Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxor
I understand the two positions now and see the dilemma. Two questions:
1. You say you had to deal with many broken screens in the last years and then later in your post you say, that out of hundreds of devices there were only 3 cases of broken screens. I guess you are talking only about M92 in the second sentence?
2. The other one for Onyx: how can they be so sure, that a broken screen is always caused by mistreatment? The displays might be extremely costly for a warranty case. But as you say, broken displays in M92 do not occur that often. When I had a display issue with my ThinkPad (and I had two cases of that kind), Lenovo replaced the display without argueing. And those displays are 200 dollars as well, even though my laptop is not even on the market any more and thus has no value that exceeds that of an M92 significantly. And by the way: I _really_ didn't mistreat my laptop. Okay, the laptop doesn't have a glass display. But that's not really the point...
@focus: If you actually _did_ mistreat your M92, be honest. Otherwise you ruin Onyx' and Booxtor's good reputation on purpose. That's not fair. By the way, on your photos there actually are some small scrapes..
|
1. We are selling ereaders since 2009 (former Pocketbook-Shop).
In this time we have sold about 20.000 devices. We had to deal with approximately 22-25 devices with broken screens. In most cases those were devices without covers or with soft covers. My experience is based on that time.
2. In the case of TFT/LCD - the warranty also covers any screen issues with electronic failure (mechanical damages are also excluded).
3. Regarding sincerity of the Customer (focus) - as I said, in the case above the device has not been necessarily hit or dropped. Even if the cover was closed it is enough to press in the middle of the screen to cause splits in the screen fixation area. It could be anything - a dog/cat/baby jumped on the device, apple in the bag pressing against device etc. The customer may even not have noticed the source of the damage.
So I believe him, if he claimed not to drop or use any force to the device on purpose. He could just not have noticed it
But it does not change the problem