SCAN bad for RMA's?

[firsttimebuyer]

Now you are just coming across as having a moan for the sake of it.

That was not "some other posters". It was one, and that was me.

That original post did NOT paint you as a screwdriver-wielding maniac. Firstly, it referred to someone who slipped. I've seen experienced engineers do it by taking short cuts they shouldn't have taken.

Secondly, that original post specified VERY clearly that it wasn't referring to you. It quoted someone else that asked a question about burnt chips, and answered THEM.

And thirdly, you've alleged that before and had it explained to you that it wasn't about you.

So if you are going to misrepresent that and keep making that accusation, it hardly gives Scan or anyone else reading this any comfort that you're telling the truth about anything else.

So stop misrepresenting what a forum Admin said or I'll remove your account. You can then deal with Scan in your own way off of Hexus. You won't get another warning.

sorry it was meant to be a joke, as you can see i was very general about it as it wasnt meant to point fingers. I didnt want to say everyone was supporting me, like i have a just cause but atleast they were not trying to add weight to the "he did it himself" argument. Which is not happening but i think it could easily happen on these forums since the general idea was planted (for lack of a better word), i am a new poster, no one really knows me or what i am capable of doing and most of the people who frequent these forums must like SCAN.

anyway i apologise

[RabidDeathGnome]

This may seem a little bit offtopic but how do you actualy know all this crap saracen?

[Saracen]

sorry it was meant to be a joke, as you can see i was very general about it as it wasnt meant to point fingers. I didnt want to say everyone was supporting me, like i have a just cause but atleast they were not trying to add weight to the "he did it himself" argument. Which is not happening but i think it could easily happen on these forums, i am a new poster, no one really knows me or what i am capable of doing and most of the people who frequent these forums must like SCAN.

anyway i apologise

Fair enough. Humour certainly doesn't always come across well in print.

It's difficult, though, for anyone other than you can Scan to either support or not support. That's why I was very careful to phrase everything to be clear I wasn't referring to you. As I said, I've no reason to suppose you aren't being absolutely honest in everything you've said. But in the general case, retailers have to be very careful about taking things absolutely at face value, because while most people (hopefully) are honest, certainly not all are and some will say and do anything they can to get way with whatever they can.

I've never bought from Scan, so have no direct experience of their after-sales service. I can ONLY go by what I see and read, and what people tell me. My conclusion from that is that they certainly seem to go above and beyond what they have to. Consumer don't always get what they might like, but Scan seem to me to be as reasonable as they possible can.

All I'm suggesting is that you give them every chance to sort things out. You're obviously rather upset, but give it a chance to work itself out, because at the moment, the attitude is coming across as antagonistic, and it's more likely to put backs up than to help, and it just might result in someone at Scan thinking "the hell with this" and not going the extra step or two which, while they aren't obliged to, they often seem to go.

There's an old saying .... if you want to coax a bear, honey works better than vinegar.

This may seem a little bit offtopic but how do you actualy know all this crap saracen?

Well .....

• legal training (and exams), mainly in consumer legislation, many years ago
  
  
• an active interest in all (or at least, many) things legal
  
  
• a LOT of reading
  
  
• active involvement with some aspects of Trading Standards (though not so much in this area), but I've had some interesting chats with TS officers over lunch
  
  
• a couple of friends that are lawyers, and some interesting discussions
  
  
• family and friends, in the judiciary, from magistrates to (in the past) a Law Lord, and some very interesting chats
  
  
• oh, and I enjoy a good debate and have thrashed many of these issues out repeatedly over the years
  
  
• finally, Google.

I guess also partly a mindset that finds unresolved issues irritating. I have the Distance Selling Regs, for example, and have read them, end to end, some number of times. But then a question gets asked and I think ....errrr hmmmmm ..... and it then irks me so I have to go and try to find out. So there's been a lot of background reading, sometimes ending up with a phone call to Trading Standard, the DTI, or one or those lawyer or judge friends or relatives. And, over a period, it just builds.

