MobileCiti Refusing to Provide Another Replacement for Pixel 2 XL (Because I Got Original Replacement from Google)

darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 10:14
Last edited 17/01/2019 - 11:40 by 1 other user

I bought a Pixel 2 xl last month, it had display issues so I got a replacement from Google which took about 3 weeks.(Luckily it was during late Dec/early Jan)

Now the replacement device has also developed issues,eg often won't connect to my PC and there is speaker rattling. I can't afford to send it back to Google as it would take roughly 3 weeks (from the support guy) so they advised me to get a replacement from the retailer (Mobileciti) as it would take much less time.

But MobileCiti says they can't replace my device because I already got an replacement from Google thus the IMEI is different.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Mobile Google Mobile Phone Android

Related Stores

Mobileciti
Mobileciti

Comments

  • cheapass88 on 17/01/2019 - 10:16
    +68

    I'd say, just wait the 3 weeks.
    MobileCiti shouldn't be liable for your replacement device.
    why didn't you contact them in the first place?

    • ronnknee on 17/01/2019 - 10:18
      +51

      This. You've elected to deal with Google directly. They've assisted you by providing you a replacement device. Now there's a problem with the replacement device, you should be going back to Google (and not MobileCiti).

      • ronnknee on 17/01/2019 - 10:25
        +50

        Take a step back and think about what you're doing. You are trying to return a product different from what they sold you.

        Mobileciti website has a 30 days defective policy in which they exchange your device if it is defective, does that not apply in this case?

        It would've applied if you went to them in the first place. You've sought remedy from Google and the remedy wasn't satisfactory. You should follow up with Google.

        • cameldownunder on 18/01/2019 - 10:14
          +1

          I had a defect Lg G4 from mobileciti, and I had to send it to a repair centre, after contacting them.
          Phone came back after 4 days. Had a second issue and contacted mobileciti again. No problem repairing the phone a second time.

          • dchoj on 19/01/2019 - 15:42

            @cameldownunder: So you went back to the retailer you received the phone from to remedy the situation and they fixed it for you? This is not the same situation as OP.

      • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 10:30
        +5

        People in the other post regarding my initial replacement

        They were right - you got a faster resolution through Google than with MobileCiti. On the other hand, you also limited yourself to dealing only with Google by doing this. People can give you advice, but at the end of the day you need to make the decision because only you would know whether, for example, you can afford to send the second device back to Google, or whether you have a backup phone you can use while a second replacement is being sourced.

        Mobileciti website has a 30 days defective policy in which they exchange your device if it is defective, does that not apply in this case?

        Of course not - you didn't get the current defective device from them, why should they be liable at all?

        Edit: Actually you're kind of lying there. The highest voted advice in your other thread was:

        Have you asked Mobileciti?

        • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 10:50
          -1

          If you look closely there are actually more replies suggesting me to go thru the RMA process with Google.

          • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 10:51
            -5

            @darkyjaz95: Not suggesting, providing that as an option. In the: 'If you don't want to deal with Mobileciti, you can go to Google directly' kind of way. End of the day, still your choice and your decision.

      • diddy50 on 17/01/2019 - 18:50
        +1

        Buy a cheap, spare smart phone?

        • resisting the urge on 18/01/2019 - 09:50
          +1

          …or ask a friend or family member to borrow their old phone.

          I have most of my old phones- every one works good as new- very handy when going overseas, or somewhere that you don't want to risk losing everything

      • brendanm on 17/01/2019 - 20:31

        Buy a $10 phone from Coles, how hard is that.

        • resisting the urge on 18/01/2019 - 09:47
          -4

          You don't get these problems with iPhone's either. Apple replace or fix at their shops, mostly on the spot.

          Perhaps a worse option for some, but possibly better than a pheaturephone ;-)

          • cameldownunder on 18/01/2019 - 10:16
            +5

            @resisting the urge: On the spot, after you book a slot in 2 days time.

            • Chewiebacca on 18/01/2019 - 11:17
              +1

              @cameldownunder: The one time I ever had a phone replaced by Apple, I walked in just to try my luck (iPhone 5, battery was kinda crappy and phone ran hot) and they replaced the unit entirely on the spot. It was a ~15 minute ordeal.

            • resisting the urge on 18/01/2019 - 13:46

              @cameldownunder: Never had to wait very long from any shop in many cities. They don't do tech help on demand for every walk-in, it's always best to expect to need to book in prior to visiting

            • apple2016 on 18/01/2019 - 14:14

              @cameldownunder: you dont need a booking if you can be there when they open.

              • MeateaW on 17/02/2019 - 11:20

                @apple2016: My work friend has a story where he was going on to do something trivial (turned out it was a setting for do not disturb on his phone I think). They made him go away and make a booking, only booking available was 11am.

                He got there early, and sat around from opening time at 9am till 11am, constantly being asked if he was ok, he said I just need some help with my phone notifications not working, to which they said he would have to wait for his appointment time.

                Come 11am they show him the option that he hadn't found.

                Suffice to say, he was not happy.

                Apple support. Yay.

      • Cyberninja on 18/01/2019 - 09:32

        … a 30 days defective policy in which they exchange your device if it is defective…

        It's not the same device anymore.

      • [Deactivated] on 18/01/2019 - 10:08

        I don't have a backup phone and need my phone for work

        Buy a backup phone from woolies for $19. I've got a spare I keep in the cupboard for just such an occasion. It's nothing special but does the job. Takes calls, text messages, etc.

        And I assure you it's not the end of the world to not have a phone for a few days. "I need it for work". I daresay you're overplaying it, but still the world won't end. At worst some of your calls will go to voicemail, or you might be a day or two responding to a text.

        Just suck up the three weeks. This is not a big deal.

        • klownz on 23/02/2019 - 15:12

          This. Plus if you need it for work you are deriving an income from use of the device, so can probably tax-deduct. Plus you need it to make money.

          Invest in a spare device in order to make money - seems easier than spending more time trying to find some way around it online/with the retailer (what do you value your time at $/hour?)

    • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 10:31
      -3

      I don't think thats right. the replacement should have exactly the same consumer rights. in australia the laws are for the retailer to offer a remedy, not the manufacturer. when I got a replacement phone from Officeworks I got a new receipt and the warranty started again.

      • buckster on 17/01/2019 - 10:44
        +10

        Yes, but the difference here is that the replacement came directly from Google, taking the retailer out of the equation as the op chose not to make use of their consumer rights.

        If op had organised the replacement through mobileciti, then they would be responsible to replace it again.

        Mobileciti cannot return the phone to Google as it will not match the one they originally purchased from them

        • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 14:40
          +1

          actually the other person said that you get a receipt with the old and new IMEI so that shouldn't be a problem

      • ronnknee on 17/01/2019 - 10:45
        +4

        the replacement should have exactly the same consumer rights

        Correct, only if the initial replacement was from MobileCiti.

        • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 10:52
          +2

          wow I have no idea why OP would get a refurbished device when he could've just got a refund

      • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 10:49

        Except OP got the replacement from Google, not Mobileciti. As far as OP's ACL rights against Mobileciti are concerned, he no longer has any because he effectively sought a third-party solution to the first issue.

        It's like you buy a fridge from HN. It breaks in warranty, but instead of making a warranty claim with HN, you get a third party to fix it, and instead break it further - retailer isn't responsible anymore.

        • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 11:01

          In this case the 3rd party is the manufacturer. When you buy something (let's say a fridge) don't you get warranty from both the retailer and the manufacturer?

          • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:11

            @darkyjaz95: You get ACL rights with the retailer, you get manufacturer warranties with the manufacturer.

            You still have the second of these, but you don't have the first because you bypassed the retailer in the first place.

            • Strahany on 17/01/2019 - 11:18
              +8

              @HighAndDry:

              You get ACL rights with the retailer, you get manufacturer warranties with the manufacturer.

              Nope. You have ACL guarantees with both:

              “Who must comply with the consumer guarantees?

              Businesses that provide goods—by selling, leasing or hiring—or services to consumers in Australia must comply with the consumer guarantees.

              Manufacturers and importers must also comply with certain consumer guarantees.”

              https://www.accc.gov.au/business/treating-customers-fairly/c…

                • Strahany on 17/01/2019 - 11:32
                  +9

                  @HighAndDry: You were giving incorrect information, irrespective of the relevance to the central tenet of your point, and I corrected it. The fact that you needed to give a two paragraph response to a simple correction is concerning.

      • [Deactivated] on 17/01/2019 - 22:25

        Imagine this taken to its logical extreme. I order a phone from a retailer, and it's mildly defective (having a stuck pixel), so I contact the manufacturer, and some scammy staff member there sends me a parcel containing a brick.

        Should the retailer be responsible for taking that brick and negotiating with the manufacturer to swap it for a properly working phone? I don't think so.

        You should always go to the retailer to get things fixed. But once you bypass that avenue, it's hard to justify forcing them to address mistakes that occurred due to a private arrangement between you and the manufacturer.

        • Savas on 18/01/2019 - 07:49

          Presumably if the retailer contacts the manufacturer, they'd also send a brick to the seller. So it is the sellers problem to make sure the retailer is following ACL. Though i don't think google would treat a retailer like that, they seem to be taking advantage of the situation to cheat people.

  • pantsparty on 17/01/2019 - 10:28

    Does Google offer any in person support - what is their equivalent of the Apple Genius bar? I wouldn't buy a phone if I had to post it in and wait for any warranty support - what a nightmare.

    • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 10:30
      +2

      They don't.

    • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 10:33

      This is pretty much OP's problem. Generally you're only entitled to go back to the retailer for issues under the ACL - the manufacturer is responsible for upholding the manufacturer's warranty (if they provide one) but that's subject to their terms and conditions.

      I wouldn't buy a phone if I had to post it in and wait for any warranty support - what a nightmare.

      This is the case in a lot of consumer electronics warranty claims if you're dealing directly with the manufacturer. The only times it's not, is generally when the product is cumbersome enough it makes more sense for the company to send a technician to you.

      • pantsparty on 17/01/2019 - 10:35
        +7

        With most consumer electronics I am happy to wait for the repair. In this day and age a mobile phone is a different story - I want it fixed ASAP and I am surprised the major manufacturers do not realise that.

        I know iPhones are not to everybodies taste but their support is great - book an appointment online, turn up, get it fixed. If the phone cannot be easily fixed they give you a new one on the spot.

        • dazweeja on 17/01/2019 - 11:05
          +3

          Obviously that high level of support is built into the cost of the phone. Others would prefer a lower price with a lower level of support. It sounds like you're in the former camp, while I'm in the latter camp. It's great that we have all these options ;)

        • [Deactivated] on 17/01/2019 - 22:27

          Most of us have a drawer full of old phones at this stage. Obtaining a backup phone that can do the basics (make calls, etc), is a trivial process of just grabbing one out of storage. I make sure I always keep a couple of spares on hand just in case.

    • follow on 17/01/2019 - 11:23
      +1

      They have advanced replacement if you purchase from Google Store

    • Chandler on 18/01/2019 - 10:58

      To answer this part of your question:

      what is their equivalent of the Apple Genius bar?

      I would presume Google One

  • No Username on 17/01/2019 - 10:35

    Why did they have to change in IMEI for a display change? Was the body damaged?

    • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 10:36

      No the phone was in mint condition, but Google offered me a replacement device,and therefore the IMEI's different.

    • websterp on 17/01/2019 - 10:39
      +1

      When you send the phone to Google for repairs they simply swap it with a new/refurbished phone. You don't get to dictate how they fix it (i.e. repair the old phone and send back)

  • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 10:55
    +1

    can you just take the original device back to Mobileciti if you still have it?

    • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 10:57
      +1

      I don't have the original device anymore, only the faulty replacement device from Google.

  • JimmyF on 17/01/2019 - 10:56

    I can't afford to send it back to Google as it would take roughly 3 weeks

    This isn't correct. When doing warranty directly with Google, they send you a replacement phone, you then send the old one back.

    • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 10:59
      +3

      No. You only get to do advance RMA with direct purchase thru Google store.

    • ronnknee on 17/01/2019 - 12:02
      -2

      Did you purchase directly from Google?

      • ronnknee on 18/01/2019 - 12:54

        Not sure why I was negged. It was a legitimate question. I purchased my Pixel from JB Hi-Fi, When it had overheating issues, I went through Google first and they also wanted me to send in the device first before sending me a replacement. They told me that they would only send the replacement first if I had purchased directly from them. So, I suspect JimmyF had purchased his phone directly from Google if we're being consistency with Google's return policy.

        • Savas on 18/01/2019 - 13:09
          +1

          Google won't do advance RMA because it was sold by Mobileciti. That's why OP can and google told him to take it back to the seller.

          • ronnknee on 18/01/2019 - 13:29
            +1

            @Savas: Correct. I completely understand OP's scenario.

            I was asking JimmyF because his experience was different. That's why my comment was nested under his.

  • Strahany on 17/01/2019 - 11:29
    -6

    OP, don’t listen to people telling you that you cannot seek remedy with MobileCiti. The ACCC rulings against Apple some years ago stated that you cannot be refused your ACL rights just because the product was serviced by a third party (exceptions are in place, such as if a third party repairer caused extra damage). The fact that, in this case, the “third party” isn’t really even a third party, since it’s the manufacturer, only helps your situation.

    For example, all Telcos have a process to update the IMEI on record in the event that you opted to have a replacement from the manufacturer directly, or replaced by other official means (e.g insurance through the Telco).

    Google will have provided you with a receipt detailing “Original IMEI: xxx and Replacement IMEI: yyy”. That will be sufficient evidence for MobileCiti; if they still try to fob you off, then threaten to (or actually) get the ACCC involved and it’ll be sorted quickly.

    • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:31
      +4

      OP, don’t listen to people telling you that you cannot seek remedy with MobileCiti.

      The current defective phone is one that OP directly got from Google. Please let us know why you think Mobileciti is still in any way involved.

      The ACCC rulings against Apple

      For third party repairs which didn't cause the defect. Google replaced OP's phone, so their "repairs" definitely cause the current defects.

      For example, all Telcos

      Mobileciti is not a telco. Not sure if you've noticed.

      That will be sufficient evidence for MobileCiti; if they still try to fob you off, then threaten to (or actually) get the ACCC involved and it’ll be sorted quickly.

      Hahaha, good luck. Mobileciti didn't supply OP's defective phone!

      • Strahany on 17/01/2019 - 11:35
        +3

        I’m not going to get into a long winded discussing with you, as everyone on OzBargain knows it’s effectively an inescapable black hole. I’ve worked with phones, their warranties, and consumer guarantees for a number of years.

        The OP has the right to seek remedy from MobileCiti in this situation. I know that to be a fact, based on several similar rulings, and I’m not going to get drawn into this.

        • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:36
          +4

          I know that to be a fact

          Unfortunately you're wrong. But if you have any ruling that says a retailer is responsible for defects in a replacement device sourced from a third party, feel free. I'm going to guess you don't have any because they don't exist. Christ, even your comment says:

          The ACCC rulings against Apple some years ago stated that you cannot be refused your ACL rights just because the product was serviced by a third party (exceptions are in place, such as if a third party repairer caused extra damage).

          The damage to OP's phone? Completely caused by Google.

          • Strahany on 17/01/2019 - 11:40
            -2

            @HighAndDry: Okay

          • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 11:43
            +2

            @HighAndDry:

            exceptions are in place, such as if a third party repairer caused extra damage

            the manufacturer also has the same ACCC contract they need to follow, they are not a "third party repairer". I don't understand why you would deny people of their consumer rights. Mobileciti made the sale, they are still responsible and by law need to help you get it resolved.

            • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:44
              +4

              @Savas: FFS. No one is disputing that Google needs to repair or replace OP's phone. We're just saying Mobileciti is now out of the picture.

              • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 11:46
                +2

                @HighAndDry: actually I don't think thats correct. by law the store has to help you get a remedy, usually by dealing with the manufacturer. in this case the OP dealed with the manufacturer directly, but he should still be able to get help from the shop.

                • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:49
                  +2

                  @Savas:

                  actually I don't think thats correct. by law the store has to help you get a remedy,

                  No, this is the exception where:

                  exceptions are in place, such as if a third party repairer caused extra damage

                  The shop is no longer involved as far as the ACL or the law is concerned.

              • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 11:49
                +2

                @HighAndDry: Would Google's warranty be out of picture if I have initially asked for repair from Mobileciti? If not, why so vice versa?

                • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:51

                  @darkyjaz95: Depends on if Mobileciti is an authorised repairer and received authorisation from Google to perform the repair. Usually they'd just send it back to Google for repairs.

                  And it's different because the legal relationship is:

                  You <—> Mobileciti <—> Google.

                  If you hadn't pushed Mobileciti out of the picture by dealing directly with Google, the above would still apply with Mobileciti effectively representing Google in certain respects.

                  • Blitzfx on 17/01/2019 - 23:51

                    @HighAndDry:

                    exceptions are in place, such as if a third party repairer caused extra damage

                    How is the manufacturer(Google) a third party repairer?

    • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 11:45

      Thank you. I have just sent them an email along with the receipt containing original IMEI.

      • Strahany on 17/01/2019 - 11:52
        +8

        No problem, let us know how you go. Might be able to help advise on what to say if they’re playing games.

        You haven’t been here long, so please excuse H&D. They’re good for comedic value, since you get to watch the Dunning-Kruger come to fruition before your very eyes.

        • Meho2026 on 23/02/2019 - 13:16

          Strahany-Best comment ever

  • Baysew on 17/01/2019 - 11:48
    +1

    So would the end result be that the OP wants to swap his refurbished phone which Google provided for a new phone from MobileCiti?

    • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:53
      +5

      Yeah, OP wants this but OP isn't entitled to it.

      Not saying it's impossible - OP has rights against Google and Mobileciti has a relationship with Google, so it's possible that if Google asks, and/or Mobileciti agrees, Mobileciti will effectively give OP a replacement on behalf of Google to discharge Google's obligations to OP. But Mobileciti has no legal obligation to do so.

      • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 11:56
        +3

        But the pixel support guy said I should go back to my retailer?

        • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 11:57
          +1

          And I'm sure Mobilecity is telling you to go to Google. They're just trying to palm you off to be someone else's problem. Tell the support person the issue is with a defective phone you received directly from Google, not via retailer RMA (which they're likely assuming happened because that's the standard procedure).

          • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 12:22
            +2

            @HighAndDry: OP did Mobileciti a favour by contacting them for them, but Google did a crap job and not providing an adequate solution. Mobileciti is still fully responsible for this to be resolved since they sold the phone.

            • Hybroid on 17/01/2019 - 12:24
              +1

              @Savas:

              Mobileciti is still fully responsible for this to be resolved.

              No, they're not. Just like everyone else here has said. They're not responsible for issues arising from a replacement device from Google or anywhere else.

              • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 12:26
                +1

                @Hybroid: whether the OP or Mobileciti contacts the manufacturer it should still be the same thing.

                • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 12:30

                  @Savas: It absolutely isn't. One is Mobileciti providing a solution, for which they would remain responsible. The other is Google providing the solution, for which Google is responsible.

            • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 12:26
              +2

              @Savas:

              Mobileciti is still fully responsible for this to be resolved since they sold the phone.

              Which phone? OP has a completely different phone than what Mobileciti sold them. OP cut Mobileciti out of the loop.

              • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 12:30
                +1

                @HighAndDry: thats a problem for Mobileciti to deal with since they were the people that sold the phone

                • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 12:30

                  @Savas:

                  the phone

                  You keep saying this. The phone that Mobileciti sold is now with Google after OP returned it. OP doesn't have any phone that they got from Mobileciti anymore.

                  • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 12:36

                    @HighAndDry: so what are you saying? did google take the money back from MobileCiti because apprantly they did not sell OP's phone?

                    • Hybroid on 17/01/2019 - 12:38
                      +2

                      @Savas: You're just trolling at this point, aren't you? That's not how manufacturer RMAs work and you know it. The replacement device straight from Google has nothing to do with Mobileciti and they are not responsible for any issues with it. OP needs to go back to Google and get it resolved, whether it takes longer than he desires or not.

                      • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 12:47
                        -1

                        @Hybroid: How can Mobileciti just pocket the money from the sale and not have anything to do with it anymore? OP shouldn't have to be forcing google to give him a new phone, it's the stores job to handle this for him.

                        • Hybroid on 17/01/2019 - 12:55
                          +3

                          @Savas: They are a reseller whom have already purchased the device from Google and make some revenue on top. OP probably should have gone back to the store but chose not to and went to Google directly. There's nothing wrong with that as they are the manufacturer.

                          Similar to buying a graphics card from Mwave/Umart or a radio from Jaycar or a camera from JB-Hifi or a product from Amazon or whatever from wherever, you have the option of going back to the store or directly to the manufacturer to resolve it.

                          However, since OP went to the manufacturer directly and received a replacement device that does not correlate to Mobileciti's sold stock, they are no longer responsible for any issues with the new device that was not provided by them. If OP had gone to Mobileciti and they gave him a replacement themselves and that replacement had issues then 100% Mobileciti still responsible. But the new device is not provided for them, the IMEI is not in their system and they're not responsible for it. The device came from Google direct and needs to go back to Google direct for resolution regardless how impatient OP is.

                          Not sure how much clearer I can break it down.

                          • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 14:22
                            -1

                            @Hybroid: that doesn't make sense because a obviously a different phone would have a different IMEI. its not OP's fault the store doesn't know the IMEI, when i returned my phone to Officeworks they didn't even check the IMEI which i presume is the standard way of doing business.

                            • ronnknee on 18/01/2019 - 13:27
                              +2

                              @Savas: Previously worked at Officeworks. They're supposed to check the S/N or IMEI against the receipt.

                        • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 13:10
                          +3

                          @Savas:

                          How can Mobileciti just pocket the money from the sale and not have anything to do with it anymore?

                          Because OP cut them out of the loop by directly dealing with Google. OP's issue isn't with the phone Mobileciti sold them, OP's issue now is with the phone which Google sent them.

                          OP shouldn't have to be forcing google to give him a new phone, it's the stores job to handle this for him.

                          OP didn't have to - OP could, and should, have gone back to Mobileciti in the first place. OP chose not to.

                          If you want a specific reference to the ACL, refer to:
                          https://www.accc.gov.au/business/treating-customers-fairly/c…

                          The consumer cannot cancel and demand a refund immediately. You must have an opportunity to fix the problem.

                          Mobileciti was not given this opportunity, and

                          You do not have to pay for damages or losses that […] relate to something independent of your business and outside your control, after the goods left your control.

                          OP obtaining a replacement directly from Google falls under "something independent of [Mobileciti's] business and outside [their] control."

                          • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 13:28

                            @HighAndDry: the section you quoted is for services though, in the actual section relevant it says

                            The seller also must not refuse to deal with a customer about the returned good and tell them to deal with the manufacturer instead.

                            • HighAndDry on 17/01/2019 - 13:47
                              +1

                              @Savas: Except OP dealt with the manufacturer themselves first. The defective goods is no longer from Mobileciti at all. I'm done here - Rep's stepped in, this should get resolved one way or another.

                              • Savas on 17/01/2019 - 13:50

                                @HighAndDry: that doesn't make sense for the rep to step in for a phone "no longer from Mobileciti at all" if you are right

                        • qwerty on 17/01/2019 - 14:02

                          @Savas: Mobilciti didnt get the phone for free

    • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 11:54
      +1

      You mean the refurb I got like 2 weeks after my brand new purchase? My issue is that I need a working replacement device FAST, I can't afford to wait for up to 3 weeks for a god damn phone that I need for work/family. At the same time I don't want having to live up with a phone with connection/speaker issue which I have paid almost $800 for.

      • bdl on 17/01/2019 - 12:06
        +5

        If you depend on a phone that much, it may be best to have a hot spare ready to go for times like this.

  • minniethemoocher on 17/01/2019 - 12:10
    +2

    I would think in this instance that it is reasonable to request Google send you a replacement device first and you post the phone back second. Even if this means google holds a deposit on your credit card for the value of the phone. As a general rule you should always deal with the phones seller if the device fails in the first 30 days as you are entitled to a new replacement rather than a refurbished device. Most manufacturers have this agreement with authorised sellers.

    • darkyjaz95 on 17/01/2019 - 13:12

      I tried with my initial replacement. I was told that only direct purchases thru Google allows for advance RMA.

  • bnebgnhunter on 17/01/2019 - 12:11
    +2

    If you’re wanting a phone without downtime
    Buy Apple, as harsh as this is it’s a reality
    3 weeks is the normal RMA turn around time for Google
    Apple are more expensive and the ozbargain pitchforks will come out but you get over the counter replacement on the spot

    • Strahany on 17/01/2019 - 12:32
      +4

      Samsung are catching up with their retail presence. Most repairs can be done on the day, but not as extensive as Apple.

  • CyberMurning on 17/01/2019 - 12:58
    +1

    just go back to google please

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join