JLC Master Chrono
Discussion
poocherama said:
The real question still to be answered is what caused the original fault? In the event that my requests for further clarification go unanswered or are ignored (highly likely) I assume I'm buggered? It is after all their word agains't mine.
It depends a little bit on what the original (and possibly subsequent) damage is. Certainly, I wouldn't expect the damage they're claiming to occur without fairly obvious damage to the case itself or at least the head of the pusher. By "obvious", I mean damage that any self-respecting retail shop would have noted on the condition report on receipt for fear of being accused of it later.If it's been possible to cause genuine damage to the movement without anything like that showing then there'd be a fair argument for the design being unfit for purpose for something designed to wear on your wrist.
RichB said:
thought you were disputing that it had had two knocks? I assumed the original fault was caused by the first knock?
I can see why there might be some confusion. This saga has been running for a year. The 'original' failure I referenced occurred a week after I bought the watch in March of last year. It was subsequently repaired under warranty. Despite asking them on a number of occasions they've never let on what was wrong with it. The watch failed again 6 weeks ago. The two knocks you refer to above are from the original diagnosis on the 19th Jan and a subsequent diagnosis on 18th Feb.
Variomatic - I've brought to their attention the fact that the original damage report mentions scratches consummate with normal wear. Neither pusher is damaged.
P
poocherama said:
Variomatic - I've brought to their attention the fact that the original damage report mentions scratches consummate with normal wear. Neither pusher is damaged.
P
In which case it's very hard for them to claim movement damage unless they're admitting a design weakness = possibly relying on the operating levers of the movement to act as stops for the pushers. Which is poor practice - they should be stopped internally or by the (sturdy) case, not the (delicate) movement parts.P
Variomatic said:
In which case it's very hard for them to claim movement damage unless they're admitting a design weakness = possibly relying on the operating levers of the movement to act as stops for the pushers. Which is poor practice - they should be stopped internally or by the (sturdy) case, not the (delicate) movement parts.
Sounds like they fixed it and don't want to tell you what caused it and same thing has happened again. Thing is it will happen again if theres a design flaw. Could you post a link to the model of jlc?Variomatic said:
In which case it's very hard for them to claim movement damage unless they're admitting a design weakness = possibly relying on the operating levers of the movement to act as stops for the pushers. Which is poor practice - they should be stopped internally or by the (sturdy) case, not the (delicate) movement parts.
Sounds like they fixed it and don't want to tell you what caused it and same thing has happened again. Thing is it will happen again if theres a design flaw. How much was it?Quick update.
JLC are still insisting that the watch received a knock causing the failure. However they are now offering to carryout the repair work for free (not under warranty as such) though they have still not told me what the original fault was back in March 2014. Should I press for an explanation or just accept the repair work? It seems that my persistence may be a factor in the current offer.
Thoughts?
JLC are still insisting that the watch received a knock causing the failure. However they are now offering to carryout the repair work for free (not under warranty as such) though they have still not told me what the original fault was back in March 2014. Should I press for an explanation or just accept the repair work? It seems that my persistence may be a factor in the current offer.
Thoughts?
If they're finally relenting (seeing sense), then does it really matter what caused what before?
More to the point, after all this (by which I mean needing 3 repairs) will you even be remotely interested in keeping it?
Just accept the offer, get it back, then enjoy (until it breaks again) or get rid of it, and go for a different JLC or something less fragile.
More to the point, after all this (by which I mean needing 3 repairs) will you even be remotely interested in keeping it?
Just accept the offer, get it back, then enjoy (until it breaks again) or get rid of it, and go for a different JLC or something less fragile.
PJ S said:
If they're finally relenting (seeing sense), then does it really matter what caused what before?
More to the point, after all this (by which I mean needing 3 repairs) will you even be remotely interested in keeping it?
Just accept the offer, get it back, then enjoy (until it breaks again) or get rid of it, and go for a different JLC or something less fragile.
I agree, once back I think it'll be for the chop!More to the point, after all this (by which I mean needing 3 repairs) will you even be remotely interested in keeping it?
