Warning - LG Electronics - No Aftersales Service

[Koenig]

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:49:54 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Well, what was he doing?

Keep the TV until the part it needed

I am not at all concerned about what he should have done - it is what
he did do is what is at issue here.


--
Trev

"I took the liberty of fertilising your caviar"

Fan Made DVD Commentaries - http://www.geocities.com/mmmcommentaries
VizPoets Filmmakers - http://www.vizpoets.com
Newsgroup stats - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newsgroupstats/
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3c026e8d%240%247488%24afc38c87%40news.optusnet.com.au&output=gplain

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:40:51 +1000, "Evil Brian"
<omoto2001@yahoo.com.au> put finger to keyboard and composed:

Bok,

Learn to read - the MW-60SZ12 has a RRP of $11,249. Go and check
http://au.lge.com/prodmodeldetail.do?actType=search&page=1&modelCategoryId=010201&categoryId=010201&parentId=0102&modelCodeDisplay=MW-60SZ12&model=Select+a+model

It's an "LCD Projection Monitor(No Tuner)", not a TV as the OP
described it.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Koenig]

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:49:54 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Repair details are directed through the qualified
service agent, not the general public.

Irrelevant to what he was trying to do. Yes, the service
agent should have done that, and when they werent
prepared to do that, that was a reasonable approach.

No, it isn't reasonable. It is utter chaos to have both the service
agent and the customer trying to secure parts from an area that should
only be dealing with the service agent ie. business end of things.

Still futile.

ONLY because LG is completely fucked as far
as after sales service is concerned, as he said.

And only he said.

Considering the service agent wouldn't have a clue what the real
fault was until he was able to take the unit away for inspection.

You dont know that either.

Unless LG are employing psychics as their service agents there is no
way they would know until they inspect the unit, and to make an
assessment without doing so is not the way to do it.


--
Trev

"I took the liberty of fertilising your caviar"

Fan Made DVD Commentaries - http://www.geocities.com/mmmcommentaries
VizPoets Filmmakers - http://www.vizpoets.com
Newsgroup stats - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newsgroupstats/
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3c026e8d%240%247488%24afc38c87%40news.optusnet.com.au&output=gplain

 

[Koenig]

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:58:11 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Yawn. Sending multiple faxes to the GM was the wrong thing to do, OK?

Wrong. Not when the other apes are ignoring you.

"Apes". OK. I can see they would be receptive to your comments also.


--
Trev

"I took the liberty of fertilising your caviar"

Fan Made DVD Commentaries - http://www.geocities.com/mmmcommentaries
VizPoets Filmmakers - http://www.vizpoets.com
Newsgroup stats - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/newsgroupstats/
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3c026e8d%240%247488%24afc38c87%40news.optusnet.com.au&output=gplain

 

[Rod Speed]

Koenig <trevorgenschbloodysven@optusnet.com.au> wrote in
message news:37vac0d598elaj6n561ph4eqrevt984v80@4ax.com...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

Well, what was he doing?

Keep the TV until the part it needed

I am not at all concerned about what he should have
done - it is what he did do is what is at issue here.

What he did do was perfectly reasonable. He attempted
to ensure that the service agent had the part needed
before they took his TV away, to minimise the time the
TV was away, when the TV was usable with the fault.

If LG after sales service is so poor that they
cannot handle that perfectly reasonable approach,
he is right, LG after sales service is fucked.

AND LG should have offered him a replacement TV
which didnt have that fault since the fault was there out
of the box instead of referring him to the service agent.

He's right, LG after sales service is fucked and anyone with
a clue would use someone else instead if that's practical.

 

[Rod Speed]

Koenig <trevorgenschbloodysven@optusnet.com.au> wrote in
message news:lmvac097mtcvq37hicdsjrvhm27jr5879g@4ax.com...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

Repair details are directed through the qualified
service agent, not the general public.

Irrelevant to what he was trying to do. Yes, the service
agent should have done that, and when they werent
prepared to do that, that was a reasonable approach.

No, it isn't reasonable.

Wrong.

It is utter chaos to have both the service agent and the
customer trying to secure parts from an area that should only
be dealing with the service agent ie. business end of things.

Mindless stuff. LG should have offered him a brand new TV that
didnt have the fault, since the TV he got was faulty out of the box.

When LG was stupid enough to tell him that he had to use the
service agent to get the TV repaired, it is perfectly reasonable
to only let the service agent take the TV away when they have the
part that needs to be changed, when the TV is usable without it.

If the service agent is so hopeless that they cant
manage something as basic as that, its perfectly
reasonable for the customer to attempt to do something
about that fucked approach in that situation.

Its the CUSTOMER that matters, not the convenience
of the service agent and the spare parts operation, stupid.

