Jump to content


Breitling Watch Agreement is it enforceable?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5055 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Breitling watches manufacture a particular watch which transmits an emergency signal when operated. This signal can then be picked up by aircraft and rescue services which constantly monitor the frequency, to find the person in need of rescue. The Emergency watch is generally sold for around £4500 through authorised retailers. Before a retailer is allowed to sell you the watch, you are required to sign a Agreement. In other words you can only buy it if you sign.

 

The Agreement gives you one or two important benefits, but in my opinion, subjects you to a number of substantial limitations. I have copied the Agreement below and wonder if anyone would like to pick it to bits and attempt to answer the questions I have raised at the end.

 

CONDITIONS OF SALE

 

The BREITLING EMERGENCY watch is equipped with atransmitter that operates on the 121.5 MHz aeronautical distress frequency. Misuse of this transmitter will disrupt air traffic as well as the activities of rescue organisations. For security reasons, the sale of the BREITLING EMERGENCY is subject to the undertaking on the part of the purchaser to comply with the following provisions.

 

1. The BREITLING EMERGENCY can be sold and used only by individuals who have been informed and have accepted the terms and conditions of sales and the restrictions on use described in this document and in the EMERGENCY INFORMATION booklet.

 

2. The transmitter cannot be activated, except in clear situations of distress occurring exclusively in the context of aeronautical activities - by pilots or passengers of planes, helicopters, balloons, hot air ballooons, airships, gliders, hang-gliders, para-gliders, ultra light aircraft and by skydivers.

 

3. Any misuse or use outside the aeronautical context of the BREITLING EMERGENCY transmitter watch may involve penalties and lead to substantial financial expenses, in addition to the cost of rescue operations provoked by the signal of the transmitter, which shall be borne by the user. The owner of the BREITING EMERGENCY shall be fully responsible for the consequences of any misuse of the transmitter, including by third party. Neither BREITLING SA nor the distributor or seller can be held responsible for any misuse of the transmitter.

 

4. If the BREITLING EMERGENCY transmitter is used without distress, negligently, accidentally, unjustifiably or outside the aeronautical context, the reconditioning cost of the transmitter shall be borne by the owner of the watch, whether the watch is covered by warranty or not. The purchaser is informed that such reconditioning cost is at least equivalent to half the suggested retail price of the BREITLING EMERGENCY watch.

 

5. In the event of legitimate use of the transmitter, justified by a situation of the distress in the aeronautical contect and certified by an official rescue organisation, the BREITLING EMERGENCY watch shall be replaced at no cost in favour of the owner mentioned in this document.

 

6. The purchaser is informed that the function of the BREITLING EMERGENCY watch is to facilitated the location of the individual in distress but does not activate rescue operations.

 

7. The purchaser communicates to BREITLING SA the information requested below and undertakes to inform BREITLING SA of any change of ownership, theft, loss or destruction of the watch whose serial number appears on this document. Such information shall be used in compliance with Swiss data protection law and shall only be communicated to third parties nin order to protect BREITLING SA or the sellers' interest for the purposes of enforcing the terms and conditions of this agreement.

 

-----------------------------------

 

So, if you sign this agreement , you agree not to use it unless the cause of your distress relates to aeronautical use. In other words, if you suffer serious life threatening distress ie: lost at sea, broken leg on a mountain, heart attack at home etc etc, you have agreed not to operate the radio signal. If you subsequently choose to operate it, you will be liable for 'substantial financial expenses & the cost of the rescue operations'.

 

Questions:

1. If your life is saved after non aeronatical rescue, the agreement subjects you to huge expense. How? How much? To whom?

 

2. If you buy the watch secondhand on ebay, you wont have signed the agreement. Therefore as you have not accepted the terms of the agreement, are you still subject to it, or is the original buyer subject to it?

 

The only benefits of the agreement appears to be that in the event of aeronautical emergency, Breitling will replace your watch free. And they obviously hold the agreements on a database, so if the watch is stolen, you might get it back one day.

 

The bad bits are the consequences/ liabilities the original owner has agreed to, in the event the transmitter is operated. I certainly dont want to feel obliged to consider the ageement before/if I need to send a distress signal. I also, dont want to be liable if anybody I sell my watch to, operates the transmitter against the terms of the agreement.

