Month: May 2011

Three Times A Year Of Radar Table Faults

‘This watch has three failures in one year for the same reason.’ Mr. Ruan recently reported to this newspaper that the Emperor Star watch he bought at a radar counter in a shopping mall was rusted during the wearing period. As a result of multiple failures, the center axis of the watch is now broken, but the counter is not replaced according to the warranty card. Radar counter selling Emperor Star watches to Mr. Ruan
15,000 yuan ‘radar’ watch rusty who pays
Customer: 3 faults in 1 year, defective watch design?
Business: corresponding treatment has been done, if not approved, third-party identification
The staff of the customer reception room of the mall said that the party responsible for the rust of the watch’s bottom shaft could not be determined, which is the key to the problem. The merchant has communicated with the radar company Beijing and issued a handling method. Find a third-party appraisal agency to appraise the malfunction of the watch.
Customers report three failures in one year
On July 9, 2011, Mr. Ruan purchased an Emperor watch from the radar counter of a mall for 15,000 yuan. In November of the same year, the watch failed and no longer operated. Due to the transparent back cover of the watch, Mr. Ruan After observation, it was found that the flywheel part in the watch was in a static state and no longer turned. After reflecting the problem, the staff said that because the watch repair master at the counter had not yet received factory training and was not qualified to repair the watch, he suggested that Mr. Ruan go to another mall counter to repair the watch. After inspection, the maintenance staff stated that due to weather and temperature, the watch entered water vapor, which caused the watch shaft to rust. After the fine rust pieces fell off, the gear was blocked and the watch could not operate normally. After cleaning, the watch operation returns to normal.
上 In the first half of 2012, when Mr. Ruan adjusted the time of the watch, the watch again failed to run. The maintenance staff checked and informed that the fault was caused by the rust of the watch shaft. After the repair, the watch returned to normal again. As the date on the mechanical watch shows 31 days per month, on July 2, 2012, when Mr. Ruan adjusted the date of the watch, the watch shaft broke and the crown was dropped.
Customer dissatisfaction
Because the watch has been purchased for nearly one year, and according to the warranty card of the watch, the watch still fails to use the same problem twice within one year and can be replaced. On July 3rd, Mr. Ruan found a special counter. After the maintenance staff inspected the watch, he informed that the watch shaft was broken due to rust, and the user had to pay to buy accessories and replace the watch shaft. In the face of Mr. Ruan’s request for replacement, the counter staff stated that the counter cannot be replaced and must be sent to a company with radar watches in Beijing for identification.
Around July 17, Mr. Ruan waited for two weeks and asked the counter staff about the identification of the watch. ‘How long does it take for identification?’ The counter manager replied the following day, because after the identification by Beijing, the watch shaft was broken. It was caused artificially, ‘The radar company did not agree to return the goods.’ This made Mr. Ruan dissatisfied, and said that because the watch was relatively expensive, he usually wore it carefully and never let him touch the water, and did not approve the identification result. The counter manager said that it would continue to coordinate with Beijing.
On July 21, the counter stated that after coordinating with Beijing, Beijing made a lenient treatment and agreed to replace the meter head for Mr. Ruan. However, from the date of purchase of the watch to the time before the last repair of the watch, users were charged daily. Depreciation fee of 5 ‰ for watch price. Mr. Ruan expressed his dissatisfaction with the result of the processing. He believed that the responsibility for the failure of the watch was not his own. The radar should make a replacement for free according to the regulations. ‘I suspect that the watch shaft is defective.’
Merchant explained that it has been relaxed
According to the staff of the counter, the staff in the customer reception room of the mall where the counter is located told the reporter that the current difficulty in handling the problem lies in the identification of the party responsible for the rust of the watch shaft. Radar Watch Beijing believes that the rust of the watch shaft is due to the user. Due to improper use, in the subsequent operation process, the shaft of the watch was broken due to human reasons, and the crown was dropped; customers believe that the watch shaft is rusty due to the problem of the watch itself. After consultations, Beijing has made the above easing treatment. ‘If the user still does not agree, then a third-party identification is required.’ The staff member said that the third-party identification of the radar brand watch can only be performed in the relevant agencies in Beijing and Xi’an. The identification cost is determined by the responsible party after the identification. Undertake, ‘this has certain risks for both parties.’