Still futile.

ONLY because LG is completely fucked as far
as after sales service is concerned, as he said.

And only he said.

Wrong again. Others have said that on notgoodenough too.

Considering the service agent wouldn't have a clue what the real
fault was until he was able to take the unit away for inspection.

You dont know that either.

Unless LG are employing psychics as their service agents
there is no way they would know until they inspect the unit,

They did that and proclaimed that they would have to take it away.

and to make an assessment without doing so is not the way to do it.

Wrong again. Depends on the fault that it can be seen to have.

 

[Rod Speed]

Koenig <trevorgenschbloodysven@optusnet.com.au> wrote in
message news:sqvac0dh2a8r4itkftvu1iln47pongocre@4ax.com...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

Yawn. Sending multiple faxes to the GM was the wrong thing to do, OK?

Wrong. Not when the other apes are ignoring you.

"Apes". OK. I can see they would be receptive to your comments also.

I never called anyone an ape when I got stonewalled by the
apes and took it to the GM and got what I required from him.

He wasnt very happy about it, but it was a bit more complicated
than the simpler situation that produced this thread.

 

[Marty]

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:973ac093c9lng11hrdori6fa5eh9kd1rnb@4ax.com...

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 10:04:32 +1000, "Marty"
NOSPAM_vk2umj@yahoo.com.au_NOSPAM> put finger to keyboard and
composed:

"bok" <bok@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:40c434c4@news.comindico.com.au...
after going to the lg website and lookong up the prices of the rear
projection tv's u said that u paid $9000 for the one u bought.when i
looked
at the prices not one of there tv's where priced above $7499 rrp.also
what
model did u get or do u won't me to give u some model number's so that
u
can
still carry on with your lies?


I want you to learn some basic english and grammar so your messages are
at
least comprehendable.

I believe that should be "comprehensible".

Hmm - seems I need to eject a few Gremlins from my brain.... ;-)

Ta muchly....

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Michael]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:2il3crFnoam5U1@uni-berlin.de...

"Michael"
"Phil Allison"
** We have another *** live *** one.

Way to snip the post and evade the issue.

** A live one and a liar.

With Google as my witness, you've just snipped bits...

** No need to repost your asinine insults.

So, yes, you did snip. If exposing your stupid comments for what they are
is insulting to you, don't make them.

and evaded the issue

** I am evading yet another know nothing lunatic.

So, yes, you did evade the issue. Poor fool, no one asked for a list of
your maniacal motives. You called me a liar because I said you both snipped
your post and evaded the issue. You've admitted to both now, which makes
you the liar, not me, and a hypocrite to boot.

again. Doesn't exactly lend much credibility to your accusation now,
does
it?

** Like I said - we have another live one, you.

That's the worst apology I've ever read. I guess hypocritical, lying,
Philistines can't do any better.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Michael" <quadhammerNOHAM@hotmail.com>


** Take you medication - lunatic.

Take a whole lot more than you are supposed to.

"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:2il3crFnoam5U1@uni-berlin.de...
"Michael"
"Phil Allison"
** We have another *** live *** one.

Way to snip the post and evade the issue.

** A live one and a liar.

With Google as my witness, you've just snipped bits...

** No need to repost your asinine insults.

So, yes, you did snip. If exposing your stupid comments for what they are
is insulting to you, don't make them.

and evaded the issue

** I am evading yet another know nothing lunatic.

So, yes, you did evade the issue. Poor fool, no one asked for a list of
your maniacal motives. You called me a liar because I said you both
snipped
your post and evaded the issue. You've admitted to both now, which makes
you the liar, not me, and a hypocrite to boot.

again. Doesn't exactly lend much credibility to your accusation now,
does
it?

** Like I said - we have another live one, you.

That's the worst apology I've ever read. I guess hypocritical, lying,
Philistines can't do any better.

 

[Noddy]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:2inflcFoopc7U1@uni-berlin.de...

"Michael" <quadhammerNOHAM@hotmail.com


** Take you medication - lunatic.

Take a whole lot more than you are supposed to.

Lol

What a wonderfully charming and intelligent response.

I'm guessing Phil is looking forward to turning 11 sometime soon

--
Regards,
Noddy.

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 21:13:09 +1000, "Phil Allison"
<philallison@tpg.com.au> put finger to keyboard and composed:

** LCD screen technology is not usually defect free - never has been.
Even expensive LCD projectors have a few defects - at least - they are not
visible unless you go on a witch hunt for them. The issue is all about the
extraordinary cost to make perfect ones. If you did not pay the price for a
perfect one - then you have no grounds to whinge.

