Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Sony Refuses To Warranty PS3-UPDATE-THE CALL!!!

16791112

Posts

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Why doesn't Sony accept the UPC code as proof of purchase for warranty purposes?

  • DelzhandDelzhand motivated battle programmerRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    so what we're saying is that if you have a ps3, no matter what the circumstances you got it under (used, theft, Jesus descended from heaven and handed it to you, etc) if it breaks, sony should have to replace it, no questions asked.

    I'm just clarifying.

    Is it wrong that I don't think that's a problem? It isn't and shouldn't be Sony's job to worry about that shit, but it makes a handy reason not to service hardware that would have gone wonky on the original owner anyway.

    jk0Btsj.png
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Delzhand wrote: »
    so what we're saying is that if you have a ps3, no matter what the circumstances you got it under (used, theft, Jesus descended from heaven and handed it to you, etc) if it breaks, sony should have to replace it, no questions asked.

    I'm just clarifying.

    Is it wrong that I don't think that's a problem? It isn't and shouldn't be Sony's job to worry about that shit, but it makes a handy reason not to service hardware that would have gone wonky on the original owner anyway.

    so, you get this ps3, sony doesn't make a cent, and then they have to fix it for free?

    sounds like a pretty good deal, FOR NOT SONY.

    xmassig2.gif
  • MuttonChopsMuttonChops Registered User
    edited December 2007
    Titmouse wrote: »
    Why doesn't Sony accept the UPC code as proof of purchase for warranty purposes?

    For the answer to that you'd have to ask a lawyer, more specifically the lawyers that drafted the warranty for SCEA. I believe, but don't quote me on this, that warranties fall under Contract Law.

    muttonchops.png
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Not that I planned on getting a ps3, but I'll be sure to warn my friend, who is planning on getting one.

    The ps2 was a complete piece of shit, hardware wise, wouldn't want to ever get stuck with a non-warrantied Sony product again.

    If you look up the warranties of the Wii, 360, and PS3 you'll see that they're all the same in that they are warranted to Original purchaser. The OP of this thread was not the original purchaser, that is why he is not being covered by the warranty.

    Now I understand the meaning of last years's "All I Want For Christmas..." campaign.

    The kid JUST wants the PSP, not the warranty.

    georgersig.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    georgersig.jpg
  • Archr5Archr5 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Delzhand wrote: »
    so what we're saying is that if you have a ps3, no matter what the circumstances you got it under (used, theft, Jesus descended from heaven and handed it to you, etc) if it breaks, sony should have to replace it, no questions asked.

    I'm just clarifying.

    Is it wrong that I don't think that's a problem? It isn't and shouldn't be Sony's job to worry about that shit, but it makes a handy reason not to service hardware that would have gone wonky on the original owner anyway.

    so, you get this ps3, sony doesn't make a cent, and then they have to fix it for free?

    sounds like a pretty good deal, FOR NOT SONY.

    Wait, so You think Sony doesn't make any money if a PS3 is stolen from a big box store?
    You realize that the retailer is fully responsible for covering Sony's price if a product is stolen right?

    If Sony ships 100 PS3's to best buy and the entire store is cleaned out, Sony doesn't eat the loss... the retailer does.

    Sony refusing a manufacturers warranty claim is just them being greedy plain and simple. Unless a SONY delivery truck got robbed, They got paid for the stolen merch. Period. there's NO reason for them to deny warranty service "incase they didn't get paid for the PS3 that needs warranty work"

    somalia_banner.jpg
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    most people should have the goddamn sense to hang on to a reciept for something that cost that much in case it, I dunno, didn't work.

    it's a condition of their warranty that a receipt is required. it sucks, but they're well within their rights

    xmassig2.gif
  • MuttonChopsMuttonChops Registered User
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    muttonchops.png
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Archr5 wrote: »
    Delzhand wrote: »
    so what we're saying is that if you have a ps3, no matter what the circumstances you got it under (used, theft, Jesus descended from heaven and handed it to you, etc) if it breaks, sony should have to replace it, no questions asked.

    I'm just clarifying.

    Is it wrong that I don't think that's a problem? It isn't and shouldn't be Sony's job to worry about that shit, but it makes a handy reason not to service hardware that would have gone wonky on the original owner anyway.

    so, you get this ps3, sony doesn't make a cent, and then they have to fix it for free?

    sounds like a pretty good deal, FOR NOT SONY.

    Wait, so You think Sony doesn't make any money if a PS3 is stolen from a big box store?
    You realize that the retailer is fully responsible for covering Sony's price if a product is stolen right?

    If Sony ships 100 PS3's to best buy and the entire store is cleaned out, Sony doesn't eat the loss... the retailer does.

    Sony refusing a manufacturers warranty claim is just them being greedy plain and simple. Unless a SONY delivery truck got robbed, They got paid for the stolen merch. Period. there's NO reason for them to deny warranty service "incase they didn't get paid for the PS3 that needs warranty work"

    you can't honestly tell me that you think it's fine for a stolen ps3 to be covered under warranty regardless of compensation.

    and besides, even if you think it's a dick move, it's blatantly specified in the warranty itself that it requires a receipt. there's seriously nothing that can be done, legally or otherwise.

    xmassig2.gif
  • Archr5Archr5 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Archr5 wrote: »
    Delzhand wrote: »
    so what we're saying is that if you have a ps3, no matter what the circumstances you got it under (used, theft, Jesus descended from heaven and handed it to you, etc) if it breaks, sony should have to replace it, no questions asked.

    I'm just clarifying.

    Is it wrong that I don't think that's a problem? It isn't and shouldn't be Sony's job to worry about that shit, but it makes a handy reason not to service hardware that would have gone wonky on the original owner anyway.

    so, you get this ps3, sony doesn't make a cent, and then they have to fix it for free?

    sounds like a pretty good deal, FOR NOT SONY.

    Wait, so You think Sony doesn't make any money if a PS3 is stolen from a big box store?
    You realize that the retailer is fully responsible for covering Sony's price if a product is stolen right?

    If Sony ships 100 PS3's to best buy and the entire store is cleaned out, Sony doesn't eat the loss... the retailer does.

    Sony refusing a manufacturers warranty claim is just them being greedy plain and simple. Unless a SONY delivery truck got robbed, They got paid for the stolen merch. Period. there's NO reason for them to deny warranty service "incase they didn't get paid for the PS3 that needs warranty work"

    you can't honestly tell me that you think it's fine for a stolen ps3 to be covered under warranty regardless of compensation.

    and besides, even if you think it's a dick move, it's blatantly specified in the warranty itself that it requires a receipt. there's seriously nothing that can be done, legally or otherwise.

    Regardless of compensation? Sony, a.k.a. the people providing the warranty service, have been paid full price for their console even if it's stolen from best buy

    Also, I do think it's a dick move, and it's enough of a dick move to prevent me from purchasing a PS3 as a gift for anyone i know, or for myself.

    When my DS broke all i needed to do was put the serial number into a website and wait for my shipping label to arrive. I didn't even have to talk to a human...

    I've given 3 DS's as gifts since i bought mine.

    somalia_banner.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    georgersig.jpg
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    That doesn't mean they aren't allowed to, though.

    xmassig2.gif
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    Indeed.

    All three (I'm assuming the Wii warranty is the same limited liability, restricted to original purchaser, receipt required thing) have the same legal jargon protecting them from fulfilling warranties in given scenarios.

    Two out of three companies have decided to be a little more liberal and trusting.

    One company which already has an abysmal public reputation has decided to be stricter.

    So, Sony is "well within their rights." Okay. Sure. People have come to expect a bit of leeway because of how everyone else acts. And I think they are rightfully annoyed that Sony does not. Is Sony "well within their rights" to act this way? Sure! Absolutemont! But should they act this way? Fuck no. No no no no NO.

    steam_sig.png
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    That doesn't mean they aren't allowed to, though.

    Okay, they are allowed to.

    Big.
    Fucking.
    Deal.

    steam_sig.png
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    That doesn't mean they aren't allowed to, though.

    Okay, they are allowed to.

    Big.
    Fucking.
    Deal.

    Well you can be pissed about it all you like, but they specified what was required in the warranty. They're not in the wrong for enforcing it.

    xmassig2.gif
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    That doesn't mean they aren't allowed to, though.

    Okay, they are allowed to.

    Big.
    Fucking.
    Deal.

    Well you can be pissed about it all you like, but they specified what was required in the warranty. They're not in the wrong for enforcing it.

    They're not legally in the wrong, no.

    If you remove that modifier - "legally" - I would beg to differ.

    steam_sig.png
  • MistaCreepyMistaCreepy Registered User
    edited December 2007
    And lets not all turn our noses up here folks... the only reason Microsoft streamlined the warranty proccess is becuase they had a mountain of broken 360's and a pissed off userbase with alternatives to their product. Have you ever called Microsoft tech support for anything other than your 360? Not fun.

    PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    People need to learn, both here and in the Rock Band thread, that it is not necessarily "right" or even ethical to exercise the full extent of your legal rights.

    Simply saying "well, I'm legally entitled to" does not absolve you morally or otherwise. Furthermore, this just creates a bad image for those aware of the problem, and I would suggest that anything adding to Sony's already pisspoor image is a "wrong" action or policy on their part.

    steam_sig.png
  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    This is one of the most seething threads I've read here.

    I think we all understand that Sony is not legally wrong to enforce this.

    However, the point people are trying to make is that they are going against the status quo. That isn't acceptable to them.

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • Niceguy MyeyeNiceguy Myeye Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I'm surprised that no one has mentioned that most receipts today are printed with thermal ink. After a month and a half, they're all blank slips of paper anyways. There were times I was concerned about some preorders I did because the receipt they printed for me was totally blank by the time the game came out :P

    I suppose you could ask them to reprint it IF you paid with a credit or debit card, but if you paid in cash, after 2 months, you won't have anything that's proof even if you saved your receipt.

  • amateurhouramateurhour Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Henroid wrote: »
    This is one of the most seething threads I've read here.

    I think we all understand that Sony is not legally wrong to enforce this.

    However, the point people are trying to make is that they are going against the status quo. That isn't acceptable to them.

    Actually, if every other company has documented cases of going against this policy, even if it's in their warranty doesn't that create precedent?

    Here's what I do...
    The Vac - My Science Fiction Epic
    Fortune Pancakes - My Gag-A-Day Comic
  • scootchscootch Registered User
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    I dunno.. I've never had to provide a receipt for my nintendo systems... ever.

    TF2 stats
    PSN: super_emu
    Xbox360 Gamertag: Emuchop
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Henroid wrote: »
    This is one of the most seething threads I've read here.

    I think we all understand that Sony is not legally wrong to enforce this.

    However, the point people are trying to make is that they are going against the status quo. That isn't acceptable to them.

    I wouldn't say that not requiring a receipt for warranty is the status quo as far as consumer electronics is concerned. If you're looking just at video game consoles, maybe, but I'm pretty sure if you had a TV or a computer that just stopped working, you'd need a receipt to get them fixed.

    xmassig2.gif
  • abducensabducens __BANNED USERS
    edited December 2007
    And lets not all turn our noses up here folks... the only reason Microsoft streamlined the warranty proccess is becuase they had a mountain of broken 360's and a pissed off userbase with alternatives to their product. Have you ever called Microsoft tech support for anything other than your 360? Not fun.

    Your wrong. Microsoft streamlined their process because they are a big ole cuddly gamer friendly teddy bear.

    Nope, nothing to do with .. eh .. well it rhymes with "crass maction raw-boot." Warranty Scmarranty, they say, we just love our gamer friends so much!

  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Zhu-Li, do the thing! Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    abducens wrote: »
    And lets not all turn our noses up here folks... the only reason Microsoft streamlined the warranty proccess is becuase they had a mountain of broken 360's and a pissed off userbase with alternatives to their product. Have you ever called Microsoft tech support for anything other than your 360? Not fun.

    Your wrong. Microsoft streamlined their process because they are a big ole cuddly gamer friendly teddy bear.

    Nope, nothing to do with .. eh .. well it rhymes with "crass maction raw-boot." Warranty Scmarranty, they say, we just love our gamer friends so much!

    Good ole helpful abducens.

    3DS: 0344-9335-6762
  • abducensabducens __BANNED USERS
    edited December 2007
    Sorry, had to get my really, really, really, really, really effective trolling in for the day. Really.

  • ArcSynArcSyn Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Henroid wrote: »
    This is one of the most seething threads I've read here.

    I think we all understand that Sony is not legally wrong to enforce this.

    However, the point people are trying to make is that they are going against the status quo. That isn't acceptable to them.

    I wouldn't say that not requiring a receipt for warranty is the status quo as far as consumer electronics is concerned. If you're looking just at video game consoles, maybe, but I'm pretty sure if you had a TV or a computer that just stopped working, you'd need a receipt to get them fixed.

    Phillips was willing to fix my TV based on the manufacture date on my SN without receipt.

