Bad experience for warranty claim(Pre-owned watch)

[sshark]

I second chris suggestion. it is good to know the end to this story. i hope it will not take too long for the story to come to an end.

When is the next hearing ?

Can share with us what your friend actually claimed as stated in tribunal form ?
All charged by Rolex + other cost ? Or what HT quoted for the repair ?

Any defence / reply from HT in black n white ?
They still refuse to pay or refuse to pay full ?

And if can also share us the Rolex service details !
What actually been done to the watch !

[Jy84]

Hi guys, I would like to seek some advice from fellow forumer. After a catchup session with my friend, she informed that the tribunal have requested H*** Th** to proof that the watch is mishandled if they wish to void the warranty claim. HT claimed that they have a photo of the watch's broken gear and mentioned that the watch could drop on soft surface which cause the damage.
Their explanation is not making sense, firstly they mention the watch is winded wrongly which cause the broken gear and now mention about the watch dropping on soft surface.

Any sifus can advice if there are anyway HT can proof the watch is mishandled?
RSC has confirmed the watch is not damage and only charge for watch service

When is the next hearing ?

Can share with us what your friend actually claimed as stated in tribunal form ?
All charged by Rolex + other cost ? Or what HT quoted for the repair ?

Any defence / reply from HT in black n white ?
They still refuse to pay or refuse to pay full ?

And if can also share us the Rolex service details !
What actually been done to the watch !

The next hearing is tomorrow (7/12/2015) and the amount claimed is 3k as she was unsure about the charges by Rolex but during the first hearing she told the tribunal to revise the claim as per receipt by Rolex for standard service charge.

HT did wrote a letter to tribunal informing that my friend has mishandle the watch and therefore they are unable to cover for the damage. HT also mentioned that they offer to fix the watch for RM 500 which was declined by my friend.

HT did pursue my friend to drop the charges after the first hearing without intention to pay for reimbursement. HT expect my friend to drop the charges and assume that nothing has happen.

Rolex service the watch as accordance to the service book that they give out after completion of the service. Oiling, gasket replacement, crown replacement and  pressure test.

[Jy84]

Finally there is an end to this case. During this morning's hearing at the consumer tribunal, HT offered to pay RM 500 for settlement in front of the officer. My friends insist for at least half of the RSC service cost since it is HT responsibility to warranty the watch. In the end, consumer tribunal decided that HT to pay RM 700 compensation for the watch repair at RSC. For my friend, it is not so much for the money, but the satisfaction to proof HT that they should be more ethical and not avoid their responsibility to warranty the watch by pushing the fault to the owner

It is great that there is a conclusion on this case and hopefully HT have learnt their lesson in dealing with such cases in future.

[roystock]

Good to hear that   
Thanks your friend for fighting for our rights   

[chrisyen]

Good to hear that

I do think the judgement is fair in this case base on what i read from buyer side of story.

1. HT agreed to pay RM500 as what they quoted to fix the watch to the judge
2. Buyer have no right to claim further than the faulty parts
    because RSC did more than replacing the faulty parts, HT cant be paying for oiling, gasket replacement and polishing
    and buyer get new warranty from RSC on HT expense

I'm not sure how to work out RM700, buyer claim RM3,000 and later revised to RM 2K++ as per RSC charge.
looks like judgement is towards to RM500 for HT agreement + RM200 for happy ending.
and HT seems not into forum discussion, we are not getting another side of the story afterall till this end

however, buyer sound happy, thats important and all of us learned what is our right, what is retailer right.

[Jy84]

Good to hear that

I do think the judgement is fair in this case base on what i read from buyer side of story.

1. HT agreed to pay RM500 as what they quoted to fix the watch to the judge
2. Buyer have no right to claim further than the faulty parts in my opinion
    because RSC did more than replacing the faulty parts, HT cant be paying for oiling, gasket replacement and polishing
    and buyer get new warranty from RSC on HT expense

I'm not sure how to work out RM700, buyer claim RM3,000 and later revised to RM 2K++ as per RSC charge.
looks like judgement is towards to RM500 for HT agreement + RM200 for happy ending.
and HT seems not into forum discussion, we are not getting another side of the story afterall till this end

however, buyer sound happy, thats important and all of us learned what is our right, what is retailer right.

True that buyer should not claim more than the cost of replacing faulty parts but whatever RSC service and replaced is totally different with what HT claimed is damaged. HT offered to fix the watch for RM 500 by replacing the gear but in fact based on RSC's evaluation, there is no damage to the gear as what HT claim.

And it is very unfortunate that HT is not interested in any discussion in this forum to clear their name up.