Just accept the offer, get it back, then enjoy (until it breaks again) or get rid of it, and go for a different JLC or something less fragile.
Yep, take the offer. It sounds very much like damage limitation by them - if there is (as suspected) a design issue then the last thing the would want is you having the watch assessed elsewhere and possibly going down the court / not fit for purpose route.
Regardless of whether you were successful or not that could only mean bad publicity for them, so they're offering a goodwill repair without accepting liability. That suggests they think you ave at least half a leg to stand on, but not necessarily enough to win if pushed.
They lose a repair charge (but will still be in profit overall on the watch) and one or a few customers but, in return, they don't have questions about their designs being raised across the watch blogging world. They're not going to "weaken" that deal by putting anything in writing to you that might also find its way onto blogs!
Regardless of whether you were successful or not that could only mean bad publicity for them, so they're offering a goodwill repair without accepting liability. That suggests they think you ave at least half a leg to stand on, but not necessarily enough to win if pushed.
They lose a repair charge (but will still be in profit overall on the watch) and one or a few customers but, in return, they don't have questions about their designs being raised across the watch blogging world. They're not going to "weaken" that deal by putting anything in writing to you that might also find its way onto blogs!
Ikemi said:
I can understand that a drop wouldn't be ideal for any automatic watch, but are the Navy Seal range a little more robust and therefore, a proper everyday watch?
The Navy SEALs tie-up is a bit of a red herring. They gave a few of their compressor divers to some SEALS to wear who said 'too big, too shiny' so they de-blinged them and reduced the size. They are not issued to them or anything. FWIW I'd have bought one were it not for the Team America tie-up, one of the most attractive divers out there. Anyway, any auto which survives a drop - you've been very, very lucky. JLCs shock protection will be industry standard, no different to say a Fifty Fathoms, AP diver or other super-luxury diver.
Something is fundamentally 'up' with this particular watch and my gut feeling (based on nothing) is that it failed under warranty due to poor build or bad componentry and then was not subsequently reassembled correctly or had another failed component. I am a huge fan of JLC and am very glad of this result but blimey, it took some work.
OP, accept the offer, get it back, flog it to Watchfinder. Then buy a Glashutte or Blancpain.
yeti said:
The Navy SEALs tie-up is a bit of a red herring. They gave a few of their compressor divers to some SEALS to wear who said 'too big, too shiny' so they de-blinged them and reduced the size. They are not issued to them or anything. FWIW I'd have bought one were it not for the Team America tie-up, one of the most attractive divers out there. Anyway, any auto which survives a drop - you've been very, very lucky.
OP, accept the offer, get it back, flog it to Watchfinder. Then buy a Glashutte or Blancpain.
I have to admit, I'm not too keen on the Navy Seals tie up either, but I'm in love with the MCDC GMT NS with the yellow accents. It's a possibility for next year, although I'm looking at the other two manufacturers you mention as well! However I've never owned a JLC and for some reason, I'm drawn to the brand ...OP, accept the offer, get it back, flog it to Watchfinder. Then buy a Glashutte or Blancpain.
OP, as Yeti says ... Accept the offer and then decide what you want to do. However it sounds as the ownership experience has been tainted, so perhaps sell on and try another manufacturer?
Quinny said:
Not sure I'd go with the JLC are fragile comment......
I have a master compressor Memovox, and it feels like it was built to withstand a bomb blast...
The Memovox isn't exactly long on complications though. It doesn't even have a quick set date ISTR.......I have a master compressor Memovox, and it feels like it was built to withstand a bomb blast...
FWIW, the only watch I've ever had fail catastrophically - in other words completely cease to function - was a JLC Master Compressor Chrono. I had it fixed at vast expense, then sold it immediately afterwards.
Riff Raff said:
The Memovox isn't exactly long on complications though. It doesn't even have a quick set date ISTR.......
