Dealing with Amazon
 

I did my research before purchasing an LCD TV, and thought I'd be getting what I wanted. Unfortunately . . .

The zoom mode does not work as documented in the manual (Syntax Olevia 30"). It is supposed to stretch a 4:3 image while maintaining the correct aspect ratio (the pictures of the stretch mode in the manual are very clear about this), but it does not. The image appears to be expanded to 16:9 before stretching.

I've contacted Amazon (the vendor from which the display was purchased), and they claim they bear no responsibility for this issue and will not accept its return.

Olevia has also been contacted; they claim that they are aware of the problem but cannot offer any assurance of a fix.

Frankly, I'm quite dissatisfied and feel like I'm getting screwed. Does anyone have any suggestions for recourse?

Use the buyers protection built into your credit card?

Discover doesn't appear to have anything other than the option to dispute the charge. I guess that's my next step, if I can't get any satisfaction from Syntax.

I've also called Amazon's customer service number (you won't find it on any of their web pages . . . it's 800-201-7575). The individual I spoke with was sympathetic, but claimed her team lead would not offer an exception.

I've never had a problem returning an item to Amazon. Did you wait too long to try to return it?

-David

If there is any information on the Amazon site that speaks to product specifications contrary to the actual product you received, just start sending emails to Amazon customer service with details escalating the issue (reasonable emails, but with a slightly angry customer tone). Their CSRs are somewhere overseas, and you get a lot of variability in the responses. Often a first response looks like they did not even read the email or they just say no - regardless of the request. But if you have a legitimate case, eventually you will get someone who offers to correct the situation. I order a lot of stuff from Amazon - have had issues every now and then - they have always taken care of things once I get the right person.

If you just waited too long to return it, and have no buyer protection, then charge-back is probably your only option.

I also never had any problem with Amazon.com so far.

At least Amazon is much better than crappy ebay.com.

As long as you return within 30 days after purchase, they always accept return item without any reason.

My first contact with Amazon regarding the problem was 3 days after the display's arrival at my home.

In my last discussion with an Amazon CSR (via their extremely well hidden telephone number), I was told that I should have detained the gentleman that delivered the set until I had completely checked it out, and refused shipment had I not found it to my liking. Nevermind that the set was delivered on a day that was well below freezing here in Maine, and the display had been stored effectively in the deep freeze for days and required at least a couple of hours warm-up before operation.

When I called the shipping service to ask if that kind of thing was standard practice, they had a hearty laugh and claimed that if that were a requirement of Amazon's, they'd never deliver anything from them again.

I've been through at least 4 CSRs via email, and 2 over the phone. All are claiming that a) the display provides the stated features (it clearly does not, there are diagrams in the manual that are refuted by reality) and b) it's a TV larger than 27" so they will not take it back.

I spoke with Discover last night about disputing the charge. They're more than happy to do this, and seem interested in keeping me happy (I am a very frequent traveler and charge all of my airfare, hotel, car rentals, food etc. through Discover . . . they make lots of money from me :)). I'm waiting until I receive Amazon's response to my last missive before taking this step.

Ya know, this is one of these cases of "you get what you pay for".

I looked into these Syntax LCD's last year too, and decided against it. When they sell 30" LCD's for the same price others charge for 23" then you just know there is a downside. There are quite a lot of reviews where their quality issues are debated...

With respect, ScottC, no it's not. What I paid for was a specific set of features as documented on the Syntax and Amazon web pages. I did not get them.

If all of the material I watch was in 16:9 anamorphic format, I would be satisfied with this set. However, much is 16:9 to 2.35:1 letterboxed in a 4:3 frame (primarily SD broadcasts), so a true zoom facility was high on my list of required features. The display is otherwise very feature rich (many inputs, two tuners for PIP, detachable speakers). There are no backlight "hotspots" or dead pixels as far as I can see, and the picture quality at native resolution is very, very good. I would be very pleased with this set if the zoom feature worked as documented.

But product satisfaction is more than just the product, it is also the after sales service, obviously this product is not working as it should and at the price it is sold for I still feel safe claiming; you get what you pay for. This is the cheapest LCD TV brand around, and granted; image quality is certainly not bad on them, but they are no Sharp, Toshiba or Philips either.

At least most of their units have a serial port so perhaps at some point a firmware upgrade will be made available.

Did you try calling Amazon? Their phone support is very good, better then email one.

Looks like he did, Post #7.

I was going to suggest the same thing.

This isn't an Amazon issue so I don't see why calling them would be an option.

