Where do I stand on this RMA?

rjk · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:32

Mayfair said:
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

the terms and conditions issued to you in the RMA confirmation explain this clearly. I have quoted below for reference.
we are simply unable to support damaged products.
the product could only have been damaged after a term of use, in your possession.

I really would like to avoid this becoming a public matter, however it does seem that you hold responsibility for customer induced damage on this occasion.

A summary of our terms and conditions can be found below.
1. PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL RETURNED PRODUCTS WILL BE INSPECTED FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY POOR HANDLING OR MISUSE. FURTHERMORE, ALL LGA (LINE GRID ARRAY) AND AMD SOCKET MOTHERBOARDS WILL BE CHECKED FOR BENT OR DAMAGED PINS, MISSING SOCKET PROTECTORS, THERMAL PASTE OR ANY OTHER CONTAMINATION INSIDE THE CPU SOCKET. ANY PRODUCTS FOUND TO HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF MISUSE, DAMAGE OR POOR HANDLING WILL BE DEEMED WARRANTY VOID, WILL BE RETURNED AND BE SUBJECT TO A £10 + RETURN SHIPPING + VAT CHARGE.

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

stulid · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:32

So why are pins near the center bent? surely if the cpu was removed for a look, the outer pins would be damaged as the cpu is lifted up on one side causing the other side to drop down in to the pins?

Westyfield2 · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:34

Customer will always claim that they never removed the CPU so it must have always been bent, but company will always claim that they tested it and it worked fine.

I guess the teller would be how long OcUK tested it for? If the OP can go for 24-hours of use without the problem occuring and OcUK only tested it for 23-hours then it is possible that both are correct. The problem was always there but didn't show up in testing

.

Though if the problem rears its head within 5-minutes of use and OcUK tested for 3-hours then it's not so likely!

rjk · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:38

Dano said:
snip

dano

it is rather clear that you are not too keen on ocuk.
surely you must understand that i am simply representing us otherwise this thread would be totally one sided.

the pins were bent, simple. put yourself on the business end of this.

if you owned ocuk and someone sent you a damaged item back which posed a loss to your company, would you simply issue another one without question or adhere to well enforced policies.

I can see this thread getting out of hand

OP if you have further issue with this RMA then please contact a member of the management using the complaints service.
this is free of charge and the management will be happy to clear up any queries you may have.

Westyfield2 said:
Customer will always claim that they never removed the CPU so it must have always been bent, but company will always claim that they tested it and it worked fine.

I guess the teller would be how long OcUK tested it for? If the OP can go for 24-hours of use without the problem occuring and OcUK only tested it for 23-hours then it is possible that both are correct. The problem was always there but didn't show up in testing .

Though if the problem rears its head within 5-minutes of use and OcUK tested for 3-hours then it's not so likely!

the bundle would not work with the pins like that

so it makes no difference how long it would have been tested for

stulid said:
So why are pins near the center bent? surely if the cpu was removed for a look, the outer pins would be damaged as the cpu is lifted up on one side causing the other side to drop down in to the pins?

this

modez · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:39

Surely, there must be 12 months warranty? As the gentleman is a loyal customer to Overclocker surely they must be able to do something for him?
It does not give Overclocker a good reputation from a customers point of view.

Mr-White · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:40

How did the OP get the cpu back in with the pins bent like that ?

MW

Mr-White · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:41

modez said:
Surely, there must be 12 months warranty? As the gentleman is a loyal customer to Overclocker surely they must be able to do something for him?
It does not give Overclocker a good reputation from a customers point of view.

Warranty doesn't cover physical damage

MW

Chuggerboom · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:42

Looking at that pic of the damaged pins i can't see how the system would work at all? Looks like it has been dropped on the floor to me.

Dano · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:43

rjkoneill said:
dano

it is rather clear that you are not too keen on ocuk.
surely you must understand that i am simply representing us otherwise this thread would be totally one sided.

the pins were bent, simple. put yourself on the business end of this.

if you owned ocuk and someone sent you a damaged item back which posed a loss to your company, would you simply issue another one without question or adhere to well enforced policies.

It's your flat out refusal to even consider that OCUK may have caused the damage when removing the CPU that concerns me.

I can see this thread getting out of hand

OP if you have further issue with this RMA then please contact a member of the management using the complaints service.
this is free of charge and the management will be happy to clear up any queries you may have.

No comment.

the bundle would not work with the pins like that

so it makes no difference how long it would have been tested for

this

And yet the OP keeps saying that the bundle did work, so either he is lying or OCUK have indeed further damaged it.

rjk · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:45

modez said:
Surely, there must be 12 months warranty? As the gentleman is a loyal customer to Overclocker surely they must be able to do something for him?
It does not give Overclocker a good reputation from a customers point of view.

our reputation is based on customer service, we cannot support damaged items.

Mr-White said:
How did the OP get the cpu back in with the pins bent like that ?

MW

the bundle would have been rejected.
this means that it would have been put to the same condition we got the bundle in.

Mr-White said:
Warranty doesn't cover physical damage

MW

something that needs to be made more clear as it seems to not be accounted for at all in this thread

stulid · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:47

well at least send him back the bundle free of charge

charging him a extra £10-20 to deliver would really be a kick in the teeth.

iamtheoneneo · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:48

I don't agree with the dons posting on this...it does warrant discussion...this is a customer who is obviously a little upset and feels they are getting no help at all. The images clearly shown that somewhere along the line the pins have been bent this could off result occurred by a member of staff. Do ocuk log everything within an rma process that could help here? I know one etailer that records everything during the process from opening the box to testing etc....

PhillyDee · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:48

modez said:
How the system work with bent pins ?

Mr-White said:
How did the OP get the cpu back in with the pins bent like that ?

MW

The pins are springs really, easy enough to put it back.

Why would the dons not be able to post? They are OcUK employees, they are trying to be transparent, they own the forums, they make the rules. The FAQ clearly says No Shop Talk. It can be deleted easily enough.

rjkoneill - It looks like this probably isn't the first time this has happened, I think it would be advantageous to buy tamper evident seals for just this reason. It could be applied over the locking lever, so if it has been broken, the customer has clearly broken the seals. For the sake of a small amount, you can clearly state if seal is broken etc.

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?

stulid · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:52

Mayfair said:
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?

He would argue the same way you are posting here now.

rjk · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:54

dano, you have been very anti OCUK on more than one occasion now and it is not going unnoticed. this is a very difficult subject to be dealing with and the OP has chosen to make it public.

why should OCUK be held accountable for damage caused by/in the possession of a customer?

damage to pins when removing a cpu could not have been caused by an ocuk technician, not in the pattern that it is in on the evidence.

experienced technicians handle many cpus every day, putting a cpu in a socket is not a difficult task and handling 1000+ CPUs a week means you become very careful

the cold hard facts are:

the bundle was working when it left here
the bundle was damaged when it got back to us.

the only thing we could do is offer the OP a 'paid for repair' by the manufacturer.
costs for this would have to be covered by the customer but could be organised by us.
repairs are not guaranteed to be successful and carry no warranty either
but could result in a working board.

I have clarified the standpoint of the company on this and offered what options I can

any further discussion by the op can be kept private as this is very much shop talk and it is causing a lot of posts verging on anti OCUK
if anyone has an issue with this then please RTM this post.

MeatLoaf · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:57

Id say either the cpu has either been forced into the socket the wrong way round or something has been dropped on the socket pins - the cpu for expample

Dark_Angel · 16 Dec 2010 at 17:57

modez said:
What Overclocker could do is when they make the bundle for customers put a sticker with the tower case which would be located at the side of the panel and stick it to the back of the case. If the sticker has been ripped by removing the side panel then you can say the warranty is void. Which would save lots of hassle.

Okay... so I want to upgrade my GPU... I want to add a new CPU. I want to add a new fan to my case, or I just want to put in a new sound card?

The only way is a seal between the CPU and the MB....

NathWraith · 17 Dec 2010 at 08:46

I have been reading this thread.

You mention you had the board working, however with this amount of damage their is no way in a million years the mobo would have posted let alone BSOD.

We put the CPU into the socket once when building the bundle to overclock it and to leave it in there. The reason we do this is so that customers do not have to remove the CPU and risk damage to the pins.

This would never happen at the courier either.

The finger of blame points at the customer. We are professionals here, myself and rjk have built thousands of overclocked bundles and systems.

99% of the time these situations occur the responsibilty lies with the customer which never admits to having "played" with their bundle.

I am going off cold hard facts here.

I don't really understand why the thread has been closed. As far as I can see the issue is not solved.

I would like to remind you even if we took the board back under RMA no manufacturer would honour any kind of warranty. And we would be left with a warranty void useless motherboard and £x .xx amount down due to sending a replacement board.

I suggest any member that are not directly involved in this topic do not post in the thread as their opinions will make no difference in the matter.

So in a nutshell it would appear that the bundle has been damaged by the customer who is now complaining that he has been caught out and hasn't got a leg to stand on.

Please prove us wrong?