But as I keep pointing out regularly, I'm not a lawyer, and what I say is layman's opinion. I've probably got a much better grounding for it and background than most lay people, but it is still a lay viewpoint. I could be wrong. So whether I actually "know" all this stuff, or just talk a good game .... well you, dear reader, will have to make your own minds up.

[Disturbedguy]

sorry it was meant to be a joke, as you can see i was very general about it as it wasnt meant to point fingers. I didnt want to say everyone was supporting me, like i have a just cause but atleast they were not trying to add weight to the "he did it himself" argument. Which is not happening but i think it could easily happen on these forums since the general idea was planted (for lack of a better word), i am a new poster, no one really knows me or what i am capable of doing and most of the people who frequent these forums must like SCAN.

anyway i apologise

No one planted anything, people on here have there own brains, therefore can think for themselves, there are quite a few people on here that like SCAN, but will and do disagree with SCAN on some matters, it does happen, I have seen it happen.

In this case, you seem to be moaning for the sake of it as already mentioned, would you rather SCAN reject the RMA and return the motherboard to you, leaving you wondering what was actually wrong with the motherboard, leaving your motherboard less and out of pocket if you have to go and buy another motherboard, or would you prefer that SCAN actually try and do something about it? Which it seems to me they are doing, if SCAN aren't able to diagnose what caused the damage, but believe ASUS will be able to, then why not just sign the form and let SCAN get on with trying to help you and resolve this matter?

[Clanger]

He's sent the form.

The problem, it seems to me and the OP, buy apparently no one else, is why is it necessary to waive your warranty (part of the contract) to get it sent to the manufacturer? Particularly, when the reason it's being sent is to get a second opinion? Plus, it's supposed to be a standard form, yet in this case it apparently referred to making an exception in this case. Doesn't make any sense to me.

[Saracen]

......

In relation to the Sale of Goods act. It's worth pointing out that after the initial 6 months - where the burden of proof is with a seller to show goods weren't faulty from the start - after that, it is still possible that a judge may agree that the goods were faulty from the start by virtue of not being of "satisfactory quality" e.g. durability, up to a period of 6 years.

Oh, indeed, a judge could decide exactly that. The presumption, though, is that after that 6 months, the fault wasn't inherent at time of sale, and it's for the consumer to prove (on balance of probability) that is was inherent. In many cases, that may well involve getting an independent examination .... but if you're going down the small claims route, check out the procedures for that before just going ahead and doing it, or you'll likely end up not getting any contribution towards the costs of it.

And, of course, the legal route is always intended to be the last resort, and for BOTH parties to have done everything reasonable to avoid getting that far. While consumer law gives some pretty strong consumer protections, it does still presume both sides work to avoid going to court. What is pretty much certain is that if either side are seen as being unreasonable, or petty, or not doing everything reasonable to avoid ending up in court, the court won't view that kindly.

Some consumers (and I don't mean this thread) seem to think that, for example, the Sale of Goods Act says goods must be of "satisfactory" quality, that that means if they, the consumer, aren't 100% satisfied, the have a right to return them for a full refunds months, or even years, later. It just doesn't work like that.

And the number of times I've heard people in shops trying to law down their "rights" under the Sale of Goods Act .... and sometimes what they think their rights actually are is hilarious. It's sometimes as if they think that "Sale of Goods Act" is some magic incantation that gives them what they want, whether they're in the right or not. I couldn't work in a shop. I couldn't keep a straight face in that type of situation, and gales of laughter when someone's enjoying a good rant don't tend to help. It's kinda .... incendiary.

[rabbid]

I might have missed it but do we have the exact wording of that "agreement form below" that had to be signed for the RMA to progress?

[firsttimebuyer]

I might have missed it but do we have the exact wording of that "agreement form below" that had to be signed for the RMA to progress?

i need to sign this

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Dear Sir/Madam,

This is to confirm that the recent return of your goods has resulted in one or more items being deemed *warranty void / physically damaged / out of warranty.

As such Scan Computers cannot take any further direct action in providing a replacement unit at this time. Normal procedures would leave us with no alternative but to reject your warranty and take no further action.

