Where do I stand on this RMA?

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 14:49

Hello there,

I'm here seeking advice on what rights I have and what I can take to sort this problem out,

I recently purchased Radon Intel Core i5 760 2.80GHz @ 4.00GHz Overclocked Bundle around 3 months ago, I've had non-stop random BSOD / Freeze's. I was told by technical support to do many tests etc which I did, I was then advised to send the bundle back for repair. Which I did, I have now been told

(SYSTEM REPAIR: Other (Not Listed), Customer Damaged, Bent pins in CPU socket - irrepairable. Warranty void.)

I have emailed stating I don’t understand how this is possible, as the motherboard came with the CPU in the socket already and I DID NOT remove the cpu from its socket as I did not need to. So if this is true and the pins are bent in the cpu socket then it must have came like it, Since I did not touch the cpu I left it in the socket how it came as I had no reason to remove it, and I don’t see how I can be to blamed for a fault that must have already accrued before I received it.

I then received an email back saying the following.

All CPUs are shipped preinstalled to avoid any possibility of damage. Bundles must pass stability tests before they can leave our department to be shipped - if any pins are bent, they simply would not pass our tests, so there is no possible way that the damage could have occurred whilst the bundle was with us.

I can't really suggest how this could have happened, all I can say is that it definitely did not happen here. It's not a case of us refusing to take responsibility for something that is our fault, it's simply that this could not have happened during assembly and testing.

Basically they are refusing that the fault was caused before I received the product and basically saying there is nothing they can do, I've read some of the DSR / Sale of goods act but I’m here seeking a second opinion on where I stand / what I can do to try sort this issue out, As I don’t feel this is right as it could not of happened while I had it since I did not remove the cpu from its socket.

Also they have shipped it back to me, Should i refuse to sign for it while i find out what legal channels i can take?

Thanks for your time reading this!

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 15:19

Mattyjw said:
I'd take a look on moneysavingexpert.com it will be more relevant than here and the forums will have people who are more used to dealing with this type of situation than anybody here. DSR is 7 days from receiving and sales of goods cover fit for purpose, the problem I can see is you had the system for three months so it's more complicated than if you checked straight away.

www.moneysavingexpert.com is the best place to look for advice I think though.

Thanks for that, I'll ask there as well.

Redmint said:
If the BSODs were happening since you first received the bundle and it passed stability testing then I suppose it could have been damaged when it was being shipped to you, not sure where Overclockers stand in that situation though as it's possibly now too late to claim damages from the courier.

The lockups and bsod were very random could go few days without or have it happen 3-4 times a day, Like I said very random this varied from playing games, browsing the web or even just idle. So maybe it didn’t happen on their 'stability tests' All I know for a fact is that this fault was there before I received the product. Like I said, I'm not too sure where I stand on this and also not sure if I should not sign for the package until I take this further or not.

Alfie said:
This is why you should always build your own systems. The kid on the assembly line will never take as much care as you would on your own build. There is every chance that OCUK's testing was not able to produce a BSOD but I would suspect their mind is made up and you would be best to put this down to experience.

So I should be with a faulty board that wasn’t my fault and be out of pocket for just over £100?

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 15:38

SouthEastBlue said:
Does the i5 even have pins? I was under the impression Intel didn't make CPUs with pins unlike AMD who do.

This is a pic of an i5 CPU, so how could the pins be bent?

*SNIP*

The parts of the CPU that make contact are seperated, it's the motherboard which has 'pins' that touch the flat contact surface of the CPU....

Unless some Intel CPUs are different...

It's the motherboard they have said that has 'bent pins'

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 16:02

nkata said:
I would start by developing a time line of correspondence, telephone calls, emails etc. and how soon this began from recieving the bundle in the first place. What testing you were asked to do and when.
Do OCUK have a QA system traceable to the technician who assembled the bundle showing dates and testing? Also any settings to achieve stability. Was documentation sent with the bundle indicating this testing was carried out?
If you are in dispute, you do not need to accept or sign for the package. I would do all you can to progress this with OCUK before taking it elsewhere.

andy.

