? - All Warranties/Dead on Arrival Issues must be dealt with manufacturer directly

oneweb

Surely this goes completely against consumer rights?

http://www.elara.ie/products/detailsfull.asp?productcode=MME865P122

Notes: PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL WARRANTIES/DEAD ON ARRIVAL ISSUES FOR THIS ITEM MUST BE DEALT WITH ACER DIRECTLY
That's ridiculous, even moreso given the absolute pile of steaming crap that is Acer Cùntomer service / Repairs.

RangeR

oneweb wrote: »

Surely this goes completely against consumer rights?

http://www.elara.ie/products/detailsfull.asp?productcode=MME865P122

Notes: PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL WARRANTIES/DEAD ON ARRIVAL ISSUES FOR THIS ITEM MUST BE DEALT WITH ACER DIRECTLY
That's ridiculous, even moreso given the absolute pile of steaming crap that is Acer Cùntomer service / Repairs.

Absolutely. I'm sure it's just a "typo" on Elara's website and is not enforceable.

IMO, the reason companies do this is to save themselves time. They KNOW that by putting this on their website, a percentage of customers will just assume this to be true and contact manufacture direct if issues arise. Therefore saving Elara time by not dealing with it.

However, if you have a problem with ANY hardware purchased from Elara, they CANNOT refuse to help you, if you are within a "reasonable time frame" from purchase.

seamus

When you buy a product from a retailer, they are required for a reasonable amount of time (changes, depending on the product) to handle all complaints/problems with that product. They cannot insist that you go to directly the manufacturer unless a certain amount of time has passed (usually about a year for consumer electronics).

In Elara's case, they will fall under the distance selling regs as well as the SGSA, which means that they are required to accept the product back from you within 7(?) days of receipt, whether it's working or not.

Kintarō Hattori

Alot of retailers have agreements in place with manufacturers that any issues will be dealt with by the manufacturer first and the retailer second. This is to save the customer time. Think about it:

If you have an issue with a product and drop it back to the place you've bought it they need to send it back to the manufacturer. In alot of cases it has to go through the distributor first.

When a customer deals with the manufacturer in most cases they'll arrange to pick it up from the customer and deal directly with it themselves meaning a quicker turn around for everyone.

I'm sure elara wouldn't refuse to deal with a problem any customer might have, just that in this case it's quicker for the customer to deal with Acer themselves.

seamus

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

I'm sure elara wouldn't refuse to deal with a problem any customer might have, just that in this case it's quicker for the customer to deal with Acer themselves.

That might be the case, but Elara (and any retailer) are still required to accept the faulty item and deal with it themselves.

Kintarō Hattori

seamus wrote: »

That might be the case, but Elara (and any retailer) are still required to accept the faulty item and deal with it themselves.

Yes they are but it's understandable that they insist the customer pursue the manufacturer first.

seamus

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

Yes they are but it's understandable that they insist the customer pursue the manufacturer first.

But they can't "insist". They can suggest to the customer that it may be quicker to deal directly with the manufacturer, but they can't ask the customer to ring the manufacturer first.

Elara: Kin

We will never refuse to help a customer in any circumstance, with Acer it is preferable that customers know that Acer deals directly with warranties from day 1. The have no DOA agreement with us, this is the same for Lenovo and for Sony.

As Kintarō says taking out another route in the RMA procedure only speeds up the process, if a customer wants us to step in between it is not an issue but it only delays the process in which we inevitability get blamed for as well.

Acer warranties are done by a company in the North, the guy I deal with there Andrew is actually on is forum as well.

ttm

Problem here is what do you get from the manufacturer?

A different repaired DOA machine or a new machine?

Elara: Kin

ttm wrote: »

Problem here is what do you get from the manufacturer?

A different repaired DOA machine or a new machine?

It depends on the problem, is it is something simple they will fix it, if it is a big fault you will get a new unit.

People need to get around the mentality that a new product is going to be better than the original unit with let’s say a new harddrive in it. The faulty part has been replaced and it in no way effects the rest of the system.

Acer and can do what HP or Toshiba do and just replace it with new units but what the does is increase costs, this directly effects the price in which new laptops need to be sold.

jor el

Elara (Kin) wrote: »

We will never refuse to help a customer in any circumstance, with Acer it is preferable that customers know that Acer deals directly with warranties from day 1. The have no DOA agreement with us, this is the same for Lenovo and for Sony.

I understand you would prefer the customer deal directly with Acer, and it may be quicker and easier for them to do this, but surely the line that says:
PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL WARRANTIES/DEAD ON ARRIVAL ISSUES FOR THIS ITEM MUST BE DEALT WITH ACER DIRECTLY
should be removed from the websites, as it is misleading, illegal, unenforceable, and gives the impression that the buyer has no comeback with Elara, which is untrue.

You could suggest it, but saying they must be dealt with by Acer is very wrong.

Elara: Kin

jor el wrote: »

I understand you would prefer the customer deal directly with Acer, and it may be quicker and easier for them to do this, but surely the line that says:
PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL WARRANTIES/DEAD ON ARRIVAL ISSUES FOR THIS ITEM MUST BE DEALT WITH ACER DIRECTLY
should be removed from the websites, as it is misleading, illegal, unenforceable, and gives the impression that the buyer has no comeback with Elara, which is untrue.

