3 Year Warranty Refund Hassle

[Hawk08]

12/29/2008: - 8800 GTS fault found by Scan and card sent to XFX for refund

20/01/2009: INVOICE issued and authorized and payment authorized. Note: no e-mails or contact from Scan as to status of the invoice or RMA

Contacted Scan by phone in early February and was advised that they had been refunded by XFX and that the most compatible card would be a 9800 GT, which they would dispatch in 2-3 days.

Offered to come in and pick up new card on Sat. 15th and 22nd, but invoice was still not processed.

Latest e-mail from Michael at Scan changes offer to 9600 GSO. I sent documentation from NVidia's own site that the GSO was an inferior card and unacceptable. NO contact from Scan since then.

This card had a three year warranty, and it's taken nearly 3 months to get a replacement. I was told the delay would be XFX, when in reality it has been Scan.

This is unacceptable customer service.

[leepen@scan]

Hi Hawk08,

Having checked your RMA it would seem that your card was sent to XFX at the first available time which was 14th January after the Christmas period. Obviously XFX are taking a little while with this card but I can confirm that the outgoing invoice for your replacement/repaired card was raised on the 20th January.

Update 10.46am - Our returns guys have confirmed that the card is back with us and the options available to you are as follows;

Accept the Suggested Replacement of a 9600GSO or accept a market value refund of £65, both of which you have been offered previously. Please let us know how you would like to proceed in light of this information.

All the best,

[Hawk08]

I'm sorry, but that is completely contrary to what I have been told so far. Two weeks ago, I was told by Scan that the card had been tested by XFX and the fault found, a refund had been made, and the next step was for Scan to send us a replacement, which we should have in 2-3 days.

Is everything I have been told so far incorrect? The RMA shows a "Completed" status with an outgoing invoice number. The invoice shows payment authorised but nothing picked or dispatched. The returns people we have spoken to/e-mailed said everything was done other than Scan sending us a new card and dithering over what card would be an equivalent replacement.

So please clarify the process. Who is giving me the true story? And exactly what will be shipped as soon as it is returned? The warranty process is pretty poor if it takes three months (or more from what you are saying) to get a replacement for a clearly defective piece of hardware.

[Meaker]

Scan:

You are not allowed to offer the GSO as a replacement it is an inferior product:

8800GTS: 112 shader units, 320bit mem bus, clocks 600 / 1500 / 900
9600GSO: 96 shader units, 192bit mem bus, clocks 550 / 1375 / 800 (summary, 20% less shader power, 47% less bandwidth)

Its seriously inferior in EVERY way. Legally you must offer an equal or better part.

INFACT the 8800GT is on equal ground to the GTS 320mb, it has more ram (the 512mb version) but less memory bandwidth. That would be the direct replacement.

If he wanted to buy an 8800GTS 320mb it would cost him around £72-£80 so offering £65 seems a bit harsh:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/XFX-GEFORCE-88...1%7C240%3A1318

Cheapest shop:

http://www.awd-it.com/scripts/prodvi...idproduct=1512

[leepen@scan]

We have made various notes of this and our returns manager shall contact you soon regarding the RMA replacement. Hope to have this resolved for you by the end of the day.

[DeludedGuy]

I have to say, that is a very unfair offer.

[LuckyNV]

If this is the old G80 8800GTS then the 9600GSO is actually faster.

old GTS was pretty much on par with the HD3850 back when they were compared, trying to find a direct comparison right now but the below will have to do.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/E...8800_GS/6.html
The review is of an 8800GS but the 9600GSO is exactly the same card using the same G92 core, same core/memory clocks. You can see its no slouch in performance and actually faster than the G80 8800GTS

Personally a 9600GSO is a decent replacement, if you had the 640MB GTS then you should ask for a 768MB 9600GSO/

Meaker, no way in hell is the G80 GTS on par with a G92 GT, you can already see how close the 8800GT is to the 8800GTX.

[blueball]

oops

[Hawk08]

I see you edited your first reply.

First of all, I was not offered the 9600 GSO or cash -- a suggestion of "how about this card?" was put out there, to which I responded with the following:

"Clock speed and memory size don't tell the whole story. I've checked the relative performance of the 8800GTS, 9800GT, 9600GT and 9600GSO on theNvidia website using their comparison page.

From the above Nvidia rate the 8800GTS as 18x the performance of their lowest card. The 9600GT is rated at 17x, and the 9600GSO at 16x. The 9800GT is 23x so is a sizeable jump up. Based on the above the closest to the 8800GTS would be the 9600GT, so I'd be happy to accept one of those. The
9600GSO is another step down."

There was never a reply to my e-mail, thus the post on these forums.

[Bluey]

I really dont see why scan are having so many problems relating to xfx cards.

Yes they are unreliable, as I found out myself after buying a 8800 gs from dabs, but when the card I purchased failed after around 4 weeks dabs refunded my money 6 days after recieving it back.

Could scan please tell us why they have such bad relations with xfx and why you even bother stocking there cards in the first place ?

Seems like nothing but hassle for your customers.

[Alfieg]

but when the card I purchased failed after around 4 weeks dabs refunded my money 6 days after recieving it back.

Same here.

[Splash]

For clarity could the OP confirm if this is a G80 or a G92 8800GTS? Also did it come with 320, 512 or 640Mb of RAM?

[Rebel]

For clarity could the OP confirm if this is a G80 or a G92 8800GTS? Also did it come with 320, 512 or 640Mb of RAM?

I have to say surely this should be between the OP and Scan to resolve between themselves.

I certainly understand the point of this post as it brings the issue out into the open, and I have to say I would do the same thing in his shoes, also after reading so many similar posts in this section I am pleased I did not purchase an XFX product myself recently.

I was very close to doing so but ended up buying a Palit 9500GT 1Gb card instead from another retailer, simply due to everything I have read here I knew if I was treated as some others appear to have been I would have been taking legal advice and not just complaining on a forum (The advantage of being old is you know where to go and who to ask, the disadvantage is your patience is not always what it could be).

However it does appear from the post made by leepen@scan at 11.23, they are now looking for a way to resolve this issue, maybe a little late in the day but better late than never so lets wait and see what the result is before jumping in and condemning anyone.

[Joey2oo7]

I really dont see why scan are having so many problems relating to xfx cards.

Yes they are unreliable, as I found out myself after buying a 8800 gs from dabs, but when the card I purchased failed after around 4 weeks dabs refunded my money 6 days after recieving it back.

Could scan please tell us why they have such bad relations with xfx and why you even bother stocking there cards in the first place ?

Seems like nothing but hassle for your customers.

I'm guessing there's a good mark up on the cards. Though you'd think all the hassle they cause would outweigh things.......

[Hawk08]

I advised you via e-mail on 24 Feb. that I'd take the refund market value. The invoice was updated the next day and has not moved from the "picked" status since then. Could you please advise what the delay is in receiving my refund?

[Hawk08]

Bump.... still waiting for a reply as to where is my refund?