Request to Include 30 Day Dead Pixel Guarantee in Laptop Sales.

[halox]

It is highly unlikely that you will get a response from an admin, unless you have sent them a PM I guess they might. A full written response from PCS would be ideal, posting audio of a conversation seems a bit uncalled for to me. Were they made aware it was recorded?

I don't see it breaking a specific rule, unless its posted to directly tarnish the reputation of PCS then we would have grounds to delete it. If its posted without any editing I think that would be the fairest way if you do post it.

I think I will leave it private. I have receiced a few pms and sent it that way. If anyone want to hear it. I did not tell them I was recording as the info I was given should be the same irrespective of this. If I did post it I see no reason for an admin to delete it as it clarified what I had suspected all along. It is totally unedited.

It would appear differing stories come out of the pcs staff depending on who responds to the email or takes the call. They are breaking no rules or laws so I reckon leave them be.

 

[nathanjrb]

You should really tell people you're recording them to be honest! Nevermind

 

[keynes]

I think I will leave it private. I have receiced a few pms and sent it that way. If anyone want to hear it. I did not tell them I was recording as the info I was given should be the same irrespective of this. If I did post it I see no reason for an admin to delete it as it clarified what I had suspected all along. It is totally unedited.

It would appear differing stories come out of the pcs staff depending on who responds to the email or takes the call. They are breaking no rules or laws so I reckon leave them be.

Just curious why you decided to record it

 

[DeadEyeDuk]

Aren't companies obliged to inform you that you might be recorded (for training purposes usually?)? Surely that should work both ways?

 

[Rakk]

I did not tell them I was recording as the info I was given should be the same irrespective of this. If I did post it I see no reason for an admin to delete it as it clarified what I had suspected all along. It is totally unedited.

I would have deleted it, mainly because you recorded them without informing them thus I would consider it a breach of their privacy (whether that is correct by law I do not know, but I would consider it a breach of privacy, therefore I would have deleted it - note: those are my views entirely)

 

[tom_gr7]

Yeah i think, if you "secretly" record something and if for example it ends up in court. I'm pretty sure the Judge will be less than impressed and as I know, it won't even hold up as evidence.

 

[keynes]

Yeah i think, if you "secretly" record something and if for example it ends up in court. I'm pretty sure the Judge will be less than impressed and as I know, it won't even hold up as evidence.

I record all of our steam chats. I am sure one day I will use it

 

[DeadEyeDuk]

You aren't allowed to record people without their knowledge unless your last name is Theroux. Them's the rule, and you can't argue with that, because we do not make the rules, this guy does...

 

[DeadEyeDuk]

I record all of our steam chats. I am sure one day I will use it

When recorded for personal use or self-gratification, I think it is allowed...

 

[nathanjrb]

I think it is a tricky subject.

A journalist was once telling me that he recorded a politician without telling them. He didn't publish the audio, just wrote an article. But then the politician tried to sue the paper for damages saying he had been mis-quoted - and THEN he whipped out the recording.

Bit naughty, but covered his back. I suppose it depends entirely on your reasons for it.

Anyway, lets try not to deviate too much from the topic

 

[Annula]

Not sure on recording laws as far as it concerns individuals I believe it's legal to record without the other party knowing, but distributing may be iffy depending on whether there's a public interest in doing so (journalists likely fall back on that). Companies however, are only allowed to record within certain circumstances, outside of that they need permission. Either way I wouldn't post it unless the person you recorded agreed it was fine to do so, regardless of whether you're within your legal rights to do so or not.

Getting conflicting information from a company when there's different customer service staff isn't unexpected either. It may be you spoke to someone more familiar with their entire operation, I may have had my email responded to by someone mainly familiar with the build process, who knows. Either way, I did ask for clarification as to whether they pre-test laptop screens for ISO spec or not prior to the screens been selected for any kind of build.

Regardless of whether they do that or not though, the fact the response mentioned that they do not cherry pick screens would make the pre-test irrelevant for the purposes of whether it would disadvantage non-insured customers. As the only way pre-testing would influence it is if they marked the non-dead pixel screens and selected those specifically any time an insured build was done, which would be cherry picking.

Also, they confirmed that screens tested during QA that are found to have dead pixels, if a customer has insurance are discarded.

I'll wait to see what reply I get, but it does sound like the process of having insurance does not disadvantage those without, at least based on current information.

Still, for the cost I think everyone getting a laptop should pay the £12 for at least the 30 day warranty anyway.

edit: Mostly out of curiosity I had a quick search and turned up this for the uk people and this and this

PS: None of the above is in any way legal advice nor necessarily accurate

 

[halox]

The reason I recorded it was because it was such a touchy subject. There are people who would call me a lair as some people here did not want to hear the truth, whatever common sense was telling them and whatever it may have been. It was purely for myself, that I recorded it.

I did not catch the guys name but he was clear on the questions I asked him. I was sure to push him for answers, whatever they were. Fact is fact and me posting a recording of those may cross the line. Hence the reason for not posting it. I think we have passed that bridge now anyway.

On-wards and upwards!

 

[Boozad]

It was purely for myself, that I recorded it.

Thankfully I did record the conversation so if if it is ok with the admins of the page I will post the video to let everyone hear it for themselves. I will await a reply before I post it either way.

I have receiced a few pms and sent it that way. If anyone want to hear it.

So, purely for yourself. Of course.

Fact is fact and me posting a recording of those may cross the line. Hence the reason for not posting it.

Posting a recording of them may cross the line? What right do you think you have to record anybody without them knowing? You've already crossed a line by recording them, then ran mile behind it by sending that recording to people who sent you PMs.

 

[halox]

It saves people who have doubts getting in touch myself.

It is for myself, but turned out to have a benefit to some others.

Is this you coming up with all that crap again about me having an agenda? The facts came to light. I could not give a dam if you don't like the fact I recorded it.

 

[DeadEyeDuk]

Shoo shoo! Begone! This thread is about the possibility of adding the insurance as standard, not about the state of a laptop where the customer has NOT taken out said insurance.

That is all.

Oh and for me to post silly pictures and pointless comments, but that's true of every thread..it's in the forum T&Cs.

/minimodhatoff

(wait, did I even put it on to start with?)

 

[Rakk]

It saves people who have doubts getting in touch myself.

The point is that Boozad and myself (and I suspect various others) are not convinced you should be recording peoples conversations without their knowledge and then telling people on a public forum that they can listen to it without the acceptance of the other party of the conversation.

But please try to stay to the original point of this thread as DED says.

 

[halox]

What's done is done. You were also not convinced pcs knowingly sent faulty screens to customers too. I am not going to lose any sleep over it. The facts helped people make their decisionon purchasing insurance. It also annoyed a few eople too that their beloved pcs could do such a thing. Let it go now, I have.

 

[PaulH]

Hey All,

Thought i'd throw my reply in here to clarify things as there seems to be a lot of confusion, I shall start at the beginning, are you sitting comfortably?....then we shall begin.

A fair while back, we got a complaint from a customer that received a laptop with a single dead pixel, they were upset, screaming, shouting etc etc. They couldn't and didn't understand that although there was a dead pixel IT IS NOT CLASSED AS A FAULT - as you all seem to have now read the ISO guidelines you will know, certain tolerances have been put in due to the nature of the process when making a screen.

As a goodwill gesture, we replaced the said customers screen free of charge, then had the idea of offering the opportunity for customers (and at this time we were the only ones to do this) to take out a dead pixel warranty - this was put into motion and added to the site.

The majority of chassis come from the manufacturers with the screen already in place, we do not unbox, build up with components to a fully working system and test every one before being put into the warehouse (its simply not feasible), separately ordered screens are also not checked on delivery (after all we couldn't send them back either they aren't classed as faulty).

When the laptop is built, and goes into testing / QC the screen is checked for dead pixels, we use a program that changes background colours and inspect manually - if the orders who have ordered dead pixel warranty have a dead pixel, we change them, then the screen is written off and binned or sold on with the dead pixel described (depending on what screen it is) WE DO NOT REMOVE THESE AND PUT THEM IN OTHER PEOPLES ORDERS THAT DO NOT HAVE A WARRANTY

If in the testing / QC stage a dead pixel is seen on a screen that does not have a dead pixel warranty, we do not change it, we do not have to as it is not faulty - this may sound harsh but we still offer a better option than every other online manufacturer of laptops. If a cluster of pixels that we deem bad e.g. 3 in one area, or even 3 at different points on the screen, we change it (even though this is not over the limit that the ISO standards set out.)

We take the monetary hit if a screen with a dead pixel warranty has a dead pixel, and its not as suggested a couple of pounds, it is a LOT more, in every size and resolution than the cost of the full year warranty you may opt to pay for.

We will not be adding the dead pixel warranty as default to the orders, please don't forget the dead pixel warranty also includes collection and return of the laptop if needed, its not simply the only cost and is totally unfair to people who have already bought and paid extra for the service.

IMHO we already offer more than most manufacturers in regards to this, we feel we are being a lot more than fair and just, we could take the stance, and be perfectly justified in not having any sort of pixel warranty, but we don't - sadly we can never please everyone and never will.

Anything I missed? - Also I have spoken with our Support team etc about this, they should now be uniform in their replies.

p.s. I suggest you read up on recording calls without notifying the person you are speaking to - let alone then distributing that....I request that unless you plan on using it as evidence in a court of law you delete it (but you cant, as you didn't notify the person)

Im closing this now, if you have any other specific questions that genuinely need an answer, bob me a PM through.

 

[moosEh]

All issues should now be covered, closing the thread now.