Dead pixel = no fault

Associate
Joined
30 Jul 2003
Posts
14
Not a happy bunny here, just got my brand new OCUK digimate monitor and its got a dead pixel bang in the centre of the screen.
So when i phone up to get it replaced i get the "sorry its not covered as a fault".
So let me get this right ive just payed for a brand new monitor expecting it to be fully working (as with any other NEW product you buy). Now the reson i expected it to be FULLY working is no were on the ocuk or digimate site does it say ANYTHING about this.
Now i can send it back as unwanted and get a refund but im sure theyll want me to post it to them at MY cost.

Seems like a great way to do bussiness

*rant over (for now)*
 
Do a bit of a search and you will find it is the same with all of the cheap screens. You do not get a no Pixel warranty with any of them. You will need to have about 5 dead pixels for them to change the screen. Luckily there is a 7 day distance selling rule that means you can return your screen for a refund upto 7 days after purchase.
 
jezzag said:
Do a bit of a search and you will find it is the same with all of the cheap screens. You do not get a no Pixel warranty with any of them. You will need to have about 5 dead pixels for them to change the screen. Luckily there is a 7 day distance selling rule that means you can return your screen for a refund upto 7 days after purchase.

Hi there

7 day rule is only valid as long as you inform the Etailor in writing, and the product is shipped back in "as new" condition, plus the 7 day rule is not valid for software.
 
I know you dont get a no pixel warranty NOW but the least they could do is put it somewere on 1 of there websites to let people know what were buying.
 
RabNo1 said:
I know you dont get a no pixel warranty NOW but the least they could do is put it somewere on 1 of there websites to let people know what were buying.

Surely if it's not on their it means there isnt one? Can you really expect all e-tailers to write everything that they dont do?
 
I would when its something as inportant as that, dont you think?? or are u a sucker and enjoy being ripped off?

I would expect to see it on there site as lcd screens seem to be the only product on earth were a manufaturer/retailer can away with something like this.. I mean its not as if it not going to be noticed it is THE most inprotant part of the product and they can get away with selling faulty goods.

Think ill go design mysellf a product then make a law i can sell them even if they dont completely work. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I know where you are coming from. Personally i feel that a dead pixel on a monitor is a faulty product also. However, everyone (apart from you until recently) tends to be aware that these panels arent replaced because of dead pixels.
 
Gibbo said:
Hi there

7 day rule is only valid as long as you inform the Etailor in writing, and the product is shipped back in "as new" condition, plus the 7 day rule is not valid for software.



In writing as in letter, fax and Email.
7 days from the day you recieve it.
Refunds should be paid within 30 days.
 
I hate the dead pixel malarky as well.... how they can justfy selling something that, ok may not have been like that when assembled, but can at any time get this problem is un-acceptable.

Imagine buying a car, but the dealer saying, well the engine may only fire on 3 cylinders instead of 4 but there's nothing we can do about that. Balls! There'd be a hanging. Just as the engine is integral to the car, the panel is intergral to a disaplay!

Sorry, we've made these products but they don't work 100% but give me ~£300 of your money regardless.

I know that 90% of people will never get this problem, but that's still not fair for the people that do. And this whole, what colour is it, is it a sub-pixel, are there more than 20 on the screen is just a joke.

IMO! :)
 
I can imagine the bain of all etailers is the Distance Selling Regs and dead pixels, I wonder how many returns get pumped out to new customers as new?

I am sure that some of the more unscrupulous etailers do it (how many do you see selling monitors with dead pixels as managers specials, etc. - not many).

If you don't want to have to risk a dead pixel and the subsequent return at your own expense under the DSR, or as an etailer you don't want monitor returns just because of dead pixels, the solution is simple:

1. As a customer do not buy from an etailer who will not check the item first or guarantee no dead pixels.

2. As an etailer, don't sell any monitors that don't have a zero dead pixel guarantee.

If only the world were so simple.... :D
 
if i bought a monitor with a dead pixel i'd feel ripped off.

When you come to sell the item you yourself have to sell it far less because of the defect, yet we get shafted when we buy new.
 
yeah dead pixel thing is joke. its new should be perfect but alas the makers can get away with upto 3 dead pixels and its not classed as there problem. thing is most people dont know this and that makes it worse as when they find out its to late.
 
Gibbo said:
Hi there

7 day rule is only valid as long as you inform the Etailor in writing, and the product is shipped back in "as new" condition, plus the 7 day rule is not valid for software.
Not true.

The 7-day rule absolutely DOES apply to software, provided it is not unsealed by the consumer.

Goods do NOT have to be in "as new" condition. The consumer must be given reasonable opportunity to examine the goods, and in many cases, that will mean opening and trying the goods. The "as new" thing is tried on by many retailers, and so long as they don't get challenged by it, they'll get away with it. But be under no illusion - it is NOT what the Distance Selling Regs say. The DSR requires only that the comsumer :-

- retains possession of the goods
- takes "reasonable care" of them
- either returns them, or makes them available for collection, in accordance with whatever reasonable terms the contract imposes.