However, as a company with a high priority in Customer Service it has been agreed with a line manager to return the item directly to the relevant manufacturer on your behalf in an attempt to source a replacement.

In doing so we have to make clear this is NOT an acceptance of fault or guarantee that we will be successful in obtaining a replacement for you, we will try our best for you, acting above and beyond our normal operating procedures, we will do this as quickly and as swiftly as we possible can, however, no timeframe can be guaranteed.

As such we need you to sign the agreement form below, which acts as your acceptance to this action.**
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also i want to make it clear i am not after a REFUND, all i want is to be treated fairly, with some professionalism and compassion. I also want to be kept informed about whats going on and why, without me having to contact them all the time requesting info. All i would like is a refurbished board or something similar thats its reasonable condition and within a reasonable time.

Also i dont care about the "Sales of Goods Act", all i know is i bought a motherboard from SCAN, its supposedly got a 36 month return to base warranty (that means return to SCAN), 11 months after i bought it contracted a fault through no malicious or accidental actions by me. I know what plugs go where and if i knowingly blew the chip myself or even if i thought it was a possiblity through something i had done i would just have accepted it as something stupid i did, since it seems only to affect a fan header.

I feel i am not at fault here, i was operating the computer, which i had been for months prior and then all of a sudden it powered down and then came back on, i turned it off and checked it. I dont know 100% thats all thats affected and since it was not my fault i wanted to RMA it and hopefully have a fully working motherboard again since its only a year old. I did not want it however to be a big hassel and be misinformed about what was going on or not informed at all, not fully.

I realise that my motherboard may have needed to be sent to ASUS, what i did not know is this would mean getting an official "Rejection" from SCAN and having to sign a form that basically states i agree that there is physical damage, SCAN is no longer liable for the warranty.

An apology for the Automatic emailer/system giving me false hope with the original email stating my RMA was awaiting a replacement/credit would be nice but instead as usual they gave me excuses and made me out to be easily offended. It says that the rejection and me having to fill out this form is "standard procedure" but i have never had to waive my rights to the warranty to have something sent back to the manufacturer before.

No one has actually gotten in touch with me again since i made this post through my personal email, so i am still pretty much in the dark about whats going on, i only know as much as they want me to know, i sign that form or they wont send my board to ASUS for a "second opinion". I dont see why they cant send it to SCAN first for the second opinion if they are unsure and wait until then to reject my RMA, if indeed it needs to be rejected at all. If ASUS goes ahead and replaces it doesnt that still mean SCAN rejected it as physically damage? what does that mean for future RMA's if the replacement goes bad? (i have sent emails to SCAN asking this, it was not long ago i sent them so hopefully i have the answer tomorrow)

I guess this is just how SCAN operates, since its all nice and legal its fine, i should complain. I apologise, its a pitty SCAN cant do the same sometimes, it seems they are never in the wrong about anything.

[Saracen]

He's sent the form.

The problem, it seems to me and the OP, buy apparently no one else, is why is it necessary to waive your warranty (part of the contract) to get it sent to the manufacturer? Particularly, when the reason it's being sent is to get a second opinion? Plus, it's supposed to be a standard form, yet in this case it apparently referred to making an exception in this case. Doesn't make any sense to me.

Well, I found that waiver a bit weird too, but I hadn't really looked that closely at it. But, from the earlier post, that form says ....

"This is to confirm that the recent return of your goods resulted in one or more items being deemed *warranty void / physically damaged / out of warranty (* delete as necessary - they did not bother to do this so i have no idea which reason they are using, maybe all 3)

As such Scan Computers cannot take any further direct action in providing a replacement unit at this time. Normal Procedures would leave us no alternative but to reject your warranty and take no further action.

However, as a company with a high priority in Customer Service it has been agreed with a line manager to return the item directly to the relevant manufacturer on your behalf in an attempt to source a replacement

In doing so we have to make it clear this is NOT an acceptance of fault (even though on the return tracking they guy who tested it found a fault) or a guarantee that we will be successful in obtaining a replacement for your, we are acting above and beyond blah blah blah.. please sign".