[keanewoon]

We only listened to buyer's side. But the tribunal listened to both side. Stop saying buyer get anything at the expense of seller.  I dont think the buyer want to go thru these messes if given choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrisyen]

Good to hear that

I do think the judgement is fair in this case base on what i read from buyer side of story.

1. HT agreed to pay RM500 as what they quoted to fix the watch to the judge
2. Buyer have no right to claim further than the faulty parts in my opinion
    because RSC did more than replacing the faulty parts, HT cant be paying for oiling, gasket replacement and polishing
    and buyer get new warranty from RSC on HT expense

I'm not sure how to work out RM700, buyer claim RM3,000 and later revised to RM 2K++ as per RSC charge.
looks like judgement is towards to RM500 for HT agreement + RM200 for happy ending.
and HT seems not into forum discussion, we are not getting another side of the story afterall till this end

however, buyer sound happy, thats important and all of us learned what is our right, what is retailer right.

True that buyer should not claim more than the cost of replacing faulty parts but whatever RSC service and replaced is totally different with what HT claimed is damaged. HT offered to fix the watch for RM 500 by replacing the gear but in fact based on RSC's evaluation, there is no damage to the gear as what HT claim.

And it is very unfortunate that HT is not interested in any discussion in this forum to clear their name up.

i understand you trust your friend.
but in this case, i stay neutral - we have not hear from HT, we also not hear from RSC. even the judgement, we heard from you.
as i mentioned earlier, it will be good you scan and post what is claimed by your friend and what defense HT replied to tribunal

since your friend said HT agreed to pay RM500 to judge and judge agreed to that RM 500 + RM200 ( dunno from where )
and your friend accepted this amount, i assume this is happy end.

and most important for this forum -
i learned, everybody who read this interesting thread also learned.
in future at least we know what is claimable and what is not.

[keanewoon]

I guess we had made decision from the very first post on whether staying neutral or siding op or even totally not trusting him. So, until now, still pretty much the same as we only hear from op.

A case is settled via tribunal at least we as consumers see there is a way to get justice even we are buying from preowned shop.

It's a lesson to both sides and us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nikfs1881]

We only listened to buyer's side. But the tribunal listened to both side. Stop saying buyer get anything at the expense of seller.  I dont think the buyer want to go thru these messes if given choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fully agree with this! The OP has no obligation at all to provide all the proofs and documents to us in this forum whatsoever! Unless if you would like to start another tribunal here..If one is so insistence to hear seller side of the story, please contact HT and hear from them and report back to us. I know i wont and i dont care as long as buyer's right is well protected. The fact that OP is happy with the outcome, i am happy enough, personally.

I can understand sympathy one have by being pn the same boat, seller's side but it may sounds one is questioning OP's integrity....which should not be the case as we operate on trust and the burden to prove otherwise is not with OP but with the seller if they really care about their reputation-which they dont?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrisyen]

tribunal here? no need! no evidence... Burden to proof shd be always by the accuser

Otherwise pure talking will end up pure for argument only!

Since its happy ending, better stop!

[antoniosaprozeld]

Just wonder if those who had good experience claiming warranty from pre-owned shops can share their cases..

Right now it seems 3rd party warranty is tarnished and not trustworthy..

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[chenht]

We only listened to buyer's side. But the tribunal listened to both side. Stop saying buyer get anything at the expense of seller.  I dont think the buyer want to go thru these messes if given choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Buyer should get more than RM 500 for all the hassle add anxiety she went through.

[Jy84]

We only listened to buyer's side. But the tribunal listened to both side. Stop saying buyer get anything at the expense of seller.  I dont think the buyer want to go thru these messes if given choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Buyer should get more than RM 500 for all the hassle add anxiety she went through.

If HT were to honor their warranty and fixed the watch without charges, HT would not need to go through all these process and pay RM 500 + the extra RM200.

[roystock]

Just wonder if those who had good experience claiming warranty from pre-owned shops can share their cases..

Right now it seems 3rd party warranty is tarnished and not trustworthy..

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

If you are looking for bad experience, I can share two.
I have yet to make good warranty claims against preowned shops.
That said, I am happy that those preowned pieces are working well and I don't need to go back to the sellers

[Maverick27]

Fully agree with this! The OP has no obligation at all to provide all the proofs and documents to us in this forum whatsoever! Unless if you would like to start another tribunal here..If one is so insistence to hear seller side of the story, please contact HT and hear from them and report back to us. I know i wont and i dont care as long as buyer's right is well protected. The fact that OP is happy with the outcome, i am happy enough, personally.

I can understand sympathy one have by being pn the same boat, seller's side but it may sounds one is questioning OP's integrity....which should not be the case as we operate on trust and the burden to prove otherwise is not with OP but with the seller if they really care about their reputation-which they dont?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk