had pink speckles. What other alternative did I have but to send the phone in since we use it in our business. I accepted the reduction for the cost of the new Tundra with hesitation. It is not so much the money but the principle of this issue. I am a very dissatisfied customer.