Reading that quite carefully, and it appears to not be a literal copy in all parts, I can't see how the consumer is signing anything away. It seems simply that all the consumer is acknowledging is that they've been told Scan have rejected the warranty claim, not that the consumer agrees with that or won't pursue it.

Thing is, Scan have to be careful not to do anything that could be interpreted, later and perhaps by a court, as implicit acceptance of liability.

It seems to me that what that waiver is saying, is :-

1) We've rejected the warranty claim
2) You Accept that we've rejected it.
3) We're prepared to try to help by sending it to the manufacturer, but ONLY if you confirm that you won't treat that as us accepting liability.

Thing is, there's several ways liability can be incurred. Obviously, legislation like the DSR (not applicable here), Sale of Goods Act, etc, can result in product liability. So can the contract between buyer and seller. Any warranty the seller offers above and beyond legal rights, such as Scan's voluntary code of practice, can be legally relied upon ifthe consumer relied upon it when buying.

Until relatively recently, manufacturer warranties were a bit trickier. The logic was that only a party to a contract could sue on it, and that as the contract was between seller and buyer, and not manufacturer, the manufacturer warranty could be argued to be unenforceable. That changed a few years back, and though there's a few wrinkles and conditions, manufacturers now can be held legally liable even though they don't have a direct contract with the consumer.

All this leads companies like Scan to need to, erm .... cover their butts.

So, they've said they rejected the warranty claim because of, as I read it, physical damage. They could leave it at that. It's then for the consumer to pursue it, perhaps by getting a independent engineering report (and paying for it), and then either trying to convince Scan they were wrong, or going down the court route.

However, Scan have said that they will send the board on the the manufacturer for a second opinion provided the mere fact they've done so isn't going to be used to try to prove that by doing so, they've accepted responsibility.

And another thing. The board belongs to firsttimebuyer, not to Scan. If they then take it upon themselves to send that board to a third party without the owner's consent, that in itself could cause legal issues with liability. Do they have the authority to send a consumer's board away without the consumer's express knowledge and consent, and do they implicitly accept liability by doing so?

It seems from Scan's rejection that they think it's physical damage. But they aren't the experts that Asus are. So, given that that is their opinion, they'd be quite entitled to just send it back to firsttimebuyer, and "wash their hands of it". But they haven't. They've agreed to send it to Asus. They aren't obliged to do so, and it's probably going to cost them money to do so. It's certainly costing them in administration.

I think the point of that waiver is being misinterpreted. What they're really saying is that they'll try to help, but not if they'll drop themselves in the poop by even trying.

Far from that form washing their hands of the board, it actually is evidence they are trying to help, even though they seem to feel the problem is physical damage, and want Asus' opinion on what may have caused the damage. Maybe, as Agent said, another component failure is the cause. Maybe a voltage regulator failed, and that "physical damage" is a sign of damage caused by a failure somewhere else, and Asus may have seen it before.

I think the waiver is being misinterpreted about exactly what is being waived.

[rabbid]

aha i see, i thought there may have been another form below which we had not seen, but it wanted you to sign below to agree with the above!

If i recveived such a disclaimer then when i print it i would strike through the warranty void / out of warranty options just to make the point that i am not agreeing to that but do agree for it to be sent to manufacturer for further investigation.

[Mossy]

Personally after a long day I find it hard to keep up with this thread but on a note so everyone can understand it kind of goes like this

1) Motherboard Was Sent back Faulty
2) Scan Received the motherboard
3) Found it had a burnt Chip / Physical Damage
4) Scan rejected the RMA
5) Scan Informed the customer that due to the circumstance we needed a second opinion before a Replacement could be offered ( When we replace a motherboard we have to send the faulty one to Asus to get Scans refund, if we do not check on circumstance like this replace and Asus reject to Scan we lose out) We do not always send motherboards back on the RMA like this let me stress this is just because we need to confirm what the fault is by Asus.

and Finally

Customer came on to Hexus wrote an essay on how bad our RMA system is and is throwing accusations which are untrue which Scan have defended.

