Chances of a replacement
Discussion
My nice new PC has just arrived from Dell this afternoon. Unfortunately the monitor has got a dead pixel (just one). What are my chances of getting them to replace it like? I've spoken to them on the phone but the guy said it has to have multiple dead pixels to be replaced. I am waiting for his supervisor to call me back.
Interestingly the CAB says the law says:
[QUOTE]
When you buy goods (including goods supplied as part of a service), the law gives you certain rights as a consumer. The law says that the goods must:-
be of satisfactory quality. This means that the goods should be of the quality that a reasonable person would expect given the description, price and any other relevant circumstances. You can take into account the appearance and finish of the goods, and whether there are any defects (including minor ones). You can also take into account whether publicized information about specific features of the goods is accurate, and whether the goods are safe when used properly
be fit for the purpose. This means that you must be able to use them for the purposes that you would normally expect from this type of product.
[/QUOTE]
It also says:
[QUOTE]
As a consumer, you have the right to return the goods and get your money back if they are not of satisfactory quality, are not fit for their purpose, or do not match their description. Alternatively, you may have the right to compensation. If you bought the goods on or after 31 March 2003, you may have the right to ask the trader to repair or replace the goods, to get a partial refund, or to cancel the contract you made when you bought the goods. If the trader offers you a credit note, you do not have to accept it (see under heading Additional rights).
[/QUOTE]
Now, to me this means I am legally entitled to a replacement. Is that actually the case and Dell are just being cheeky with their multiple pixel policy?
Thanks..
PS i know that needing more than 1 dead pixel to replace is a standard policy but its not a very good one, is it?
Interestingly the CAB says the law says:
[QUOTE]
When you buy goods (including goods supplied as part of a service), the law gives you certain rights as a consumer. The law says that the goods must:-
be of satisfactory quality. This means that the goods should be of the quality that a reasonable person would expect given the description, price and any other relevant circumstances. You can take into account the appearance and finish of the goods, and whether there are any defects (including minor ones). You can also take into account whether publicized information about specific features of the goods is accurate, and whether the goods are safe when used properly
be fit for the purpose. This means that you must be able to use them for the purposes that you would normally expect from this type of product.
[/QUOTE]
It also says:
[QUOTE]
As a consumer, you have the right to return the goods and get your money back if they are not of satisfactory quality, are not fit for their purpose, or do not match their description. Alternatively, you may have the right to compensation. If you bought the goods on or after 31 March 2003, you may have the right to ask the trader to repair or replace the goods, to get a partial refund, or to cancel the contract you made when you bought the goods. If the trader offers you a credit note, you do not have to accept it (see under heading Additional rights).
[/QUOTE]
Now, to me this means I am legally entitled to a replacement. Is that actually the case and Dell are just being cheeky with their multiple pixel policy?
Thanks..
PS i know that needing more than 1 dead pixel to replace is a standard policy but its not a very good one, is it?
If they won't play ball, reject the lot under the The Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000
www.dti.gov.uk/ccp/topics1/guide/distsell.htm
and
www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2000/20002334.htm
Not checked the text, but if IIRC you have 7 working days to return (at your cost) for a full refund.
www.dti.gov.uk/ccp/topics1/guide/distsell.htm
and
www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2000/20002334.htm
Not checked the text, but if IIRC you have 7 working days to return (at your cost) for a full refund.
Guys in the office have had real problems attempting to reject TFT's with "Dead" Pixels..
slinky
NEC White paper said:
The manufacturing process for LCD displays requires millions of transistors in each panel. Limitations of the manufacturing process sometimes result in dead pixels. A "dead pixel" can take the form of either a contrast spot or a black spot. A contrast spot appears when a completely gray screen is displayed. A black spot appears when a completely red, green or blue screen is displayed.