Every customer is entitled to the reasonable expectation that a new
product would be defect free right out of the box. If a manufacturer
wishes to differentiate between perfect and somewhat imperfect
product, then let him sell them as prime and seconds quality,
respectively, otherwise prime quality should be the default. OTOH, if
a defect develops during the life of the product, then the customer
should be bound by the terms of the manufacturer's dead pixel policy
(or similar), but only if this policy has been clearly explained at
the time of purchase.

FWIW, if I had handled the OP's original complaint, I would have
offered him the choice of a rebate, say $500 - $1K, or a DVD recorder,
for example, to compensate him for his "impaired appreciation" of the
product, assuming the fault was at all tolerable. Otherwise I would
have exchanged the unit for a new one and sold his old one as a
factory second. Either way LG would have come out ahead. And that's
even without accounting for the PR value.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On 4 Jun 2004 02:52:00 -0700, paul_c100@hotmail.com (Paul) put finger
to keyboard and composed:

I aggreed to have the TV taken away. We waited three weeks. Nobody
returned calls. Unbelievable.

After it was returned, the picture quality was crap, the progressive
scan no longer works, and I suspect (no proof yet) that they've put in
an inferior LCD unit because the TV doesn't seem to display high
resolution images as well as before.

The progressive scan feature would be a function of the support
electronics, not the actual LCD module. Surely the two components are
not supplied as an assembly? In any case, does progressive scan have
any real meaning for an LCD screen?


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Franc Zabkar"
"Phil Allison"

** LCD screen technology is not usually defect free - never has been.
Even expensive LCD projectors have a few defects - at least - they are
not
visible unless you go on a witch hunt for them. The issue is all about
the
extraordinary cost to make perfect ones. If you did not pay the price for
a
perfect one - then you have no grounds to whinge.

Every customer is entitled to the reasonable expectation that a new
product would be defect free right out of the box.

** Now you are playing games with words while ignoring what I pointed out
above. In reality, no new product is perfectly defect free - it is
enough that any defects are insignificant and /or not noticeable.





........... Phil

 

[Noddy]

"Franc Zabkar" <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message

FWIW, if I had handled the OP's original complaint, I would have
offered him the choice of a rebate, say $500 - $1K, or a DVD recorder,
for example, to compensate him for his "impaired appreciation" of the
product, assuming the fault was at all tolerable. Otherwise I would
have exchanged the unit for a new one and sold his old one as a
factory second. Either way LG would have come out ahead. And that's
even without accounting for the PR value.

Indeed.

It's a shame that you weren't.

--
Regards,
Noddy.

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 18:54:36 +1000, "Phil Allison"
<philallison@tpg.com.au> put finger to keyboard and composed:

"Franc Zabkar"
"Phil Allison"

** LCD screen technology is not usually defect free - never has been.
Even expensive LCD projectors have a few defects - at least - they are
not
visible unless you go on a witch hunt for them. The issue is all about
the
extraordinary cost to make perfect ones. If you did not pay the price for
a
perfect one - then you have no grounds to whinge.

Every customer is entitled to the reasonable expectation that a new
product would be defect free right out of the box.


** Now you are playing games with words while ignoring what I pointed out
above. In reality, no new product is perfectly defect free - it is
enough that any defects are insignificant and /or not noticeable.

Whether a defect is significant or not is a subjective issue. From my
perspective, a pixel defect is insignificant in a seconds quality
product, but not in a prime quality product. The price should reflect
the difference. In any case, what is to say that the OP's original
problem wasn't something even less noticeable than a dead pixel? He
still hasn't come clean on the issue. I'm starting to wonder whether
he's just trolling.

Anyway, ask yourself this question, if your CRT screen started
displaying a stuck pixel, and you traced the fault to a hot bit in the
video RAM on your in-warranty graphics card, would you expect to
receive a replacement card?

FWIW, I can think of at least one product where defects are
acceptable, namely a hard disc drive. However, even in this case, once
the number of grown defects exceeds the number of spare sectors (ie
once new defects become visible), then the HD can be considered to be
defective.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[Pad]

Who are you an LG man???


Phil Allison wrote:

"Noddy" <dg4163@tpg.com.au

"DJ!" <derek@ausmicro.com

Possibly with good cause. We only have your side of the story here,
remember.

Of course.

Just out of curiosity, did you see a *single* point in the guys story that
was in any way unreasonable?

** Just about the whole lot smacks of a control freak and a crank:

1. He avoided saying what the original "small fault" was.

2. He has libelled LG publicly on the basis of one example which only he
knows about while remaining anonymous.

3. There is ***no information*** in his story that can be checked out by
those reading it.

4. He has not availed himself of the free legal process for settling such
disputes.

5. He has not returned to explain or justify himself.

............ Phil

 

[Paul]

Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<dihdc01ntg932i5hs5glcd3v0i5jv6adu7@4ax.com>...

The progressive scan feature would be a function of the support
electronics, not the actual LCD module. Surely the two components are
not supplied as an assembly? In any case, does progressive scan have
any real meaning for an LCD screen?
- Franc Zabkar

Frank - What do you mean by your last sentance. There is a very clear
difference between progressive scan and non-progressive scan. I recall
prior to buying the LG existing owners had shown photographs of
detailed images with and without.

Interested in why you would think it's not applicable.

 

[Franc Zabkar]

On 10 Jun 2004 05:38:18 -0700, paul_c100@hotmail.com (Paul) put finger
to keyboard and composed:

Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<dihdc01ntg932i5hs5glcd3v0i5jv6adu7@4ax.com>...


The progressive scan feature would be a function of the support
electronics, not the actual LCD module. Surely the two components are
not supplied as an assembly? In any case, does progressive scan have
any real meaning for an LCD screen?
- Franc Zabkar

Frank - What do you mean by your last sentance. There is a very clear
difference between progressive scan and non-progressive scan. I recall
prior to buying the LG existing owners had shown photographs of
detailed images with and without.

Does this mean that you don't have any personal experience of
progressive scanning?

Interested in why you would think it's not applicable.

To be honest, I'm in no position to give an opinion on this issue
(that's why I phrased my last statement as a question). I don't have
access to any progressive scan AV equipment, and my understanding of
this term is very rudimentary. I suppose a simplistic definition is to
say that progressive = non-interlaced, and non-progressive =
interlaced. Here's another definition:

=====================================================================
http://www.jvc.com/support/index.jsp?pageID=1&faqID=10

Progressive Scan Output

Video output that carries a video signal in which each horizontal line
follows the next--unlike an interlaced output, which presents the
odd-numbered horizontal lines, then the even-numbered horizontal
lines, and so on. Progressive-scan video has less flicker and fewer
motion artifacts than the traditional interlaced-scanning method.
=====================================================================

Notice that the author cites reduced flicker and "fewer motion
artifacts" as being benefits of progressive scannning. However, I
would think that current LCD displays would be relatively immune to
flicker and "motion artifacts" due to their relative long response
times (16ms?). In fact, 20 years ago CRT CAD monitors used long
persistence phosphors to circumvent flicker problems due to low
refresh rates.

Another problem with interlaced CRT displays is "interlace jitter".
This URL seems to describe this effect quite well:

=====================================================================
http://moliere.byu.edu/digital/oilwater.html

Instead, each frame actually consisted of two fields that were scanned
to the face of the TV's cathode ray tube in succession. The first
field was placed on alternating scanlines, and the second field was
"interlaced" onto the lines left vacant by the first field.

Due to the difficulty of beginning the scan of each line at the
precise point of the preceding and subsequent lines, the interlacing
of the two fields causes jitter on the screen.
=====================================================================

I see interlace jitter on both my 68cm LG and my 80cm Sanyo TVs
(although the latter has additional vertical jitter issues). It is
most noticeable when viewing text or long, thin horizontal lines. I
would think that an LCD display would be immune to this problem
because odd and even lines of information would be written precisely
on every scan, ie there would be no synchronisation issues.

Here is another definition of interlace jitter:

=====================================================================
http://www.gisdevelopment.net/glossary/i.htm

Thus, a single, still video image of 1/30 of a second duration
consists of two interlaced fields of the source video signal.
Displaying a single frame of interlaced video causes vertical jitter.
This jitter is especially pronounced when an image contains horizontal
lines. This is called umpire shirt jitter on conventional broadcast TV
and can be seen along the black and white edges of an umpire's shirt
or along the sharp horizontal edges of large letters. This effect can
cause eye strain. Interlace jitter is best overcome by using a monitor
with long-persistence phosphor. This phosphor holds each line longer
until it can be refreshed by the next scan.
=====================================================================


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[TonyP]

"Paul" <paul_c100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:26be4c9c.0406040152.356f02e5@posting.google.com...

This contrasts with other dealers. I have had problems with both Sony
and Philips products in the past. The difference is, if you request
the problem be escalated, Sony and Philips will DEAL with your
problem. Both of these companies went out of their way in attempting
to solve complex (and expensive) problems.

LMAO, I had far worse problems with Sony on two occasions which were only
settled after I got DFT involved.
My Nephew had similar problems with Philips, and so did I many years ago.
Conversely a friend had LG go above and beyond, when the dealer walked away
from their responsibility.

Getting satisfactory service from nearly any company is usually a matter of
luck and persistence. It's a lot easier to name the good ones than the bad,
since the list is *SO* much shorter!

TonyP.