Edited by Its WAR

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

The agreement is pretty standard, is basically shifts the responsibility for improper use. You may recall issues where marine distress beacons have been traced to tops of wardrobes. or in the boot of a car. Since the activations were cause by improper use, those who had the devices (and activated them either directly or indirectly) were either let off with a warning (and the item confiscated) or if there was a genuine fault, a report sent to the manufacturers. I do recall a case a few years ago where someone was fined unter the Communications Acts for transmitting a on distress frequency and causing an alert (he was close to the see, but 1 mile inland. He was fined £2,500/

 

He didn't sign an agreement! 8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I buy and sell these watches as a part of my business. The issue is one of ultimate liability under the agreement. Can Breitling for instance somehow sue you? Afterall, you have an agreement with them. You dont have an agreement with the RNLI and I am sure they would be thrilled if they had a successful rescue. Or in my case, I watched a navy helicopter hover over the sea with a searchlight a mile away from my location. Had I of been wearing my emergency watch at the time, I could have saved the tax payer 15 minutes of heli fuel and saved myself a rather long swim ashore.

 

The question is whether any such agreement has any validity whether or not you sign it?

 

I realise the watch should not be activated to show off to your mates at the pub. I just object to being forced to agree never to use the watch in anything other than a aeronautical emergency. I guess more people die in non aeronautical emergencies and I wish to wear and be free to use my transmitter without having to concedrn myself about whether I am breaching an agreement with Breitling, and having made the agreement I am then in the firing line for Breitling to somehow sue me if I survive.

 

Of course, in the event of a real rescue using the watch, you can be certain Breitling will milk the publicity for millions (whether or not an aeronautical emergency or other) Just imagine if Steve Fossett was able to operate his. Or the Brit who capsized his yacht in the Southern Ocean and was rescued from his upturned hull after a few days. His floating transmitter was 100s miles away. Things would have been different if he had the watch on. He would have breached an agreement which could have cost him £1000s.

 

So, the watch cant be used in a non aeronautical emergency, yet we all know , we would operate the transmitter anyway. The rescuers would be thrilled. So whats the point of the clause? and should we sign the agreement, or just buy secondhand from ebay in order not to have to sign the agreement? but having bought secondhand, what are the implications for the original owner, having just sold his watch on ebay?

 

Breitling wont say, but have they ever prosecuted?

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Breitling wont say, but have they ever prosecuted?

 

Of course they won't. (1) They cannot (2) They have no lawful rights to do so. (3) This would be a breach of contract only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Breitling, as a corporate entity, would not be in a position to prosecute anyone. They could sue, but they would have no cause of action unless they had been charged for a non-aeronautical rescue and sought to recover the cost from a watch owner.

 

Apart from the negative publicity such a case would generate, in this country at least, Search And Rescue providers do not usually charge for their services. In countries where a charge may be made, such as France, it is usual to insure against the possibility of getting a bill.

 

I can recall that a few occasions where members of the two-winged master race, after a negligent SARBE activation, were invited by the Stn Cdr to make a substantial contribution to charity, but have never heard of a civilian being subject to any action other than censure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi There

 

As I read it and understand. If you activate the watch and the emergency services are alerted then you will be liable for any costs associated with this, if the service decide to charge, which is unlikely in a real emergency when life is at risk. In the event of false activation they may charge.

 

I had an accidental activation of a 406 ELT and turned it off straight away, then called the aviation Distress and Diversion service through the local airfield, and they said they would let the services know and prevent any search starting, they appreciated the call.

 

Breitling say they will repair the watch in an activation free of charge if activated in an aeronautical context. ( this will be done as they will get good publicity in the aviation community ) If activated when you're on top of a snowy mountain with a broken leg after a bit of walking, Breitling are not under any obligation to re-set the watch free of charge. Not sure if any stories are around about this. I think that would be the least of your worries when awaiting rescue.!!

 

It would be good to realise that activating the SOS on the watch will not necessarily start a search and rescue. 121.5 will not trigger the Satellite alert service any more. It's now done on 406 Mhz - 121.5 is still used as a monitoring and homing frequency by aircraft and communications. The 121.5 beacon will assist in locating the source when the rescue aircraft/ vessels are in the vicinity.