Our specifications allow 10 missing dots. But, if there is a cluster of some missing dots, we will consider that depending on colors that are missing and distance between the quantity of missing dots
slinky
read the small print, it will say that there are a number of dead pixels/sub pixels and pixels that are permantely off/on and allowed to be so, it's the price you pay for tft monitors, many articles been written about that on the net.
distance selling act 2000 is your only hope of rejection, you can if you so wish reject the goods, within 7 days of recieving them and get all of your money back, excepting the postage/delivery costs, but then you may just end up with another monitor the same....
k
distance selling act 2000 is your only hope of rejection, you can if you so wish reject the goods, within 7 days of recieving them and get all of your money back, excepting the postage/delivery costs, but then you may just end up with another monitor the same....
k
Yeah, but the law says that goods must be of "satisfactory quality" or you are entitled to a repair/replacement/refund. Its up to a magistrate to decide what satisfactory quality is... Nowhere on the Dell website is there any info on the type of tft screen it is *(class A can have 0 defective pixels, class B (what mine is, as it says on the back) can have 2 per million pixels). Apparently its reasonable to say that as it was not stated i assumed it would be class A... hence they should replace it for me... I'm going to phone them up everyday and see what they do...
Incidentally I already pointed out I can reject it and they don't seem to be interested in replacing my monitor to save the whole sale...
Incidentally I already pointed out I can reject it and they don't seem to be interested in replacing my monitor to save the whole sale...
Distance selling act 2000,
you do not need a reason, you can reject the goods even if perfect.....
find the act and read the statements, it is designed to protect you if you bought over the internet/telephone etc. It works, trust me.
K
sale of goods act is for satisfactory quality or merchantable quality as the act states, and/or fit for purpose, they are not the same as the distance selling act.
>> Edited by warmfuzzies on Friday 23 July 20:45
you do not need a reason, you can reject the goods even if perfect.....
find the act and read the statements, it is designed to protect you if you bought over the internet/telephone etc. It works, trust me.
K
sale of goods act is for satisfactory quality or merchantable quality as the act states, and/or fit for purpose, they are not the same as the distance selling act.
>> Edited by warmfuzzies on Friday 23 July 20:45
D_Mike said:
Unfortunately the monitor has got a dead pixel (just one)....The law says that the goods must:-
be of satisfactory quality.
The maximum permitted number of pixels faults is stipulated in the international standard ISO 13406-2 Class II which is applied for the 'consumer'.
An example from the standard is a 15" flat-screen with a resolution of 1024 x 768 has 1024 x 768 = 786423 pixels. Each pixel consists of three sub pixels (red, green and blue), so there are almost 2.4 million dots in total. According to ISO 13406-2 (Class II), a maximum of 4 pixels and 5 sub pixels may be defective, i. e. a total of 17 fault dots. This corresponds to approx. 0.002% of the entire screen surface.
The pixel is defective if one or more of the dots can’t be controlled, i.e. the dot stays the same colour despite of desired colour and it is visible from 30 cm distance from the LCD panel surface. Typically such defects can be seen as bright spots on dark (black) background. The bright spot can be seen as bright white, red, blue or green.
When there is a bright, white background, the dot can be seen as a black spot.
i.e. using the above ISO standard, your screen with 1 fault pixel is of 'satisfactory quality'.
Right. I am probably gonna get slated for this but I don't care. Here was my method for dealing with the whole 'dead pixel' thing:
I am self employed in one role as a Computer Consultant. I sell between 5 and 30 new systems per week. I normally spec TFT's over CRT's as this is what the customer wants.
I have had a number of pixel failures, and as a result of me complaining, my supplier has since added a disclaimer on the sales page which clearly states that 5-7 dead pixels is 'acceptable'.
NFW is it. The point I pressed to them was; if I bought a brand new red car, would a bright blue spot on the paintwork be acceptable? No, I think not.
After a few months on returns, they informed me that it was a condition of trading, as listed in the TFT sales listings that 5-7 dead pixels was perfectly acceptable.
My customers, however, are totally against this; even after being advised of this position. I consulted my in-house consumer lawyer, and he told me that the Consumer rights bill; ie 'fitness for a purpose' and 'not of merchantable quality' argument was invalid as the terms of the sale were indicated and covered, stating that 5-7 dead pixels was acceptable in the sale conditions - by buying the TFT, I was acccepting these terms.