Simple fact is in cases such as this we are entitled to a second opinion and in no way are we shirking or passing the buck. Accusations like we don't care and anyone can ship a parcel are ridiculous we follow it through to the end and further, we continue to have a Care forum for these very reasons, in regards to your suggestions people on here defend Scan its becuase regular posters/members recognise and see for themselves we generally go out our way to have a reasonable solution to issues.

SARACEN is a very good mediator he is not here to flame up situations just gives good valid information to which he never suggested that you was to blame and nither did Scan blame you but we feel its unreasonable you can not unerstand why we are not entitle to a second opinion.

I have stayed late to answer your questions on a Friday evening I hope you can understand that asking you to sign a disclaimer is NOT washing our hands of it.

I hope we can sort this out as fast as possible.

Regards

[firsttimebuyer]

Personally after a long day I find it hard to keep up with this thread but on a note so everyone can understand it kind of goes like this

1) Motherboard Was Sent back Faulty
2) Scan Received the motherboard
3) Found it had a burnt Chip / Physical Damage
4) Scan rejected the RMA
5) Scan Informed the customer that due to the circumstance we needed a second opinion before a Replacement could be offered ( When we replace a motherboard we have to send the faulty one to Asus to get Scans refund, if we do not check on circumstance like this replace and Asus reject to Scan we lose out) We do not always send motherboards back on the RMA like this let me stress this is just because we need to confirm what the fault is by Asus.

and Finally

Customer came on to Hexus wrote an essay on how bad our RMA system is and is throwing accusations which are untrue which Scan have defended.

Simple fact is in cases such as this we are entitled to a second opinion and in no way are we shirking or passing the buck. Accusations like we don't care and anyone can ship a parcel are ridiculous we follow it through to the end and further, we continue to have a Care forum for these very reasons, in regards to your suggestions people on here defend Scan its becuase regular posters/members recognise and see for themselves we generally go out our way to have a reasonable solution to issues.

SARACEN is a very good mediator he is not here to flame up situations just gives good valid information to which he never suggested that you was to blame and nither did Scan blame you but we feel its unreasonable you can not unerstand why we are not entitle to a second opinion.

I have stayed late to answer your questions on a Friday evening I hope you can understand that asking you to sign a disclaimer is NOT washing our hands of it.

I hope we can sort this out as fast as possible.

Regards

I am sorry but number 5 is untrue

this is the only email i was sent at 9.45 am, I was then told at 9.47am a line manager would look into it, i cant see anywhere in this email that it explains why it was being sent back to ASUS, no mention of it being for a second opinion. I had to specifically request this information also, SCAN did not just "inform" me of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avril Barrie,

Hi,

Further to your e-mail I can confirm that all the stages of the RMA are currently listed on our website and the current stage is highlighted. This means the RMA tracking page shows all possible states, whether they apply to your specific RMA or not. In this situation Credit Authorisation does not apply to your return as you are only eligible for repair/replacement. With regards to an e-mail stating the RMA is awaiting replacement/credit this I believe was sent in error before the rejection status has been applied.

The rejection e-mails are automatic and I can only apologise if they seem harsh, the disclaimer is a standard form that needs to be completed for any item that needs to be returned to the supplier/manufacturer.

With regards to the details required for the disclaimer form the date field is for the date you have signed the disclaimer form and the SCIL number for this board is 1910496491.

Regards,

Ian h (technical returns)
Scan Computers

The set of characters in the subject uniquely identifies your query. When replying to this email please ensure that these characters remain unaltered.