I have some sort of time lime with all my emails / post's with ocuk, the tests I was asked to do was

1. remove the overclock.

2. memtest 11 passes.

3. OCCT power supply test.

4. Furmark

5. failed/BSOD IBT at stock and overclock

I was then told to increase CPU VCore by two notches but I was still getting freezes and failling/bsod on IBT.

I had problems quite early I didn’t contact ocuk until 20th Sep (13 days after receiving it, 11 days after having the computer running)

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 16:23

MeatLoaf said:
I would sign for the package becuae the last thing you want is it going missing or taking a month to get back to them. Also you dont want to risk damage to your other parts whilst there rattling round the delivery network

But if i sign for it, Wont ocuk just say "oh he signed for it he is agreeing with us" and then just refuse to take it back?

Dano said:
Did you pay by Credit Card?

I paid via Barclays Visa Debit Card.

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 16:43

I hope ocuk can sort this out, as I’m a loyal customer and always buy my stuff here because their support and service is normally excellent but unfortunately this has happened

I'm still not sure whether to sign for the package when it comes tomorrow seeing how I don’t agree this is my fault..

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 16:55

Mattyjw said:
Also have a look at http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/section75-protect-your-purchases

Just to clear this up, this protection only applies to credit and store cards, NOT debit cards, cash spending, using cheques or charge cards. Therefore you have to use a credit card to be protected.

As i've paid via my Barclays Visa Debit it seems i dont have that protection.

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:08

Mattyjw said:
at the bottom there's a bit about visa chargeback although with the price being 400 it might not apply.

Thanks for that Mattyjw, I will look into this seems intresting.

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:24

rjkoneill said:
if you wish for me to move the thread to the private customer service forum to save embarrasment then please let me know

No, Please keep this thread here.

rjkoneill said:
The board would not work in this condition. you mention you had it working.

Yes I mentioned I had it working, it did/does work I was just getting random freezes and random BSOD as I’ve stated already.

Dano said:
So OCUK is unwilling to even consider the fact that it might have:

A) Been damaged in shipping.
B) Been damaged by OCUK - you have after all removed the CPU from it's socket to take photo's and it could easily have been damaged during this process.
C) Slipped past your quality control and may not have been tested at all.

Yes I find it unbelievable that OCUK is 100% flat-out refusing to consider anything other than it did not happen before I received it.

I understand it's very unlikely to be the courier's fault

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:32

rjkoneill said:
the returned box was sealed.
that is not what is in question here.

the op has had the pc functional. the return was created after a period of time which suggests the damage was caused after a period of functionallity.

this suggests that the bundle was delivered in full working condition.

this damage has happend whilst it is in the OPs possesion. the board would not function in this condition.

As I’ve stated rjkoneill the bundle does work I was just getting random freezes and BSOD, and failing of IBT. So your now saying it's not even posting? I find that unbelievable as it was posting and running when I had it... just with random freezes / crashes / bsod

Mayfair · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:50

So your saying its not even working/posting and yet i used it when i posted a webnote on the 29/11/2010, So how's that then?

Mayfair · 17 Dec 2010 at 13:08

Ok sorry I didn’t know that you re-opened this thread, So thank you for doing that!

You’re all saying that it would not post let alone boot? But yet I was using it when I posted a web note regarding packaging.
Also regarding where I said

took the pc apart and re-built it again incase there was a lose molex or connection

I did take the pc apart but the left the Corsair H50 on the CPU as I was reading that the paste that comes with the H50 gives very good results and is hard to beat.

Also for further proof, These post's was made on 22nd Sep 2010, 19:38 , I have an IBT test result on my backup hard drive that has time and date that IBT failed.

This is a result from Intel Burn Test log file when running the test
----------------------------
IntelBurnTest v2.50
Created by AgentGOD
----------------------------

Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU 760 @ 2.80GHz
Clock Speed: 4.02 GHz
Active Physical Cores: 4
Total System Memory: 4094 MB

Stress Level: Custom (2000 MB)
Testing started on 26/11/2010 14:11:38
Time (s) Speed (GFlops) Result
[14:12:42] 52.872 48.1646 3.267938e-002

As you can see, It completes the first test, But BSOD on the second test.

