Do you think it's wrong for companies to do this?

[bozack]

I had this happen once and hated it, my wife bought me a handspring visor that had a defect in the screen, she ordered it direct from handspring...when I called them on it they told me that if you buy online then they will only give you a refurb for a replacement, I took the less ethical route and bought another in a store and returned the one we ordered...but that IMHO is a joke of a policy.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo
Why should one customer have a product without defects, but since this one was sent one with an issue, he shouldn't be sent a new one?

In general, warranties don't promise to always make things "like new", but to fix any problems you have. Would you demand that they send you a new one even if they could fix the problem in the one you had?

In the end, they both paid the same, but one ended up with a refurbished product, and the other ended up with a brand new one that worked the first time. Their duty is not over until he gets what he paid for, it's as simple as that.

If you go to a dealership and they sell you a *new* car, but it comes with a big dent, so they just offer you a slightly used one, you would argue that, right? Why not in this case? Price difference is not a valid reason.

Actually, many states have 'lemon laws' about car purchases -- if they can't make it "like new", they have to either give you a new car or give you your money back. In some states the laws apply to other purchases as well. However, such laws usually only cover you for something like 30 days. After that it's up to whatever terms are in the warranty (if any).

If I bought a brand-new car and the engine failed after a week, I would demand that they fix it so it was "like new" or provide a comparable replacement engine (for instance, a rebuilt engine with new parts and <10K miles) with the same warranty coverage. But I wouldn't demand an entire brand-new car unless they couldn't or wouldn't fix it properly. If the engine failed after a year, and the dealer couldn't fix it but offered to replace the car with an identical one just coming off a 1-year lease with about the same mileage, you wouldn't think that was reasonable?

With computer equipment -- if it fails within a very short period of time, just about every store I've ever seen will let you exchange a non-working piece of hardware for an exact replacement with no fee. If it fails after months and months of use -- you no longer have a "new" piece of hardware, so I'm not sure why you would expect to be given a brand-new replacement if they can't fix the one you have.

 

[ryan256]

As long as it is in new condition and they honor the full warranty of the original item I have no problem with it.

 

[imported_Imp]

It's annoying no doubt. RMA'd a DVD drive within a month of buying it and they not only sent me a refurb back, but it was in the wrong colour and an OEM (mines was retail and the 'tards at Lite-On won't let you run firmware updates on OEMs).

 

[mugs]

To replace a brand new item that never worked, yes I think that's wrong. You generally pay less for refurb items. Why pay new prices when you never had a new, working product?

For a used item that worked before breaking, I think refurb is fine as long as it is warrantied for at least 90 days or until the end of the original warranty, whichever is longer. Getting a refurb is no different from them fixing your broken item and returning it to you, you just get it sooner.

I like the way hard drive companies do it - 30 days or less, you get new. Otherwise you get refurb.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: Schfifty Five
Why bother going to the manufacturer for defects with 30 days of purchase? You should just return/exchange it at the place you bought it.

Because many places charge a restocking fee for returns.

Not for exchanges.