 

I think result of prosecution and fines will depend on the country it's activated in.

 

Flyingdr.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't read it that Breitling would prosecute and it doesn't strike me as unreasonable. In plain English it boils down to:

1. We need to make sure you have read this

2. It's sold for the stated purpose

3. Use it for anything else and you are liable for the consequences

4. The warranty doesn't cover improper use

5. The warranty does cover proper use and extends to a free replacement

6. The device transmits a distress signal but doesn't guarantee rescue

7. They'd like to know if it changes hands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but there is a breach of contract if used in a non aeronautical use and Breitling could sue. They will no doubt be under a similar requirement from the transmiter maker. If you dont sign the contract, ie bought secondhand....are you then free to operate it under any distress without carring about Brietling?

 

And Hightail, the agreement doesnt cover improper use as far as the guarantee is concerned. Thats the same in most guarantees. But by signing the agreement you agree to substantial penalties if you break the conditions.

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but there is a breach of contract if used in a non aeronautical use and Breitling could sue. .....

 

I would be surprised if they did. On what grounds would they be able to sue if a life was at risk. If you were stranded in the middle of an ocean I would activate and say 'sue me'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But by signing the agreement you agree to substantial penalties if you break the conditions

 

I can't see where it says that. It does warn there may be penalties for improper use but where does it say it's Breitling that will impose them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Ofcom who are charged with looking after the radio spectrum in the UK and they who would prosecute for misuse of emergency frequencies. How a watch maker could suppose that they would be entitled to do so is not comprehensible.

 

It would be on a comparison with Ford suing anyone who broke the speed limit in one of their cars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The last three post have it in a nutshell. How can Breitling sue? So whats the point of the agreement? I guess its Ofcom who should answer under what circumstances the transmiter can be used. But nevertheless, there would be a breach of an agreement. Unless the watch is secondhand, in which case, Ofcom and not Breitling are the boys in blue anyway.

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Hi There

 

It would be good to realise that activating the SOS on the watch will not necessarily start a search and rescue. 121.5 will not trigger the Satellite alert service any more. It's now done on 406 Mhz - 121.5 is still used as a monitoring and homing frequency by aircraft and communications. The 121.5 beacon will assist in locating the source when the rescue aircraft/ vessels are in the vicinity.

 

 

Wot 'e said. unless you're in a seafront pub and a lifeboat is passing with its DF equipment set to 121.5, most likely nothing will happen if you set this watch off. COSPAS/SARSAT no longer monitors this frequency. However it is strange that the documentation referes to aeronautical situations specifically. This can only be some internal policy of Breitling's, to do with their flying assoications. 121.5 is also used for homing signals on EPIRBs and man-overboard systems so the frequency itself is used in several types of device.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The transmitter allows search and rescue to locate you, but yes, you have to be able to radio or phone them first to tell them you are in trouble....unless you are lucky enough to be in range of an aircraft or boat that is monitoring the frequency.

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the agreement!

 

- it warns you that you might face penalties if you use it - not that Breitling will sue you, but that whoever tries to rescue you might (hardly surprising if they spend £5k or whatever trying to rescue you!)

 

- it lets you know that it is expensive to reset and it will cost you a lot to have it done if you set it off when you shouldnt

 

and here's the biggie:

 

- if you use it properly Breitling will recommission it for free.

 

So... it's a good agreement, not a bad one. Just because it warns you there are consequences for your actions, doesnt mean Breitling will sue you!!

Edited by badfelafel
additions
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not exactly. It is our undertaking never to use the transmitter without first suffering a life threatening emergency caused by an aeronautical accident. We have therefore entered into a contract with Breitling and we breach that contract if we need rescue from any other life threatening accident.

 

The vibe of the agreement is dont use it unless you have an aeronautical accident and if you use it under other circumstances the penalties are extreme. This is simply untrue. No rescue service will send you a bill for £1000s after you have properly used the transmitter and they have made a life saving rescue. Indeed, using the transmitter might effect a cheaper rescue in terms of fuel and hours.

 

Its a dumb agreement. And you just watch Breitling milk the publicity at your expense, especialy if you survive.

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...