You could suggest it, but saying they must be dealt with by Acer is very wrong.

I will speak to the other guys here regarding the statement.

ttm

Elara (Kin) wrote: »

It depends on the problem, is it is something simple they will fix it, if it is a big fault you will get a new unit.

People need to get around the mentality that a new product is going to be better than the original unit with let’s say a new harddrive in it. The faulty part has been replaced and it in no way effects the rest of the system.

Acer and can do what HP or Toshiba do and just replace it with new units but what the does is increase costs, this directly effects the price in which new laptops need to be sold.

Just what I'd expect a retailer to say.

The buyers "mentality" is simple if you pay for an item you expect it to work no matter how "small" the problem is!

So I can just see it in a retailers warehouse somewhere, a load of Acer laptops fall off a pallet and the supervisor says don't worry not our problem if there's a problem Acer will sort it so we'll never see those boxes again.

Rather extreme I now but if customers have the wrong "mentality" I'm sure parts of the retail chain are also capable of developing the wrong "mentality".

One other point if the retailer gets a hard time over a brand because of DOA and other claims they have to field then the less likely they are to sell or promote that brand but if a manufacturer takes over the DOA proceedure many of these claims won't be seen by the retailer.

dudara

I just want to say thanks to Elara (Kin) for taking the time to talk to consumers here on this forum. Even if you're all not in agreement, it's good to have discussion.

dudara

Elara: Kin

ttm wrote: »

Just what I'd expect a retailer to say.

The buyers "mentality" is simple if you pay for an item you expect it to work no matter how "small" the problem is!

Yes I get that, I hate getting items faulty as well. My point is in regard to the replacement, what is the difference between the original faulty unit with a faulty harddrive replaced or a new sealed unit. It is like getting a brand new car and finding the windows does not come down because the motor is broken, then bringing the car back to the dealer and demanding a new car because he does not want the fault fixed. Yes it is a rather odd comparison but it is rather similar in a lot of ways.

ttm wrote: »

So I can just see it in a retailers warehouse somewhere, a load of Acer laptops fall off a pallet and the supervisor says don't worry not our problem if there's a problem Acer will sort it so we'll never see those boxes again.

Rather extreme I now but if customers have the wrong "mentality" I'm sure parts of the retail chain are also capable of developing the wrong "mentality".

I would give my left testicle if Acer will allow us to handle DOAs like HP... there is absolutely no joy in having Acer handle DOAs at all. That being said I have to say what they are now compared to 3 years ago is a vast improvement.

dudara wrote: »

I just want to say thanks to Elara (Kin) for taking the time to talk to consumers here on this forum. Even if you're all not in agreement, it's good to have discussion.

dudara

Thats what I am here for and input good or bad is always appreciated.

Kintarō Hattori

ttm wrote: »

The buyers "mentality" is simple if you pay for an item you expect it to work no matter how "small" the problem is!

And the retailer would love for this to be the case 100% of the time.

ttm wrote: »

So I can just see it in a retailers warehouse somewhere, a load of Acer laptops fall off a pallet and the supervisor says don't worry not our problem if there's a problem Acer will sort it so we'll never see those boxes again.

In a situation like that any good retailer such as elara will never let those laptops see the light of day. They'll be sent back to the disti or the manufacturer.

ttm wrote: »

One other point if the retailer gets a hard time over a brand because of DOA and other claims they have to field then the less likely they are to sell or promote that brand but if a manufacturer takes over the DOA proceedure many of these claims won't be seen by the retailer.

Many retailers do their research before they take onboard a new manufacturer/product and this often eliminates potentially troublesome items. Also during the lifespan of a product you will have customers coming into your shops/ringing and emailing you in regards to the product. Through this process they will come across products with a high returns/problems rate.

subway

I' failry sure that the wording of the notice is illegal tbh,
you can tell people what you think is best etc - but certainly cant tell them they MUST contact the manufacture

that goes for peats also, they could not (and would not afaik) display a sign like that.
kintaro, for someone working in a shop your knowledge of consumer rights are shocking

hopefully Kin will rectify it quickly.

Elara: Kin

subway wrote: »

I' failry sure that the wording of the notice is illegal tbh,
you can tell people what you think is best etc - but certainly cant tell them they MUST contact the manufacture

that goes for peats also, they could not (and would not afaik) display a sign like that.
kintaro, for someone working in a shop your knowledge of consumer rights are shocking

hopefully Kin will rectify it quickly.

Getting changed now, should be on the website before the end fo the day.

Kintarō Hattori

subway wrote: »

I' failry sure that the wording of the notice is illegal tbh,
you can tell people what you think is best etc - but certainly cant tell them they MUST contact the manufacture

that goes for peats also, they could not (and would not afaik) display a sign like that.
kintaro, for someone working in a shop your knowledge of consumer rights are shocking

hopefully Kin will rectify it quickly.