Was that acceptable?? Was it *uck!! As far as I was concerned, these TFT's were defective, and it was a manaufacturing fault. Obviously the manufacturer does not agree with this policy due to a high number of manufacturing failures. Therefore, I have been forced to make my own solutions to the problem, as this was not aceptable as it threatened to damage my reputation in supplying 100% functional goods to my customers.
This was my observation:
All decent TFT's carry a 3 year warranty. If it doesn't have one, don't buy it.
TFT's are very sensitive to EMF and High frequency radiation - if for some strange reason the TFT should come into contact with high frequency radiation; ie microwave, it will ruin the electronics within 5 seconds (no more no less) - that is all that is required. Microwave energy will reflect and casue damage to the microwave transmitter if any metal parts are not covered in insulaing tape, so bear this in mind. If your TFT becomes a 'victim' of such abuse, promptly inform the manufacturer that your TFT does not work - period - , and a replacement will be sent (normaly within 3 days).
Should the new panel arrive with dead pixels, the same fate could occur. There is no known way for the manufacturer to compalain or reject your warranty claim as this is how it arrived to your door
Please think before commenting on a public forum with your interpretation of these findings as you may have an adverse effect on any monitors returned under warranty.
As I see it the manufacturers have a duty to supply us with error free TFT's. If they cannot do this, they should not be offered for sale in ther first instance.
I am self employed in one role as a Computer Consultant. I sell between 5 and 30 new systems per week. I normally spec TFT's over CRT's as this is what the customer wants.
I have had a number of pixel failures, and as a result of me complaining, my supplier has since added a disclaimer on the sales page which clearly states that 5-7 dead pixels is 'acceptable'.
NFW is it. The point I pressed to them was; if I bought a brand new red car, would a bright blue spot on the paintwork be acceptable? No, I think not.
After a few months on returns, they informed me that it was a condition of trading, as listed in the TFT sales listings that 5-7 dead pixels was perfectly acceptable.
My customers, however, are totally against this; even after being advised of this position. I consulted my in-house consumer lawyer, and he told me that the Consumer rights bill; ie 'fitness for a purpose' and 'not of merchantable quality' argument was invalid as the terms of the sale were indicated and covered, stating that 5-7 dead pixels was acceptable in the sale conditions - by buying the TFT, I was acccepting these terms.
Was that acceptable?? Was it *uck!! As far as I was concerned, these TFT's were defective, and it was a manaufacturing fault. Obviously the manufacturer does not agree with this policy due to a high number of manufacturing failures. Therefore, I have been forced to make my own solutions to the problem, as this was not aceptable as it threatened to damage my reputation in supplying 100% functional goods to my customers.
This was my observation:
All decent TFT's carry a 3 year warranty. If it doesn't have one, don't buy it.
TFT's are very sensitive to EMF and High frequency radiation - if for some strange reason the TFT should come into contact with high frequency radiation; ie microwave, it will ruin the electronics within 5 seconds (no more no less) - that is all that is required. Microwave energy will reflect and casue damage to the microwave transmitter if any metal parts are not covered in insulaing tape, so bear this in mind. If your TFT becomes a 'victim' of such abuse, promptly inform the manufacturer that your TFT does not work - period - , and a replacement will be sent (normaly within 3 days).
Should the new panel arrive with dead pixels, the same fate could occur. There is no known way for the manufacturer to compalain or reject your warranty claim as this is how it arrived to your door
Please think before commenting on a public forum with your interpretation of these findings as you may have an adverse effect on any monitors returned under warranty.
As I see it the manufacturers have a duty to supply us with error free TFT's. If they cannot do this, they should not be offered for sale in ther first instance.
Although it's incredibly frustrating I can actually see the manufacturers' point of view. If they were to reject any screen with dead pixels then the cost of the screens would shoot up. I've spent about an hour on the phone to Dell so far on this issue and they aren't budging. The argument basically goes:
me: "It's faulty"
them: "the ISO says 5 or 6 dead pixels are acceptable"
me: "the law says a good must be of satisfactory quality"
them: "it is. it's not faulty"
me: "i'm not satisfied"
etc. etc. The only real way to solve this is to get a magistrate to decide I imagine. I still do not see how an meeting an industry standard means that it is automatically of good enough quality for a consumer...