    Dell (at least, and I'm sure most companies do) tracks sales dates and warranty periods based on the service code, which is especially easy when you custom-order online. One phone call and I have a replacement headed my way with a pre-paid waybill to send the broken item back.

    steam_sig.png
    Backloggery XBox Live: ArcSyn 3DS: 1805-2274-4550 (Jonathan) WiiU NNID: ArcSyn

    GIFT GET GIFS
  • abducensabducens __BANNED USERS
    edited December 2007
    I've read through this thread and I apologize if this has already been addressed, but I didn't see it ...

    But isn't the original warranty only a 90 day warranty anyway? So if the thing was bought last March like it says in the OP and just died here in December, what difference does it make?

  • HenroidHenroid Nobody Nowhere fastRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    ArcSyn wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    This is one of the most seething threads I've read here.

    I think we all understand that Sony is not legally wrong to enforce this.

    However, the point people are trying to make is that they are going against the status quo. That isn't acceptable to them.

    I wouldn't say that not requiring a receipt for warranty is the status quo as far as consumer electronics is concerned. If you're looking just at video game consoles, maybe, but I'm pretty sure if you had a TV or a computer that just stopped working, you'd need a receipt to get them fixed.

    Phillips was willing to fix my TV based on the manufacture date on my SN without receipt.

    Dell (at least, and I'm sure most companies do) tracks sales dates and warranty periods based on the service code, which is especially easy when you custom-order online. One phone call and I have a replacement headed my way with a pre-paid waybill to send the broken item back.

    See, now that's how it is done!

    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
    PA Lets Play Archive - Twitter - Blog (6/15/14)
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Drez wrote: »
    People need to learn, both here and in the Rock Band thread, that it is not necessarily "right" or even ethical to exercise the full extent of your legal rights.

    Simply saying "well, I'm legally entitled to" does not absolve you morally or otherwise. Furthermore, this just creates a bad image for those aware of the problem, and I would suggest that anything adding to Sony's already pisspoor image is a "wrong" action or policy on their part.

    But I thought law was what we used to base our ethical judgments on! My perception of government is crumbling.
    Spoiler:

  • MuttonChopsMuttonChops Registered User
    edited December 2007
    Henroid wrote: »
    This is one of the most seething threads I've read here.

    I think we all understand that Sony is not legally wrong to enforce this.

    However, the point people are trying to make is that they are going against the status quo. That isn't acceptable to them.

    The status quo? Warranty coverage is being denied due to non-transferability all the time, for any type of product. Not everyone decides to post about it on the internet though because it's that common of an occurence. I'm not sure what the percentage of enforced vs. unenforced is, but through my time as Inbound-Call Customer Service Rep I'm willing to bet that the percentage of enforced is way higher when the Warrantor knows they're not dealing with the Warrantee. I've had to deny coverage due to non-transferability and I've personally be denied coverage for the same reason. I bought a car secondhand, the original owner had put all new tires on it to help it sell. Turned out one of those tires was faulty. Went to Canadian Tire where it was bought and they wouldn't cover it when I told them I had just bought the car. I waited a day, went back when there was someone different working the front desk and instead of mentioning I had just bought the car or giving him my name, I gave just the car's license plate number. He looked it up, verified that the tire was still within the warranty date, and replaced it. He did not verify who I was or my eligibilty. If they had I would have been denied again. This type of scenario happens a lot. When this type of thing goes unenforced it's either because someone isn't doing their job correctly, they don't know the difference, they just don't care, or they are entitled to give a certain amount of goodwill per day.

    The Wii warranty is a bit more lenient in that it's worded in this way: "The original purchaser is entitled to this warranty only if the date of purchase is registered at point of sale or the consumer can demonstrate, to Nintendo's satisfaction, that the product was purchased within the last 12 months." The original purchaser is not limited to a bill of sale or receipt.

    muttonchops.png
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Henroid wrote: »
    This is one of the most seething threads I've read here.

    I think we all understand that Sony is not legally wrong to enforce this.

    However, the point people are trying to make is that they are going against the status quo. That isn't acceptable to them.

    The status quo? Warranty coverage is being denied due to non-transferability all the time, for any type of product.

    I don't know what happens out there, honestly, but I have always been under the impression (and assume that most people here were as well) that warranty coverage applied to the original INTENDED owner, not the physical purchaser. The idea that if something is bought FOR some one else, that some one else is denied a warranty seems to be horribly wrong.

    georgersig.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    That doesn't mean they aren't allowed to, though.

    Yup.

