Digimate (DGM) Monitors

[perplexity]

 

It is far from clear that this is correct

 

The 'burden of proof' falls with the Consumer to justify their complaint and disprove the Trader/Company's comments or position.

in view of this from the EU Directive 1999/44/EC:

 

3. Unless proved otherwise, any lack of conformity which becomes apparent within six months of delivery of the goods shall be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery unless this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the nature of the lack of conformity.

However, the question remains of whether or not an obvious fault would not be immediately evident at the time of delivery, so could not have existed at the time of delivery because of the month it took to "develop".

 

At the end of the day then, you probably would need an independent report (at least) to win the claim.

 

[Neonin]

It's definately the backlight if it's anything like mine....

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]25088[/ATTACH]

 

I'm curious to see that photo, how long does it take before an attatchment gets approved?

[CarlosFundango]

I just used the insert mage icon on the quick reply.

[Neonin]

Yeah but for me it's just a link with "attatchment pending approval"

[Neonin]

So I just received a telephone call from a representative at DGM, offering to collect the monitor to be tested after all. However, they say that if it does turn out to be "customer damage" then they would of course have to charge me for any repairs.

 

The problem I now have, and I was perfectly honest with the person on the phone, is that with all the hassle and lies that have gone on with this company I simply do not trust them to test the unit independantly. It would be in their financial interest in more ways than one to claim it as customer damage, even though I'd have no way of knowing whether they even bothered to look at it.

 

I asked them for a little time to consider and have emailed Trading Standards for advice, but I'd be interested to know what the opinion of people here is too. Do I accept DGM at their word and arrange collection? Or would it be better to get the unit independantly tested and then, assuming it is a manufacturing fault, claim the cost back from them in addition to getting the monitor repaired? Can I even do that after they've offered to pick it up and test it themselves?

[Jasper1965]

An independent assessment will likely cost you £50.

Although I have a rational deep seated mistrust of some of the "most respected" brands and trading names and agree with your worries that once they have it they can say what they want, I can only see one or two ways forward for you.

1) Send it in and have the fault analysed, stipulate that if it is as you aver a manufacturing defect then a repair/replacement is in order BUT if they assert that this fault is caused by the customer then they are to return the unit unrepaired with a signed statement to that effect and a copy of the report diagnosis sheet for you to pass on to an independent tester.

2) Don't agree to pay a repair unless it is capped as a new screen for a £129 monitor may be chargeable at £150 by the manufacturer.

[Neonin]

Thanks for that Jasper, I used your suggestions while on the phone to the Trading Standards Officer who's dealing with my complaint today. He is sending DGM an email today regarding their offer, as soon as he/I get a reply I shall continue to update you all on the progress.

[Neonin]

Ok, so first the letter from TS to DGM:

 

Dear *****,

 

I refer to the existing complaint concerning the above. Please note that the reason for Mr Jenkins delay in contacting you was a result of an illness and also that he wished to discuss the recent complaint developments with Wolverhampton Trading Standards Service.

 

Mr Jenkins informs me that he was contacted by a representative of your Company (******) offering to arrange a collection and assessment of the monitor in question.****** informed Mr Jenkins that if the monitor is found to be faulty; a free of charge repair will be arranged but should the monitor show signs of customer misuse or damage then a chargeable repair will be actioned.

 

Taking these recent developments into account and the lack of faith Mr Jenkins has in your Company when considering the complaint history, I have advised him to consider the commission of an independent inspection to confirm the nature of the monitor fault. Should the report to be in Mr Jenkins favour he will seek reimbursement for the cost of the report from your Company and an immediate replacement. If you have any objections to this course of action please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

I look forward to receiving your comments within 7 days. If no response is received I will advise Mr Jenkins to arrange the independent inspection without further delay.

 

Yours sincerely

 

******

Consumer Advice Officer

Trading Standards Service

Wolverhampton City Council

DGM then got back to TS without bothering to copy me in on it:

 

Good afternoon ******,

Unfortunately we are unable to offer any reimbursement or compensation under the manufacturer’s warranty.