I also gave them the car analogy - if you buy a new car and it has a scratch on it, you get them to repair it... The car works with the scratch but it is not of satisfactory quality... its the same as with these monitors.
me: "It's faulty"
them: "the ISO says 5 or 6 dead pixels are acceptable"
me: "the law says a good must be of satisfactory quality"
them: "it is. it's not faulty"
me: "i'm not satisfied"
etc. etc. The only real way to solve this is to get a magistrate to decide I imagine. I still do not see how an meeting an industry standard means that it is automatically of good enough quality for a consumer...
I also gave them the car analogy - if you buy a new car and it has a scratch on it, you get them to repair it... The car works with the scratch but it is not of satisfactory quality... its the same as with these monitors.
D_Mike said:
The argument basically goes:
me: "It's faulty"
them: "the ISO says 5 or 6 dead pixels are acceptable"
me: "the law says a good must be of satisfactory quality"
them: "it is. it's not faulty"
me: "i'm not satisfied"
etc. etc. The only real way to solve this is to get a magistrate to decide I imagine.
DISTANCE SELLING REGULATIONS! Stop arguing under the satisfactory quality clause, because you won't win. Return the whole thing under distance selling act.
Buy CTX with their 'zero dead pixel' guarantee
www.ctxeurope.com/
www.ctxeurope.com/
D_Mike said:
The only real way to solve this is to get a magistrate to decide I imagine. I still do not see how an meeting an industry standard means that it is automatically of good enough quality for a consumer...
This would probably be viewed as caveat emptor.
The technology used in production of TFTs has a well known poor yield rate (as at the moment), so unless you pay a premium for a no dead pixels type or stick to CRT, you run the risk of purchasing a display with this.
There is no plausible reason for a new car to have a scratch or colour imperfection on it.
It's not the manufacturer/supplier's fault that you didn't research your choice before buying to know that it is an imperfect technology and that the ISO standard for manufacture allows dead pixels on TFT as a compromise!
On the other hand, they don't make this obvious in the marketing about how lovely TFTs are do they? (But I expect they're covered in some small print somewhere).
As maffwilson says, there is a proper ISO standard which these monitors are made (and sold) under. The jump up to the next class which guaruntees "perfect" panels which have pricetags several times larger - down to you as to whether the risk of a dead pixel is that much of a big deal. To use the car analogy, it's like buying a Perodua Kelisa for 5k and moaning that the paint finish or plastic moulding isn't as "perfect" as a BMW. You can't be buying 17" TFTs at 250 quid and expect perfection. Yes, in a perfect world we'd have super-cheap TFTs with no imperfections, but in the real world TFTs are expensive to make and have low yields even when you're allowed less than a thousandth of a percent of the pixels to be faulty on the display. On the plus side, we have TFTs that are bigger, brighter, sharper and quicker than ever before at prices that seemed unimaginable a couple of years ago.
If anyone had a Trinitron or Diamondtron monitor, were you waving your arms and demanding replacements because your new monitor had two thin lines across it?
>> Edited by sjg on Monday 26th July 23:17
If anyone had a Trinitron or Diamondtron monitor, were you waving your arms and demanding replacements because your new monitor had two thin lines across it?
>> Edited by sjg on Monday 26th July 23:17
Hi there
Friend of mine bought a Laptop cheap because they thought it had a dead pixel, when I looked at it the mouse pointer moved under said pixel, turns out someone had marked the centre of the screen for some reason with a permanent marker, meths and a gentle wipe fixed it. Maybe Dell would buy my patented "cure".
Friend of mine bought a Laptop cheap because they thought it had a dead pixel, when I looked at it the mouse pointer moved under said pixel, turns out someone had marked the centre of the screen for some reason with a permanent marker, meths and a gentle wipe fixed it. Maybe Dell would buy my patented "cure".
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff