... regardless of the fact that the part works? Seems doubtful anyone is operating T&Cs that allows them to take your expensive working parts and replace them with cheap working parts so they can sell the expensive parts for profit.
What law exactly is being broken?
- Thread starter robfosters
- Start date
and even if they were it would probably fall under 'unfair terms'.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,515
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Again.
State of the art parts have warranty. There's no reason the customer ends up with a worse GPU in any scenario.
Last edited by a moderator:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,768
- Location
- Auckland
When a customer hands over their equipment to another party there are normally a number of obligations which both parties agree to. It is not unimaginable - having drafted several of these for a very large chain of stores in the UK - that part of that agreement allows for the replacement of components at the engineer's discretion and without a requirement for parity of either cost or specification. In simpler language, the engineer could, depending on the arrangement and within reason, do whatever he felt necessary to fix the problem.
I'm actually more interested in what the personal insult said rather than the rest of what you said
If you have written support contracts that allow the repair person to remove high-end parts that are working and replace them with low-end parts that have inferior performance, keeping the high-end part, then you are part of the problem. Please let me know which "large chain of stores" you wrote these from so I can avoid like the plague.
I'm actually more interested in what the personal insult said rather than the rest of what you said
It wasn't so much a personal insult as it was a more emphatic one-word synonym for "rubbish". Apparently too strong for our genteel mods but a common word with which you will be familiar.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,768
- Location
- Auckland
I feel we're at loggerheads over something we both agree on. The important thing is that agreements can often provide the engineer/support person/High Street Retailer with permission to do a large amount of things, flexing reasonableness but not breaking it. Me being 'part of the problem' ignores, of course, all the other aspects which go into these arrangements, most of which favour the customer, but I'll let that slide.
Does it start with a C or an S?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,768
- Location
- Auckland
Thank you, darling
I suspect there's a very big difference to being able to replace parts and being able to replace parts that result in both a financial loss and reduced capability of the product.
Isn't it like the difference between dropping your Ferrari off to be fixed as the engine is knackered and them replacing it with a Ferrari engine versus replacing it with something out a Mondeo?
Isn't it like the difference between dropping your Ferrari off to be fixed as the engine is knackered and them replacing it with a Ferrari engine versus replacing it with something out a Mondeo?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,732
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
No because there wasn't anything wrong with the engine in the first place.
It's more like removing a plug lead and the company replaces the Ferrari engine with a Mondeo engine.
Short version:
There was nothing wrong with the graphics card in the OP, it was a simple fault set up by an 'Engineer'.
What would happen to the guy anyway in this day and age... Community service, a fine. It is probably well worth it for him.
Until they start coming out with proper punishments for these people to at least deter it will continue.
Until they start coming out with proper punishments for these people to at least deter it will continue.
That's definitely true. It's often still profitable even with the risk of being caught and getting a paltry fine.
That and a lot of bad publicity letting lots of people know he was a thief and con artist. Free Market - fixing problems since 1776!