    Which is why there is no pointin fightingthe warranty, and people should simply be more informed instead.

    georgersig.jpg
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    That doesn't mean they aren't allowed to, though.

    Yup.

    Which is why there is no pointin fightingthe warranty, and people should simply be more informed instead.

    I don't know if you're being sarcastic, but yeah, that's absolutely correct.

    xmassig2.gif
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Honestly, though, is there any way we can get this out to the media (even a semi-major gaming blog)?

    I don't care about Sony's public perception, I justthink that people should be WARNED that any Sony products that they give or recieve as gifts this Christmas lose their warranties as soon as they are given.

    It's not limited to sony. It could've happened with any of the consoles.

    But Sony is the only one on record enforcing it.

    That doesn't mean they aren't allowed to, though.

    Yup.

    Which is why there is no pointin fightingthe warranty, and people should simply be more informed instead.

    I don't know if you're being sarcastic, but yeah, that's absolutely correct.

    I have no idea either, honestly.



    I am entirely serious about getting this on to some kind of news site, though. Regardless of how long that clause has been in the warranty, the fact that they are now enforcing it is an INPORTANT consideration for people to make if they were planning on buying anyone a PSP or PS3 this holiday season.

    georgersig.jpg
  • ghost_master2000ghost_master2000 Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    so is it still just because of not having the receipt? Since it was apparently purchased at best buy, why not just have that person go have them make another copy of the receipt? Someone on the first page said best buy does that.

    I realize that's not the point, but if you want a working ps3 you gotta do what you gotta do.

  • MuttonChopsMuttonChops Registered User
    edited December 2007
    I don't know what happens out there, honestly, but I have always been under the impression (and assume that most people here were as well) that warranty coverage applied to the original INTENDED owner, not the physical purchaser. The idea that if something is bought FOR some one else, that some one else is denied a warranty seems to be horribly wrong.

    I was under that assumption too until I was harshly disabbused of it by having Canadian Tire throw a non-transferable warranty in my face. I thought it was pretty shady. But it didn't hurt to try and it gave me the not-so-honest way around it.


    I know I've been defending the warranty in this case, but I'm just arguing the facts (as I see them) of the matter. Personally, I also think the warranty should be for the end user and not the original purchaser.

    muttonchops.png
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited December 2007
    I don't know what happens out there, honestly, but I have always been under the impression (and assume that most people here were as well) that warranty coverage applied to the original INTENDED owner, not the physical purchaser. The idea that if something is bought FOR some one else, that some one else is denied a warranty seems to be horribly wrong.

    I was under that assumption too until I was harshly disabbused of it by having Canadian Tire throw a non-transferable warranty in my face. I thought it was pretty shady. But it didn't hurt to try and it gave me the not-so-honest way around it.


    I know I've been defending the warranty in this case, but I'm just arguing the facts (as I see them) of the matter. Personally, I also think the warranty should be for the end user and not the original purchaser.

    I don't think anyone has argued that the wording of the warranty is ANY different, though.

    And Algertman CAN'T be held accountable for not knowing the warranty, because it is INSIDE of the box, not on the outside of it. By the time he took possession of it, and opened it, it was too late.



    A company refusing to warranty a second-hand item is fair, IMO, but refusing to warranty an item that was given brand new as a gift is an unacceptable practise, in my opinion.

    They could specify in the warranty "Some parts of product are exempt from coverage, including (but not limited to) the controllers, the powercable, and the entire left side of the unit." It would still be just as binding (however binding that is) but it would still be something not worth puttingup with.

    georgersig.jpg
  • MuttonChopsMuttonChops Registered User
    edited December 2007
    I am entirely serious about getting this on to some kind of news site, though.

    I think the OP has been way too vague in his story to try and blow this up over the internets. His update consisted of "I spoke to the manager and he hung up on me". No details. There's been a lack of detail over all. Several people in this thread have offered advice or courses of action about how to get a copy of the receipt and try again, which I think probably would have worked, but there's been no reply as to whether or not he's actually tried them. When's he's tried every recourse and documented his actions in detail, with no satisfactory resolution, then maybe a big deal could be made of this.



    *EDIT* I stress the word "maybe" because this type of thing is an incredibly common, day to day, same shit different pile, type of issue that customer service deals with. The only reason why a big deal could be made of it is because it includes the words "Sony" and "PS3". The internets loves that shit. Replace those two words with "Coleman"and "Barbecue" and no-one would give a fuck.

    muttonchops.png
Sign In or Register to comment.