NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/misc/consumer/18857

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-08 | 3.4 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!boo!uttsbbs!paul's.friend
From: paul'[e-mail] (Paul'S Friend)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Subject: SANTRON 4 OF 5
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 7 Nov 92 20:50:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: paul'[e-mail] (Paul'S Friend)
Lines: 54

Santron, Part IV of V: Sanity Prevails.

     And so he did see them in court.  My friend lost another day
of consulting.  Robert from Santron showed up with a luggable
computer in tow, and told my friend it was now ready (!!!) and
had room for full-size cards, so why didn't my friend just take
it and avoid the nasty trial.  My friend explained that now that
3 months had elapsed without one word from Santron, it was a
little late to start negotiating, and besides, he had now bought
another computer elsewhere that he was perfectly happy with.

     My friend told his story.  Santron didn't deny anything,
they just told the judge that my friend had broken the computer
on purpose.  The judge asked my friend if he had broken his own
computer.  My friend said no.  He asked my friend's wife if she
had broken the computer.  She said no.  The judge laughed, and
awarded my friend a full refund of $2864.00.  Santron appealed
for a new trial, surely there was a judge out there who had some
sense.  At the new trial, again they showed up with the luggable
(what were these guys thinking?) and again they told the "he
broke it" story, and again the judge laughed.  So this time they
came armed with some better stories that made it sound like they
had done their very very best, and that my friend was just being
picky.

     They told the judge that they used old parts because new
ones cost too much.  And they told him that they don't promise to
repair computers in one day, or even four.  So my friend showed
the judge a letter from Santron in response to a sales enquiry he
had made.  It stated, in response to his questions; "Concerns: 1.
Warranty repairs: We use new parts for repairs.  2. Repairs:
Turn-around time for repairs is usually 8 business hours.  In
some cases, if we don't have parts in stock, we might need an
extra day or two to order parts".  And the judge laughed.

     Then they told the judge that customers are not allowed to
take the back off of the computer or replace cards because the
components inside the computer are VERY fragile, and that the
computers have a seal on the back that must not be broken or it
will void the warranty.  My friend and the judge laughed.

     Then they said the computer was never designed to hold three
full-length cards.  So my friend showed the judge the nice glossy
flyer for the computer that stated "3 full-size slots available".
My friend also mentioned that the original computer held 3 full-
length cards very nicely thank-you.  So Santron explained that
they didn't actually mean "full-size" slots because "full-length"
cards are old technology, and new "full-length" cards are not
actually full-length.  My friend and the judge looked puzzled,
and my friend explained that nevertheless, he still used those
antique "full-length" cards.  Again the judge laughed and found
for my friend, awarding him 10% less than the first judge had.
(Well you can't please all of the judges all of the time).