SE K750i - Broken? Tell me what you think

Doctor DooM

The reason they dont offer a repair for a water damaged phone is that the corrosion may reoccur as the moisture may still be in the phone despite the best efforts of the repair company, thus leading to a worhtless repair when your phone breaks down for a second time.

Urban Weigl

It should really be called "moisture damage" rather than "water damage", as it can happen over time, for example if you use the phone outside when air humidity is high (like is often the case on this green isle!), or have it in the same room with you when you shower.

Like has been already suggested, try taking the phone to a different repair centre for a second opinion. And/or just buy a new phone.

neilled

Linoge wrote:

Conspiracy is a word best reserved for people who who believe in aliens. It was Damo86 (who I can guess is 20 years old) who was entering into all kinds of ideas on how CPW make money (so you can see how I enjoyed his quip on how I should "move on"). Although... I certainly am surprised at some of the posters here pure faith that companies uphold a strong moral code (Krups, Mercedes, BASF anyone???).

Can I just point out that I waited 10 weeks for this picture, which I had to request. They do not supply it with a repair. When they did finally supply the photo, it did not come with any explanation of the damage shown. MPRC say on their website that they are ISO certified, can anyone here tell me if this report sounds like it is to a specified standard (or even "a" standard).

Independent of that, CPW have no quality checks in place to make sure that the repairs made by MPRC are up to standard.

Overall the point I am trying to make is that it is not acceptable to receive a one sentence report "BEP due to water damage" to tell you that your E200 phone should be thrown in the bin. A photo and a summary explanation is not too much to expect. The phone is moisture damaged and that is fine. Why should I have to wait 10 weeks for a photo, have to post that photo on a message board and then have Daveym tell me what is wrong with it??!

Whilst i can't comment on CPW, o2 have an online facility for seeing the repair status of a phone, what was wrong, what part was replaced, how much that part cost and the name of the tech that done it. I would have assumed that this is standard across the compeition as well.

Repair centers operate in accordance with the procedures laid down by a particular manufacturer like nokia or sony ericsson if they want to call themselves authorised service centers. These companies must ensure their devices conform to certain standards laid down by regulations as do repairs. So some sort of certification exists.

I too can have experiences (not referring to the op) when people would come in with phones that were water damaged and argue tooth and nail that they were not and it was all being made up.... despite to contact corrossion and the watermark stickers being activated!

120_Minutes

Linoge wrote:

Can I just point out that I waited 10 weeks for this picture, which I had to request. They do not supply it with a repair. When they did finally supply the photo, it did not come with any explanation of the damage
Independent of that, CPW have no quality checks in place to make sure that the repairs made by MPRC are up to standard.

Thats quite unusual, as ber moisture damage repairs from the CPW usually come back with a picture, highlighted showing the area moisture damaged.

with a discalimer: "while it may be possible to repair the handset, it may not operate to manufacturers standard" which is a nice way of saying theres no real point in repairing it.

copacetic

neilled wrote:

Water damage can take time to manifest itself as it slowly corrodes circuts on the phones main board. 99.9% of the time the repairers are right when they say its water damaged..........

thats rubbish, water doesn't erode ccts! the only damage water does to 'ccts' is form a conductivity path that can lead to shorts. so can loads of other things! the problem with all of
this is that there is no real way to tell what caused the damage like in the pictures but 'water damage' could be a cause and it is an easy one to tell the customer.. your statement should be 99.9% the repairers don't know anything except that they can't fix the problem so they say it is water damage.

neilled

Davey i used the term corrode because i opened up a phone that had been water damged once and its guts had started looking a rather discoloured... and lots of green gunk that had built up on the copper contacts. Now i'm not from an engineering background like you but thats what i would describe that as corrosion!

Your arguement that water damage doiagnosis is used because techs don't know what the problem is isn't relevant read the manufacturers warranty from any brand, once they find evidence of water inside your handset its game over, your warranty is void whether the water caused the problem or nt!

The 99.9 statement was a reply to a previous poster who seem to believe at the time that there was a vast conspiracy to say phones were water damaged when they were not so cpw could make extra sales.

copacetic

neilled wrote:

Davey i used the term corrode because i opened up a phone that had been water damged once and its guts had started looking a rather discoloured... and lots of green gunk that had built up on the copper contacts. Now i'm not from an engineering background like you but thats what i would describe that as corrosion!

Your arguement that water damage doiagnosis is used because techs don't know what the problem is isn't relevant read the manufacturers warranty from any brand, once they find evidence of water inside your handset its game over, your warranty is void whether the water caused the problem or nt!

The 99.9 statement was a reply to a previous poster who seem to believe at the time that there was a vast conspiracy to say phones were water damaged when they were not so cpw could make extra sales.

i certainly would agree that there isn't a mass conspiracy, but there is a tendency to say 'water damage' as a first port of call when there is any physical evidence of a problem on a cct board.

they fact that it may void your warranty is even more reason for them to actually prove 'water' damage. rather than some damage on a cct board that they believe to be moisture related but have no proof of.

eg for the op here, they opened his phone up saw a cct board problem and said 'water damage'. A million and one things could have caused that issue from bad components, bad manufacturing, esd etc etc. (maybe the most likely cause is moisture damage but that is all they could say). They just say it is water damage, send a pic and that is ok? Seems a bit off to me, but wouldn't pretend to be an expert of the legalities of it all..