My knowledge of consumer rights? I didn't say that sign was legal- I explained why elara would have had it there.

Catalyst

Web Updated now ...

subway

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

My knowledge of consumer rights? I didn't say that sign was legal- I explained why elara would have had it there.

Alot of retailers have agreements in place with manufacturers that any issues will be dealt with by the manufacturer first and the retailer second

i was referring to that piece, a lot of retailers shouldnt have anything of the sort in place.
manfucaturer warranty is in addtion to your consumer rights, as opposed to a replacement of.
a consumer would be well advised to report any issues to the retailer first as this is an important step in ensuring a retialer has had the chance to rectify the issue. if it does go to the SCC, its important that fair chacne has been given to all parties.

and well done to elara for getting this rectified so quickly

Kintarō Hattori

subway wrote: »

i was referring to that piece, a lot of retailers shouldnt have anything of the sort in place.
manfucaturer warranty is in addtion to your consumer rights, as opposed to a replacement of.
a consumer would be well advised to report any issues to the retailer first as this is an important step in ensuring a retialer has had the chance to rectify the issue. if it does go to the SCC, its important that fair chacne has been given to all parties.

and well done to elara for getting this rectified so quickly

You'd actually like to increase the turn around time betweena customer discovering a fault with their equipment and having it fixed. Strange. Agreements like this make a customers life easier. They have the option of bringing the item to the retailer if they so wish but it is faster for everyone if they deal with the manufacturer.

No-one is saying they do not have the option to bring it back to the retailer.

subway

You'd actually like to increase the turn around time betweena customer discovering a fault with their equipment and having it fixed. Strange.

if you can point out where i actually said that ill gladyl take it back, however misrepresenting what I've said is a bit unfair

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

No-one is saying they do not have the option to bring it back to the retailer.

if you would re-read the original post, you will see that this is exactly what elara said

Kintarō Hattori

subway wrote: »

if you can point out where i actually said that ill gladyl take it back, however misrepresenting what I've said is a bit unfair

You've said :

...retailers shouldnt have anything of the sort in place

subway wrote: »

if you would re-read the original post, you will see that this is exactly what elara said

And as I explained already, I mentioned why they might have had this notice, because it is quicker and handier for the customer to go direct with the manufacurer in many cases. I didn't say it was or was not legal. I simply explained their possible reasons for having such a notice.

Elara: Kin

Kintarō is just trying to point out that not all retailers ask customers to go back to the manufacturer because we don't want to help, it is just the quickest route for the repair sometimes. I don't think he is saying our original notice was correct.

Anyways, thanks for all your input guys. Lets hope our Acer account manager does not read this or I will have to change my name to Wan Hung Low.

subway

Kintarō Hattori wrote: »

And as I explained already, I mentioned might why they might have had this notice, because it is quicker and handier for the customer to go direct with the manufacurer in many cases. I didn't say it was or was not legal. I simply explained their possible reasons for having such a notice.

point taken, i read your post as leaning towards the idea that retailers are within their rights to have an agreement where consumers must go the manufacturer first rather than they provide the option to go to the manufacturer first.

in the context of the thread and your position as a retailer, i think thats a fair assumption, but thanks for clarifying your actual stance.

Gummy Panda

Seriously, who would accept a repair after receiving a DOA. I'd be looking for replacement or refund. Having a notice like that is the reason I won't buy from elara or Acer. It's like a time warp to 4 years ago when I received an Acer DOA and elara told me to contact Acer.

Antigone05

Acer are notorious for ANY procedure.

they do not entertain any supplier or retailer with DOAs. their repair time isnt fast either.

they also usually, annually change their DOA procedures. they really make it hard for retailers and suppliers

astrofool

That's also one of the reasons Acer's are so cheap. You choose your manufacturer and you take what you get. If enough people stop buying from them, they'll improve their service and raise their prices.

foggy_lad

Elara (Kin) wrote: »

Yes I get that, I hate getting items faulty as well. My point is in regard to the replacement, what is the difference between the original faulty unit with a faulty harddrive replaced or a new sealed unit. It is like getting a brand new car and finding the windows does not come down because the motor is broken, then bringing the car back to the dealer and demanding a new car because he does not want the fault fixed. Yes it is a rather odd comparison but it is rather similar in a lot of ways.

if you get a window motor fixed in a brand new car the car is still seen as being new but if you have to send a laptop away for a repair just after buying it and get back some refurb or your own one repaired it will always be seen as repaired and you may well not trust it to last as long as it should!

Elara (Kin) wrote: »

Kintarō is just trying to point out that not all retailers ask customers to go back to the manufacturer because we don't want to help, it is just the quickest route for the repair sometimes. I don't think he is saying our original notice was correct.

Anyways, thanks for all your input guys. Lets hope our Acer account manager does not read this or I will have to change my name to Wan Hung Low.

it is always better to deal with retailer rather than acer as they seem to look for any excuse to charge for warrenty repairs. if you change the os or dual boot it is voiding their warranty, if you delete the recovery partition they will not accept the recovery discs and will charge almost €100 for their own recovery discs etc etc instead of dealing with the actual fault you have.