From: Gary Kuznitz (docfxit_at_theoffice.la)
Date: Tue Nov 05 2002 - 00:54:32 EST
Does this mean that everyone has to open up their Thinkpad before
it gets sent in to IBM to make sure nothing has been spilled so IBM
will not void the warranty?
Gary Kuznitz
On 4 Nov 2002 at 19:06, Bill (Bill Morrow <marrow_at_adelphia.net>)
commented about
Re: [Thinkpad] EZ Serv insanity update 2:
> i don't think this qualifies as a class action..
> i think small claims would be a better course of action..
> venu runs where the tort took place and in think a good case can be made for
> that to be when you opened the box and found the denial of the warranty
> claim.. also, since IBM has nexus most everyplace, then that makes most places
> their "office"..
>
> but if there IS a spill, no matter how small, then they DO have a case..
> but to call is a biological hazard is a bit extreme..
> and to give no information at all other than a quick note is simply not good
> customer relations..
>
> <------------------------------->
> Cordially, :-)
> Bill Morrow
> WEB page http://thinkpads.com
> thinkpads.com Open Forum
> http://www.afaonline.com:8080/webboard/$webb.exe/~2/login?
> or go to thinkpads.com and link from there
> E-Mail: bill at thinkpads dot com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruce Markowitz" <scosgt_at_worldnet.att.net>
> To: "Jonathan Graham" <grahamj_at_virtue.cx>; <andres_at_msu.edu>;
> <thinkpad_at_stderr.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 6:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [Thinkpad] EZ Serv insanity update 2
>
>
> > Yes, but the THREAT is what gets action.
> > The group may get short $$, but the Corp loses MILLIONS
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jonathan Graham" <grahamj_at_virtue.cx>
> > To: <andres_at_msu.edu>; <thinkpad_at_stderr.org>
> > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 6:35 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Thinkpad] EZ Serv insanity update 2
> >
> >
> > > Ug...not to mention that the group that tends to get the short end of
> the
> > > stick in a class action is the consumer. Remember the mwave class
> action
> > > against IBM? $100 USD and a 10% off coupon.
> > >
> > > J.
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "STeve Andre'" <andres_at_msu.edu>
> > > To: <thinkpad_at_stderr.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 5:53 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Thinkpad] EZ Serv insanity update 2
> > >
> > >
> > > > Class action lawsuit? Why?
> > > >
> > > > This is an individual problem, not en mass as far as I can tell.
> > > >
> > > > Besides, I would rather IBM do the right thing here. There are
> > > > two parts to what I consider correct behavior: first, to realize that
> > > > they're service system is over-zealous in inspecting things (I mean, the
> > > > spill is *really* minor), and more importantly how to deal with a
> > > > customer in this situation. The letter I got was perhaps even more
> > > > infuriating than the actual hardware problem is.
> > > >
> > > > There has to be a better way. Reason has to win inside IBM. It
> > > > has to, else IBM is doomed. I don't want to see that.
> > > >
> > > > --STeve Andre'
> > > >
> > > > On Monday 04 November 2002 05:46 pm, Bruce Markowitz wrote:
> > > > > Only on terminology will work
> > > > > Call Legal in Armonk NY and say:
> > > > > CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "David Goldman" <David_at_DGoldman.Com>
> > > > > To: <thinkpad_at_stderr.org>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:48 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Thinkpad] EZ Serv insanity update 2
> > > > >
> > > > > > At 02:04 PM 11/4/2002, STeve Andre' wrote:
> > > > > > >Well, I just got a call from a Mike at IBM, about my "offensive or
> > > > > > >biological hazard" in my ThinkPad.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I lose.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >He said exactly what the other people at IBM said: that something
> > > > > > >(cat urine? cat hair?) was in my machine, and they would not deal
> > > > > > >with this until it had been cleaned by someone else. After that
> my
> > > > > > >unit would be repaired on a billable basis: my warranty is gone,
> > > > > > >due to "negligence" on my part.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >The part that I found so interesting about this call was that it
> > > wasn't
> > > > > > >helpful at all. No hint of trying to help the customer here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Wow. I don't think I can recomend ThinkPads any more.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I am sad.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I find it interesting that they could not / would not tell you
> > exactly
> > > > > > what is wrong. For example, couldn't they tell the difference
> > between
> > > > > > cat hair and cat urine? And if it was urine, how would they know
> the
> > > > > > difference between cat/dog/human urine? Do you even own a pet (or
> an
> > > > > > ill behaved child)?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you have the ability to contact "Mike" again, I'd ask for a
> > > SPECIFIC
> > > > > > answer regarding what testing was done to determine that something
> > > > > > "offensive" was on your system. Did they use a chemical test? A
> > black
> > > > > > light? A alcohol wipe (a la current airport security checks), etc.
> > If
> > > > > > they refuse to identify the testing method they used (and where in
> > the
> > > > > > warranty statement they previously informed you that such
> > "offensive"
> > > > > > material would void your warranty), then you intend to take them
> to
> > > > > > small claims court over the arbitrary loss of value of your
> Thinkpad
> > > > > > associated with a loss of warranty. Also indicate that you will
> file
> > > > > > a complaint with the BBB. Finally, if "Mike" is not available, I'd
> > > > > > ask to speak to his supervisor.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This issue is *NOT* resolved until they can supply some proof that
> > > they
> > > > > > did something more than flip a coin to determine that they
> > could/would
> > > > > > void your warranty.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Good luck. Don't give up yet!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > David Goldman
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:59:35 EST