If a contract does not include that "as new" requirement, in cannot be imposed afterwards, and if it does include it, it would be struck down under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, because it attempts to limit the consumer's statutory rights under the DSR.

Note : the DSR does not define what "reasonable care" is, and as with "as new", any contractual attempt to define it would be challegeable under the UTCCR, if it attempted to impose a burden on the consumer in contradiction of their statutory rights. It is the perogative of a court to determine what is, and is not, reasonable, in any given case.
 
Last edited:
pastymuncher said:
It's actually 7 working days from the day you recieve it.
Erm, no. Not quite.

It's rather more complicated than that. But the basic provision is 7 working days starting the day AFTER you receive the goods.

However, there are circumstances in which it can be a lot (3 months) longer than that, if the seller did not comply with the requirements on them to provide certain information.

And, in some circumstances, it can be shorter than that (such as if a service has commenced, with the consumer's consent) or, for some goods and services, it doesn't exist at all.

But the basic provision is a full 7 working days, commencing the day after delivery.
 
thefishdude said:
yeah dead pixel thing is joke. its new should be perfect but alas the makers can get away with upto 3 dead pixels and its not classed as there problem. thing is most people dont know this and that makes it worse as when they find out its to late.
Monitors with dead pixels is actually a perfectly reasonable thing to sell, for the simple reason that defectless SO 13406-2 Class I monitors are extremely expensive.

What isn't reasonable, in my view, is that this isn't made very clear to buyers before they buy ... and I'm talking generally, not about OcUK. I haven't looked at their website in this regard, so have no opinion on that. But, generally, it's information which, if present at all, is usually only visible if you go hunting for it, and the typical buyer would only do that if he/she already knew of the problem, and if that were the case, he/she wouldn't need information on it in the first place.


The situation is this. ISO 13406-2 provides definitions for what level of pixel, and sub-pixel, defects fall into different classes (I to IV), but different manufacturers interpret those defintions in different ways, so the exact warranty coverage varies from brand to brand. To know what you're getting for a given brand, you have to check with the manufacturer and, as it varies over time, you have to do it just prior to buying. Class III and IV mionitors are sufficently defect-ridden that they aren't consumer items, so if you buy a domestic monitor, it is almost certain to be Class II.

I have considerable sympathy with retailers over this, because they're caught in the middle. They can't replace monitors that a buyer isn't happy with unless it falls within the manufactuer's warranty guidelines, because the manufacturer won't take it back from the retailer, and the retailer can't afford to get stuck with loads of rejected monitors.

If buyers expected dealers to swallow this cost, one of two things will happen. Either prices on alll monitors will rise to cover the cost of the duff ones they're stuck with, or they'll simply have to stop stocking them at all, and we all go back to CRTs.

So while it's extremely irritating to buy one with too many dodgy pixels, or dodgy pixels in very noticeable locations, there isn't much you can do about it short of buyer a wince-inducing, wallet-puckering Class I monitor ..... or buying from a local shop where you can get them to power up a monitor and visually check it yourself before parting with your cash. But, mail-ordering a monitor is, and is likely to remain, rather like buying a pig in a poke. Pot luck.
 
Lots of good stuff Geoff.

The only thing I could disagree on is that you can get dead-pixel free guarantees from a number of brands as standard, despite their monitors costing no more than their competitior like-for-like, and often employing the same panel.

So more expensive, not necessarily, but I am sure that most people would rather pay an extra £20 quid or so to guarantee having a fully working monitor with all pixels present and correct.
 
Geoff said:
Not true.

The 7-day rule absolutely DOES apply to software, provided it is not unsealed by the consumer.

Goods do NOT have to be in "as new" condition. The consumer must be given reasonable opportunity to examine the goods, and in many cases, that will mean opening and trying the goods. The "as new" thing is tried on by many retailers, and so long as they don't get challenged by it, they'll get away with it. But be under no illusion - it is NOT what the Distance Selling Regs say. The DSR requires only that the comsumer :-

- retains possession of the goods
- takes "reasonable care" of them
- either returns them, or makes them available for collection, in accordance with whatever reasonable terms the contract imposes.

If a contract does not include that "as new" requirement, in cannot be imposed afterwards, and if it does include it, it would be struck down under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, because it attempts to limit the consumer's statutory rights under the DSR.

Note : the DSR does not define what "reasonable care" is, and as with "as new", any contractual attempt to define it would be challegeable under the UTCCR, if it attempted to impose a burden on the consumer in contradiction of their statutory rights. It is the perogative of a court to determine what is, and is not, reasonable, in any given case.

Beat me to it. I personally love having this debate with retailers then going to the DSR "legal" documentation and hearing their jaw drop.
 
I did replace my CRT with a TFT a while back and was lucky not to have any problems, but the dead pixel thing nearly put me off buying a TFT completely. Having a dead pixel in the middle of the screen like the OP would be a severe distraction (and disappointment)...hope the OP gets something sorted out.
 
Back
Top Bottom