 

We can arrange to have the unit collected for assessment, if there proves to be a manufacturing defect then we will repair free of charge. If the fault proves to be a result of damage or misuse then we will contact the customer and offer a chargeable repair. If they do not wish to have a chargeable repair then we will return the unit to them.

 

Kind Regards

 

******

 

Repairtech

Customer Services

Then TS replied:

 

Dear ******,

Thank you for your email concerning Mr Jenkin's complaint, the content of which is noted..

 

Irrespective of whether the manufacturers warranty does not offer the facility of reimbursement for independent reports Mr Jenkin's can still seek the cost of the report from your Company.

Mr Jenkins entered into a contract with your Company who sold him the monitor not the manufacturer. His contract with your Company is governed by the Sales of Goods Act 1979 and has statutory rights for up to 6 years.

 

Our Trading Standards Service have advised Mr Jenkins to consider commissioning an independent report as the photographic evidence submitted to our offices show no signs of cosmetic damage, impact or distress. My investigations have also confirmed that the faults as described by Mr Jenkins and suggested by the photographs of the item could possibly be a screen backlight failure which is a common component failure with monitors. You will note that my expertise do not lie in monitor fault diagnosis and therefore have requested that Mr Jenkins seek an independent report to confirm the fault. The report will also comment on the condition of the monitor prior to delivery which will also confirm if the monitor is damaged in transit.

 

I look forward to your comments concerning the above.

 

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

******

Consumer Advice Officer

Trading Standards Service

Wolverhampton City Council

At this point I emailed TS to point out that I'd had a phone conversation with the people I actually bought the monitor off (eBuyer) and that they said it was their understanding that since DGM replaced the monitor it is no longer their responsibility to deal with the issue under SOGA, as it's not the unit they supplied me that is at fault. Then they sent the following, this time copying me in on it:

 

Good afternoon ******,

 

This is not correct. We are the manufacturer’s warranty repair centre, and we did not sell the unit to the customer. Therefore we are unable to offer the customer reimbursement for an independent report.

 

As stated below, if our engineers confirm there is a manufacturing defect with the unit then we will repair the unit free of charge.

 

Kind Regards

 

******

 

Repairtech

Customer Services

I'm now waiting to see what TS replies, I'm guessing the officer dealing with it has now gone off to research whether DGM or eBuyer is responsible for dealing with this. All fun eh?

[perplexity]

The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 applies to goods supplied but not directly sold by the supplier.

 

It amounts to the same because the Implied terms about quality or fitness are equivalent.

 

This sort of botch is why I am not so keen to urge a buyer to complain to Trading Standards.

 

[Crapstone]

The warranty is an addition to your rights and does not absolve eBuyer of their duty to provide a resolution to your statutory rights so you could chose either as they both should be aiming for the same result. Goods that work and that the consumer is satisfied with. The only botch I see is with eBuyer and DGM passing ther buck . TS have acted as would be expected.

[perplexity]

Wolverhampton Trading Standards Service appear to have failed to tell the difference between the person who sold the goods and the warranty repair centre, with regard to the legislation to apply.

 

What is that, if not a botch?

Edited March 2, 2011 by perplexity
spelling

[Neonin]

On the advice of TS I've just arranged for DGM to pick up the monitor for testing on monday. Will be interesting to see how long it takes them, it better not be another 80 working days like last time! Will update you all when I hear something.

[perplexity]

You keep on saying "DGM", but Repairtech is its own private limited company, not a part of DGM UK LIMITED.

 

In order to enforce a warranty, your claim is against the person (company) the warranty came from.

 

8-)

[Neonin]

Honestly, have you bothered to read ANYTHING properly? Here, let me spell it out for you so you can understand. The person I've been dealing with by email:

 

Harriet

DGM Customer Services

 

Tel: 0871 250 8000

Fax: 0870 495 8234

Email: harriet.colvin@repairtech .co.uk

 

Better?

[perplexity]

Noticing that the replies to Trading Standards declared themselves as

 

Repairtech

Customer Services

 

I looked them up at Companies House.

 

Did you?

 

Repairtech:

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/repairtech

 

DGM UK Limited:

 

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/dgm-uk

 

P.S.