FWIW, the only watch I've ever had fail catastrophically - in other words completely cease to function - was a JLC Master Compressor Chrono. I had it fixed at vast expense, then sold it immediately afterwards.
If you don't mind me asking, what failed and what was the total cost for repair? Was it the MCC MK1, with the white rotating hour dial?FWIW, the only watch I've ever had fail catastrophically - in other words completely cease to function - was a JLC Master Compressor Chrono. I had it fixed at vast expense, then sold it immediately afterwards.
Ikemi said:
If you don't mind me asking, what failed and what was the total cost for repair? Was it the MCC MK1, with the white rotating hour dial?
Yes, it was one of the mk1's. To be perfectly honest, I don't know what failed - I didn't ask, and they didn't spell it out on the estimate. It just said it needed a full service. That I already knew, as it wasn't working. I can't check what parts, if any were replaced, as the service paperwork went with the watch when I sold it. From memory, it was about £750 with a 20 week turnaround. And that was a good few years ago now.At that point I'd just lost faith in the brand, so I didn't see much point in having the drains up with the fault. I just wanted it fixed so I could move it on and recoup some of the money I had invested in the piece.
Hopefully the final update.
As you know the watch is being repaired under 'goodwill' not under warranty. Today however I received a call from Jaeger le Coultre Customer Service UK, with reference to my 'blogging' about my experience to date. It was an interesting conversation.
They didn't let on what forum they'd been following but wanted to know what they could do to make amends. They offered me an extended one year warranty. Sure, though I politely pointed out that the watch still had 14 months of warranty when it broke in January and it hadn't been repaired under it.
The really interesting bit was the issue of the original failure back in March 2014. Apparently the Richemont system doesn't allow for notes to be added about diagnosis / repair work. Apparently when a watch fails (in my case completely) it's not always apparent what the cause is. It's taken apart, serviced, if a component is broken replaced, put back together and tested. This apparently was the situation with my watch, no history of the failure was noted. I pointed out that this seemed at odd's with the latest diagnosis which was pinpointed directly to an impact/knock.
Long and the short of it was they want me to report a favourable outcome. Happy to write about my direct experience to date was the reply. What did I really want? Not to have to contact JLC customer service for the foreseeable future!
Let us hope this is the case!
P
As you know the watch is being repaired under 'goodwill' not under warranty. Today however I received a call from Jaeger le Coultre Customer Service UK, with reference to my 'blogging' about my experience to date. It was an interesting conversation.
They didn't let on what forum they'd been following but wanted to know what they could do to make amends. They offered me an extended one year warranty. Sure, though I politely pointed out that the watch still had 14 months of warranty when it broke in January and it hadn't been repaired under it.
The really interesting bit was the issue of the original failure back in March 2014. Apparently the Richemont system doesn't allow for notes to be added about diagnosis / repair work. Apparently when a watch fails (in my case completely) it's not always apparent what the cause is. It's taken apart, serviced, if a component is broken replaced, put back together and tested. This apparently was the situation with my watch, no history of the failure was noted. I pointed out that this seemed at odd's with the latest diagnosis which was pinpointed directly to an impact/knock.
Long and the short of it was they want me to report a favourable outcome. Happy to write about my direct experience to date was the reply. What did I really want? Not to have to contact JLC customer service for the foreseeable future!
Let us hope this is the case!
P
You should've asked for a free upgrade to a chronograph that might actually be properly designed for normal usage – http://www.jaeger-lecoultre.com/WW/en/watches/mast...
Then you could've regaled us with how your customer experience was!
Then you could've regaled us with how your customer experience was!
Sometimes, just sometimes, the small guy wins.
Well done OP.
Shame on you JLC. (And I wear one.)
It is not good enough that you hide behind your contrived invisible face, where your paying customers are left with virtually no recourse to your dictatorial attitudes to both faults and the incomprehensible delay in completing and returning a watch submitted for service.
Not good enough, not by a long way.
It is now the day of the internet, and you have been found wanting. (I trust this message will be pushed upstairs, otherwise, well, draw your own conclusions...)
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff