Dell Chastized Over Customer Service

The Register is reporting that Dell recently agreed to give into demands from the UK's Office of Fair Trading and alter the agreements that accompany their hardware. From the article: "The OFT has spent the past few months sparring with Dell over the company's terms and conditions. The two organizations recently agreed to settle their issues with Dell changing contracts and making them "fairer to consumers," the OFT said. The specific changes, however, remain secret as neither the OFT nor Dell will reveal exact terms and conditions alterations and as Dell has kept old contracts online."

Re:hm...

[joe 155]

figured I might as well expand...

# limited liability for negligence to the price of the product

If you agree a price and they accept then they can't later alter this so I fail to see too many problems

# excluded liability for consequential loss arising out of breach of contract

This might need looking at although I can't imagine too much which could go wrong, if the product isn't of a merchandisable quality then you can get your money back anyway (because of the statutory rights) - there are also rights to protect you from misleading advertising - if they fail to deliver then you can simply get your money back without too much trouble.

# excluded liability for oral representations not confirmed in writing, and

No contract is worth anything if it is not in writing so I can't see how this is a problem

# required the consumer to notify Dell of any errors in its confirmation of the consumer's order immediately

You'd expect this anyway, if they refuse to help then cancel because it is within your cooling off period

- this all seems like it could be solved fairly easily anyway... you can't sign away statutory rights so consumers are safe as far as I can see...

We could use some of that in Canada...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dell's customer service in Canada has fallen so far in Canada over the last 5-7 years that as an IT consultant, I now include "avoid Dell" in my equipment recommendations to my clients. I have read their legals and there are so many "escape clauses" built in that I doubt that Dell could be forced to service anything no matter the cause if they stuck to the exact letter.

Worse still is their telephone support. I often run across people whose Dell machines have run into problems, and where a clueless telephone support tech has caused them to lose all their machine's data. One client, a tax accountant, lost an extire tax season. I know, I know, backup data - but I think everyone here knows how likely you are to get most users to reliably do so. This is just one of many horror stories.

I would just love it if Dell Canada were forced to take on some accountability for its products. Then perhaps the small business people they have actually hurt would find they had more when fighting with Dell to get a machine they thought was under warranty working again. At least for now, some have found that their only remedy is to sue.

I've Been Happy with Dell

[DavidD_CA]

I help my friends and family with their Dells whenever they need it, and every time I've had to contact Dell for support or drivers they have been very prompt and knowledgeable. Even for systems that are out of warranty or hella old.

Their chat system and website for drivers have been especially useful and very efficient.

I've never had to send anything in for warranty repair, so I can't comment on that.

The last four computers...

[subxero37]

that I've worked on were all Dells. Two of them had the same motherboard, both of which were completely dead, and both of which were no older than six months. When I called Dell to request new motherboards (since the machines were under warranty) they promptly told me that they could not replace motherboards. They then offered to send me new heatsinks. Yes, because heatsinks dissipate heat so well when they're placed on a component that can't be turned on. I was never able to coax them to send me new motherboards. I now have two dissatisfied customers. Surely, someone should kick their ass.

Serves 'em right!

[epp_b]

Hey, I'd be pretty ticked at them too if they sold me a several-thousand-dollar network cable [theregister.co.uk].

Re:hm...

[Turn-X Alphonse]

The UK is different from the US. We don't go "oh the market will sort it's self out", we go "oi, you stick to the rules or you fuck off". That way if someone is being a bitch to their customers or using too much bullshit to get the truth out of them, people like Trading standards and other government bodies come in. They check it out and get it sorted.

We're an odd little place and like everyone to play fair no matter what, not just assume the cheats will get theirs via the customers.

Re:hm...

[DRJlaw]

# limited liability for negligence to the price of the product
If you agree a price and they accept then they can't later alter this so I fail to see too many problems

Your Dell laptop explodes due to a faulty lithium ion battery and burns down your house. Dell's liability is limited to the price of the laptop. I see a problem.

# excluded liability for consequential loss arising out of breach of contract
This might need looking at although I can't imagine too much which could go wrong, if the product isn't of a merchandisable quality then you can get your money back anyway (because of the statutory rights) - there are also rights to protect you from misleading advertising - if they fail to deliver then you can simply get your money back without too much trouble.

Consequential damages may be but are not necessarily related to warranties of merchantability and/or truth in advertising. Dell sells you 50 rack mount servers for a video production project that starts on 8/7/2006 and promises a delivery date of 8/1/2006. Dell fails to deliver the servers until two months after the delivery date. You've lost 7 weeks of production time. Those weeks of delay may be compensable as consequential damages.

# excluded liability for oral representations not confirmed in writing, and
No contract is worth anything if it is not in writing so I can't see how this is a problem.

The Statute of Frauds says otherwise. The common law says otherwise. There are plenty of ways to prove the existence of a contract that do not rely on a signed writing. I find it odd that you believe that Dell can make such representations and simultaneously protect itself from liability for making them.

# required the consumer to notify Dell of any errors in its confirmation of the consumer's order immediately
You'd expect this anyway, if they refuse to help then cancel because it is within your cooling off period

I would not expect this at all. The consumer makes an offer for a specified piece of equipment. Dell purports to accept the offer but specifies different equipment. Under the law of contracts the consumer is not obligated to do anything because Dell has failed to accept the original offer, and in fact made a counteroffer (mirror image rule). The professional sales organization shifts the effort required to catch and correct errors onto the consumer. You believe that this is equitable?

Four strikes. You're out.

Dell Complete Coverage

[Anonymous Coward]

I work at a private school helping out the tech department. A few years ago, the middle school started a program requiring every student to purchase a certain laptop. The school now has around 150 Dells, in various latitude models. Getting dropped and abused in every manner, we also require the "complete coverage" plan, which is pretty much anything but batteries. It works very well, needing only about half an hour to set up a replacement or onsite repair of anything--screens, motherboards, whatever. The parts arrive next day; technicians usually arrive in two or three.

They have a phone line that isn't bad, but their chat is faster. You just enter the service tag, and verify the company or person that owns it. Infrequently you will be disconnected and have to retype all the information.

From my experience, with the expensive warranty, they are prompt and helpful. Then again, it is a business-class account, even though the computers themselves are owned privately.

My Dell Hell Story

[DellFraud]

For anyone out there that thinks Dell has good customer service. Try again. This is the worst company that I have ever dealt with. I am still trying to fight with them so I won't give all the details yet, but if I ever get my money back from them, I will be posting even more details. I have contacted several lawyers and asked them to file a class action lawsuit against them for consumer fraud, but all of the lawyers are afraid of Dell. The biggest reason is because there is a binding arbitration clause buried in the sales contract. If there are any lawyers at there that would be willing to help me out with this case I would be delighted to work with you to hold Dell accountable for their actions.

• Purchased new computer from Dell on 08/24/03.

• On 03/23/04 the computer just started overheating and shutting off.

• They replaced the processor, heatsink and fan unit on 04/04/04 and the problem went away. BTW, I had a next day business warranty with them and they were not able to fix my problem from 3/23/04 until 04/04/04.

• On 12/29/04 I contacted Dell again because this problem was happening again. After discussing with them explaining to them that this is a product defect and that they can not fix the problem they told me they would replace the parts again, I was told with an updated part, unfortunately I find that hard to believe because it was the exact same part number as the first time.

• They replaced the parts but because I knew the problem would happen again I made them give me an additional year on the warranty. They told me they would extend the warranty, but I would have to pay for it and then they would reimburse me. I payed the money and then they told me that they couldn't reiimburse me. I fought with them until 04/11/05 to get them to give me my money back.

• At this point, I thought the problem was fixed because it hadn't overheated or shut off for a very long time. Then I found out when they replaced the parts on 12/29/04 they also replaced the BIOS to A33 on the computer and when the computer started overheating it would only run at 1/2 the speed as what I was sold. Eg. I bought a 3.06GHz and it would only run at 1.56GHz

• On 05/11/06, I contacted Dell telling them that their "solution" to the problem was not acceptable. I was told that I needed to upgrade my BIOS to A38 and turn Intel SpeedStep off in the BIOS. I did and the problem still existed.

• I called on 05/16/06, telling them that the solution did not fix the problem and they told me that they had no way to fix this technical support problem. I then told them I wanted a new computer. They agreed to this and I was told that I would be getting a new computer that was equivalent or better in every way.

• On 05/31/06, I received the new computer and 45 minutes after it was turned on it crashed. There was something wrong with the graphics. I explained to them that there was a problem with the new computer and they said that I would have to go through the normal troubleshooting procedures. I told them that I was sending back the new system and that I wanted my money back on my orginal system.

• On 06/22/06, I was told that Dell would refund me my original system cost minus 25% depreciation to the original form of payment.

• On 06/27/06, I informed Dell that the original credit card that I used I know longer had the account and I was told that I had to provide them with written verification that I know longer had an account with the credit card company. I contacted the credit card company and had them fax the requested information to Dell and they said that it was not sufficient to "bypass or circumvent the normal processes".

• On 07/07/06, I informed Dell that this was not acceptable and they would need to provide me exactly what it is they need from the credit card company and / or find an alternative method of payment even though I closed the credit card account which was the original form of payment on Nov. 4th 2004!!!!

Re:Leveling the field

[Firehed]

I had a similar experience with a DVD drive that started acting up from a Dell system. I had the new one within a day or two (with an offer to send out a technician to replace it - I opted out, seeing as the drive hadn't been used in the original system for several months, not to mention I can use a screwdriver) with a prepaid return postage for sending back the old busted drive.

As it turns out though, the way they handle stuff like that is quite sketchy, if not illeal. They charged my (well, my dad's, as I was about 15 at the time) credit card the cost of the replacement drive - about twice what it would have cost anywhere else - and credited that back as soon as they received the new drive. Had I needed to dispute the charges there would have been no issue, as I was never told that they would do such a thing, nor was there any indication that that's their SOP in the original warrantee for the system. All in all, I was quite happy with the service, but when I found out that they handle returns like that, I was a bit nervous to say the least.

Re:Leveling the field

[wfberg]

If you don't like their customer service, don't buy their products. The market will decide whether good customer service is worth the extra cost.

So what you're saying is, contractual law isn't necessary to police breaches of contract? Interesting.

What Dell is doing is basically breaching EU laws on remote sales, as well as common laws. Customers are entitled to statutory protections and Dell isn't living up to those. This is a problem in a free market, because the playing field is level to everyone, except Dell. Meanwhile, people buy a Dell expecting it to be a merchantible piece of equipment, fit for its purpose (Dell isn't saying otherwise) and then the shit starts, anywhere from Dell not actually delivering the thing in time, delivering the wrong thing and denying it, not replacing parts that are bad (i.e. not agreed to) etc.

A free market presupposed actual fair trading, rather than taking money for stuff, and not living up to your end of the deal. That would be illegal.