This message is entirely the creation of its author in his or her personal capacity and any views expressed in this message are the views of that author. Accordingly, Scan Computers Intl Ltd shall not be nor become liable in any way, whether contractually, tortuously or otherwise, in respect of anything stated or depicted in this message. Please also note that this message shall not constitute an offer or an acceptance or be legally binding upon Scan Computers Intl Ltd in any way.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

apart from that i was sent this at 2.35pm the day before i got the above email and why i sent a reply requesting the info you included in the above email, this one could have been semi-informative if it did not also require me to sign a form acknowledging that SCAN has rejected the RMA and would no longer be liable but they would send it to ASUS in hope they would replace it. i also sent an email not long after asking why it needed to be sent to ASUS, that one has not been replied to yet.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Avril Barrie,

Hi,

Further to your recent return I can confirm that the mothebroard will need to be returned to our supplier for inspection as such please print out the e-mail below, fill in the detailas and send it to the same address as the motherboard and I will process this for you ASAP.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Warranty Void / Physical Damage / Out of Warranty

Date:____/____/20____
Invoice_________RMA___________OLQ_____________
Product_______________________SCIL______________

Dear Sir/Madam,

This is to confirm that the recent return of your goods has resulted in one or more items being deemed *warranty void / physically damaged / out of warranty.

As such Scan Computers cannot take any further direct action in providing a replacement unit at this time. Normal procedures would leave us with no alternative but to reject your warranty and take no further action.

However, as a company with a high priority in Customer Service it has been agreed with a line manager to return the item directly to the relevant manufacturer on your behalf in an attempt to source a replacement.

In doing so we have to make clear this is NOT an acceptance of fault or guarantee that we will be successful in obtaining a replacement for you, we will try our best for you, acting above and beyond our normal operating procedures, we will do this as quickly and as swiftly as we possible can, however, no timeframe can be guaranteed.

As such we need you to sign the agreement form below, which acts as your acceptance to this action.

*Delete as appropriate


Customer Name________________________Inv No.__________________

I confirm that I agree to the above action being taken by Scan Computers, I understand this action is NOT a guarantee that Scan Computers will be successful in obtaining a replacement and I agree no guaranteed timeframe for this action can be given, however, I understand you will work to resolve this as quickly as possible

Signed (Customer)____________________________Date____/____/20____
Print Name__________________________________

Authorised by (SCAN)_________________________Date____/____/20____
Print Name__________________________________

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regards,

Ian h (technical returns)
Scan Computers

The set of characters in the subject uniquely identifies your query. When replying to this email please ensure that these characters remain unaltered.

This message is entirely the creation of its author in his or her personal capacity and any views expressed in this message are the views of that author. Accordingly, Scan Computers Intl Ltd shall not be nor become liable in any way, whether contractually, tortuously or otherwise, in respect of anything stated or depicted in this message. Please also note that this message shall not constitute an offer or an acceptance or be legally binding upon Scan Computers Intl Ltd in any way.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But yeah thanks for saying all i do is make false accusations and think i am being unreasonable. I may have voiced things that are my based on my feelings/opinions due to my personal dealings with SCAN but i have not lied about anything.

[Zak33]

gentlemen and ladies

it is Friday evening, at 6:40pm and I think that it's possible the resolution will be more easily made after the weekend, no?

It's a HUGE thread, and while I have patience to read stuff, this is a long read.

Scan are
A: to be trusted to do right
B: humans who need to go home at night
C: good guys

Amen

[Chris P]

How about we wait for the response from ASUS?

[firsttimebuyer]

gentlemen and ladies

it is Friday evening, at 6:40pm and I think that it's possible the resolution will be more easily made after the weekend, no?

It's a HUGE thread, and while I have patience to read stuff, this is a long read.

Scan are
A: to be trusted to do right
B: humans who need to go home at night
C: good guys

Amen

I have posted the form.

All i wanted with this thread was a record of my dealings with SCAN and possibly make SCAN do, atleast what i think, is the right thing.

If they had just explained things better and not sent my emails one saying i was awaiting replacement/credit then the next minute rejected i would not have bothered with this thread anyway. Even hollow apology for the email error would have done it (they only apologised if i found the rejection email harsh) but instead they give excuses.

I do consider this matter closed but i will still respond if someone tries to make it look like i did something wrong when i did not though.

Anyway, enjoy the weekend, it might help some of us chill-out a bit.

[Clanger]

Thing is, Scan have to be careful not to do anything that could be interpreted, later and perhaps by a court, as implicit acceptance of liability.

Good point! And hopefully that's it.

Regarding standard emails: you have to remember that that's what they are.