 

If the warranty was granted by DGM, you need to address yourself primarily to them at

 

Unit 1, Chancery Gate Business Centre

Stonefield Way

Ruislip

HA4 0JA

 

with the correspondence copied to Repairtech.

 

If you are lucky there might be somebody there who was taught to read English.

Edited March 6, 2011 by perplexity
P.S.

[Milo611]

I found the information here very useful.

 

i too had problems with my DGM L-2362 monitor when a backlight failed just over a year after I purchased it.

 

No problem I thought, they give a 3 year warranty.

 

I returned the Monitor to my Retailer and DGM agreed to repair it under the terms of the warranty agreement, 7 - 10 days they said, great I thought.

 

Then I waited......and waited..............and waited.

 

 

Phone calls by the Retailer to DGM got the same response each time '7 - 10 days'.

 

emails went unanswered.

 

My retailer gave me the reference number for the repair job and the contact details for DGM, they acknowledged my email and then nothing happened.

 

I emailed again same reponse, same result.

 

Finally I sent a letter, by recorded delivery, giving them 7 days to return my Monitor in working order or I would take the matter to the Smalls Claims Court .

 

SUCCESS! My retailer rang me to say the monitor was back, let us hope it keeps on working.

 

I am aware things can and do go wrong, but a measure of a Company is how they deal with problems that occur, on this score DGM are very poor and I will not be giving them any repeat business or recommending them to any of my friends and family.

 

A copy of my letter (with personal details removed) is included if it helps anyone else in the future who may have a similar problem with DGM.

 

You can also contact them on 020 8839 2285 instead of their expensive premium rate 0871 number.

 

 

DGM (UK) Ltd.,

Digimate House,

1 Chancery Gate Business Centre,

Stonefield Way,

Ruislip,

London.

HA4 0HA

 

**** March 2011

 

 

 

 

Reference: DGH *******

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

My Computer Monitor, a DGM L-2362WD, was returned to you, via my Retailer, ****** Computing, for a Warranty repair. You acknowledged that your company received my Monitor on **** February 2011. Since then, despite repeated telephone calls and emails, from ****** Computing and myself, I have been without my Monitor. Neither has there been any feedback or contact to confirm a possible date of return.

 

I am disappointed, nay appalled, at the lack of progress on this problem.

 

You have now had my monitor for 23 days, ample time for any competent engineer to inspect, diagnose and repair or replace.

 

I have discussed this issue with Trading Standards.

 

Please be advised that time is now of the essence and I expect this matter to be resolved within 7 days by one of the following options:-

 

1. I am to receive my original monitor, properly repaired and fully functioning.

 

2. I receive a fully functioning replacement monitor, of equal or greater quality and value to the original.

 

3. A refund to allow me to purchase a replacement monitor of my own choice.

 

If I do not achieve a satisfactory resolution within the time period stated then I will have no other recourse than to submit a claim via the Small Claims Court and make a written complaint to Trading Standards regarding your failure to deal with this matter in a timely manner.

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

[Neonin]

Thanks for that Milo.

 

Another quick update, TS emailed me on monday to ask if there'd been any progress since the monitor was collected. I replied in the negative, as I had heard nothing out of DGM by then. TS then emailed DGM and received a reply the day after saying the unit was "with the engineers" and DGM would get back to them when they knew something.

 

I wonder how much longer this will drag out...

[Milo611]

Hi Neonin,

 

For what it is worth, I spent over 20 years in a Customer Service environment as an Advisor/Manager/Training Manager.

 

Customers who became angry/threatening/abusive got very little assistance.

 

Those customers, who had a genuine grievance, were assertive, but polite, got their issues resolved fairly rapidly.

 

The biggest failing with with Companies/Service staff is that other customers, the ones who were qquiet and patient, often ended up at the back of the queue, not deliberately, but because it is human nature, staff would deal with the urgent cases and others would be put aside to wait until they had time and, unfortunately become forgotten, gathering dust metaphorically speaking.

 

Be assertive, know your rights, don't be fobbed off.