And also OCCT images with time and dates that I was asked to perform.

OCCT results(With stock profile): http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/6940/occt.png
OCCT CPU1(With stock profile): http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/5029/2010111723h35cpu1.png
OCCT CPU2(With stock profile): http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/4799/2010111723h35cpu2.png
OCCT CPU3(With stock profile): http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/727/2010111723h35cpu3.png
OCCT CPU4(With stock profile): http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/6648/2010111723h35cpu4.png
OCCT GPU1(With stock profile): http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/7015/2010111723h35gpu1.png
OCCT VCore(With stock profile): http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/5564/2010111723h35vcore.png
OCCT Volt3(With stock profile): http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/5302/2010111723h35volt3.png
OCCT Volt12(With stock profile): http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/6870/2010111723h35volt12.png
Stock Failure: http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/2739/stockfailure.png

I also have an image from furmark that I sent to OCUK via web note on the 27/11 that ocuk can check.

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/6365/furmarkq.jpg

You guys are saying this would not even post let alone boot, So how do I have proof that the system was running ranging from 17/11 -> 26/11? I was advised to send it back and an RMA was created on the 29/11

Also regarding

But if i decide to re-sit the cpu/heatsink what thermal paste is best to use out of the two i have.

Please notice the IF. Even if I did do this(Which I didn’t) how would I have images and IBT log file ranging from 17/11 ++ when that was posted on 22nd Sep 2010. If the computer would not even post with this damage?

I will go through all my emails and my backup hard drive to find any more proof the system was posting and running with more dates.

Mayfair · 17 Dec 2010 at 13:27

Shakeel said:
it left the op working as well

NathWraith said:
Is this your issue?

No so please stay out of the thread. You have nothing useful to say.

So it's ok for people to post who are pointing it at me, But when someone post's that are saying otherwise they get told to 'stay out of the thread' ?

Mayfair · 17 Dec 2010 at 16:39

Shakeel said:
he does have a point here. im not saying that ocuk did as i see no reason why they would but i do think its unfair for almost everybody to attack the op

his system was unstable and im sure he wanted ocuk to sort it out. why would he bend the pins if it was going to rma.

Oh so at least someone has some common sense, Why would I go take the cpu out of its socket and bend pins etc, When it was going for RMA anyway to solve the issue's I was having? Even one of the tech guys via web note said the crashes/freezes/bsod I was having sounded like a problem with the board. So if I was going to get it rma'ed anyway why the hell would I go to the trouble messing with the cpu and bending the pins? Come on guys some common sense here...

Also regarding why I posted them logs, as some people were suggesting I 're-built' the system and I messed with the cpu clearly not...

I wasn’t even the one who suggested RMA, the guy via web note suggested I should do this as it sounded like a problem with the board.

Also I didn’t make this thread to cause an upset with user's and ocuk nor was it to make ocuk look bad. I was just looking for some help/advice.

Mayfair · 17 Dec 2010 at 17:01

mothermachine said:
dunno about you guys but if i was in the OP's shoes and was innocent here I would be WELL angry. angry at OCUK for failing to do what i'm asking and at the other forum members for practically all siding against me. which he does not appear to be. which looks very much as though he knows he's either in the wrong OR OCUK are NOT in the wrong, but either way is not going to win. first thing I would have done would be to go directly to the private tech support forum and not air this in public. doing so makes it look very much like a rather desperate plea for help and support from the public. i might be wrong, but I think i'm a fairly decent judge of people's characters.

my hunch? OP dun broke it. other definitely possible explanation? postie broke it. either way it's not OCUK's problem.

the above is not really helpful at all to this thread but frankly since it's in the public part of the forum and not in the private tech support section (where it ought to be in my opinion!) then I feel justified in giving my simple opinion on the matter.

So because I'm not posting in CAPS or swearing etc etc means I'm not angry?

Of course I'm angry.... But posting in such a manner will get nowhere.