Posted 2 days ago
Motorola razr 40 - warrenty hell with curry's
Been on the customer service roundabout for hours.
The Motorola phone has developed a hairline crack on the screen protector right on the fold from normal everyday use. It's in the 12 month warranty but they say it's not covered.
Surely this can't be right as the item is clearly defective...
Does anyone have any advice?
The Motorola phone has developed a hairline crack on the screen protector right on the fold from normal everyday use. It's in the 12 month warranty but they say it's not covered.
Surely this can't be right as the item is clearly defective...
Does anyone have any advice?
Community Updates
2 Comments
additionally the manufacturer may offer unenforceable warranty service.
If you believe the product has failed prematurely and you choose not to attempt to use manu warranty service:
your course of redress is with the trader that sold you the prematurely busted rubbish that had "unsatisfactory durability".
Submit your Consumer Rights Act claim to the trader; there's a reasonable CRA claim template at Which? website at
which.co.uk/con…lgZ
Beyond six months from taking possession of the product the trader will likely/legally do nothing until you show why the product has failed prematurely. This will reasonably require you to obtain a credible report identifying premature failure.
If the credible report indicates premature failure the report cost will be recoverable.
A credible report is one authored by an entity able to show extended expertise/experience in their field;
so typically a formal repair quotation from a specialist electronics / device repair organisation where the formal repair quotation will ideally include a phrase similar to:
Most decent repair/maintenance organisations will be happy to include such a phrase if their professional opinion is the premature bustedness is unrelated to accident / abuse.
All above can be enforced by dull but straightforward legal procedure if the trader is still trading and/or has assets at time of enforcement.
The legal concept here is that The Consumer Rights Act requires the trader to ensure satisfactory product quality including specifically satisfactory durability.
Credible independent confirmation of premature failure confirms unsatisfactory quality/durability on the day of originally taking possession of the product, because by definition:
if the product had satisfactory durability on the day of taking possession it would not now be prematurely busted.
You have up to six years from original receipt of the product to present your CRA claim to the trader,
unless you live in a country that prefers to shaft its citizens with a lesser period to claim, such as Scotland.
Edit: there was another Moto fold issue few months back:
hotukdeals.com/dis…508 (edited)