 

Tell them:-

 

a) What the problem is

b) State what has happened so far and what you have done

c) What you expect them to do

d) Give a reasonable deadline to achieve a resolution

e) State what will happen if they fail

 

Above all be factual and accurate.

 

Always keep records of who/what/where/time/date and what was said, email or Royal mail (recorded delivery, so they cannot deny receiving a letter).

 

If it reaches the stage where you do have to go to the Small Claims Court to get a resolution, the cost of phone calls, letters and Court fees are added to the claim so when you get a judgement in your favour all your costs are reimbursed. Courts like facts, the more the better.

 

I hope you get this sorted soon.

[CarlosFundango]

I have now got my monitor back after nearly two months. Too late. I bought another one and am proceeding with a case in the small claims court. I called them up and emailed them to say if I didn't get my monitor back within 7 days I was going to start legal action, after the 7 days, I then emailed them to say I had started legal action. A day later I got a phone call telling me my monitor would be delivered the next. Strange that.

Anyways, I had bought a new monitor as I couldn't wait 2 months for a repair so I'm proceeding wit the court case. What a Sh**ty company, shi**ty product and shi**ty service.

[Milo611]

"What a Sh**ty company, shi**ty product and shi**ty service."

 

Sorry Carlos, I have to disagree with that.............

 

 

 

'Sh**ty' is far too mild an epithet to describe the service and products provided by DGM!

[Neonin]

Yesterday was four working weeks since the monitor arrived at DGM and just under two weeks since the reply we got saying the monitor was "with the engineers", and surprise surprise I still have not heard anything. I emailed TS about it and they sent off another query today asking for an update. Their reply should be interesting!

[Neonin]

And eargerly-awaited reply, received yesterday, was:

 

Good afternoon,

 

I will request an update from engineering.

 

Kind Regards

 

***

 

DGM

Customer Services

I wonder how long it'll take now for a proper reply...

[Neonin]

Tradings Standards emailed them again today to request another update since it's been 5 weeks now, and received the following reply:

 

Good morning ******,

The unit has been tested by our engineers and they discovered a part is required to complete the repair which I am afraid we do not have in stock. We have ordered an inverter from head office and as soon as stock is available it will be shipped to us and the repair will be completed.

Kind Regards

***

DGM

Customer Services

 

I take that to mean it wasn't customer damage as they tried to fob me off with after all, but if I hadn't got TS in they'd probably have never accepted the unit back for testing. I sent an email to the guy I'm dealing with at TS to ask how long with give them because although it's a different part this is exactly the same thing they said last time and it still took months before I got a new monitor!

[Jasper1965]

I'm with labrat, looking at the pattern it's the backlight or just possibly the inverter it's pretty obvious and easy to spot for anyone who deals with these issues suggest they are simply trying to pass the buck.

 

What kind of fools does this company employ? We can diagnose the fault from a picture on the internet, a one second voltage check across the inverter output would have confirmed what was obvious from the outset in fact if you had simply described the symptoms we'd have come to the same prognosis.

 

With the unit in front of you it would take no more than five minutes to assess, diagnose and confirm this fault, why it took five weeks is beyond me.

 

(Assuming of course that the person charged with doing this had a fundamental level of training which in my experience they simply do not).

 

It's always the customer who suffers because they all too often attempt to baffle the unwitting customer with pseudo electronic terminology and excuses to hide the incompetence of the board swappers.

 

Well done for plugging away at them.

 

 

 

ps Yes by confirming the inverter needs replaced they have admitted the fault is a manufacturers part and not customer damage. If it's the following part number IV185030HX I could get one for tuesday (and I'm not trade) , surprised they don't carry stock as this is a common failure point, no need for an extended wait now IMO.

Edited April 17, 2011 by Jasper1965

[Neonin]

Thanks for that reply Jasper, that was a very interesting read!

 

Considering this is the second unit I've had go back in the ongoing saga and with TS involved, I was amazed it took them 5 weeks to let us know what the fault was. I've sent my contact at TS your views to keep them informed and it will be interesting to see how long it takes before we have to start shooting off more emails to get this sorted.