Unless of course it is to return the product.

Was this the LCD that was featured in Stuff Magazine a few months back?

Well, after listening to yet another Amazon CSR vociferously misinterpret the documentation provided for this TV (and again refuse to accept its return), I've gone ahead and disputed the charge on my credit card. The credit card company's instructions to Amazon are to arrange for return of the set or provide proof that it works as advertised. I've already got documentation from Syntax that says the documentation is wrong, so I'm pretty sure this will be a slam dunk.

Of course it's an Amazon issue. The vendor has an implied warranty that the product work as specified and advertised, at least in my home state. On-line, catalog and mail purchases are qualified as "local" purchases, so Maine consumer protection statutes apply.

I didn't give my money to Syntax, I gave it to Amazon. If they're going to act as a sales agent for a product, they're expected to handle issues caused by their misrepresentation of that product's features.

So, you ARE returning it.

So, when I said "you get what you pay for", I was right, FWIW some of the reviews on Amazon.com DO mention your problems, so your product research alarm bells should have started ringing there...

There is no such thing as a good quality 30" LCD for $1100.

What? I didn't get what I paid for. The TV did not have the advertised feature. Which is why I'm returning it . . . :confused:

The first two things I would have done, if I actually did the research, was Google "Olevia zoom" after reading the red flags at Amazon. Then I would have seen the first two links returned telling me again that the zoom didn't work.

Then I would not have bought it and would have avoided all this hassle.

Also, moving forward in your research, please do the math so you don't end up trapped again. 16:9 works out to 1.78 ratio. The resolution of the 30" is 1280x768 (1.6666). That's 15:9, not 16:9.

The real 16:9 should have resolution 1280x720 (oliva 27") or 1366x768 (Oliva 32").

So, I also suppose you can go after them that way. Good luck... and please research more thoroughly going forward. ^

So, you mail ordered a no-name Chinese TV that's on perpetual closeout at tigerdirect based on a feature that is physically impossible to accomplish and now you think you're getting screwed? That isn't the word I would use.

Huh? Zooming a 4:3 image while maintaining aspect ratio is not physically impossible. I have a 57" Hitachi RPTV that does this quite nicely.

Reports on the quality and features of televisions are something for which I generally go to Home Theater web sites. The Syntax TVs are mostly well received given their price points. The Amazon reviews also showed them as a good value. But once you've read a dozen or more positive reviews, you most likely come to the conclusion that what you're purchasing is OK.

For cryin' out loud, I'd already examined the owner's manual of the TV before I purchased it . . . it had the feature I wanted listed. Why should I disbelieve it, and more importantly, why should I be given grief by the vendor when the product does not perform as documented?

Because, as others have pointed out, you get what you pay for. You bought a no-name TV and are SHOCKED that it doesn't perform as reliably as a top-of-the-line, name-brand unit. That's why these things are cheap, because they don't do fancy things. The fancy things they claim to do are often huge stretches (no pun intended), and still often don't work at all.

If something's too good to be true, it usually is.

You're assuming the pixels are square.

You know, I'm going to try and remain civil here. As I've pointed out numerous times (you seem to be conveniently ignoring this), I DID NOT get what I paid for.

As far as "fancy things" are concerned, I'm not expecting any. Performing as per the documentation is a pretty fundamental thing, and that's all what I want. If it did that, I'd be quite happy with the set. My complaint is with one, SPECIFIC feature that is implemented incorrectly and does not perform as per Syntax's published specifications.

The general concensus on home theater and electronics fora is that the Syntax line is a good value. I would agree except for the fact that it doesn't have a specific feature as documented in the owner's manual, and it's a thing of value to me. I do not believe it unreasonable to expect a vendor to make good on the features touted, or accomodate those via a refund of the purchase price when they can't be.

Wow, that's original.

What's most interesting is that most of the people here telling me to just "suck it up, you can't expect good quality at this price" are probably the first to whine to their respective airlines because they want compensation for the busted lav on the last flight they took on a deeply-discounted fare.

Where do you come up with this stuff? FWIW I mainly fly on paid J and F tickets and have only ever complained twice to an airline in my life, both times on eleven thousand dollar tickets when they messed things up.

Reality is different. I was in the market for an LCD last year, and came pretty close to ordering the Syntax 30". In the end I opted for an A brand TV instead.

I really don't mean to offend you with the "you get what you pay for". all I mean by it is that you opted to purchase a no-name brand with virtually zero history in making TV's. I don't mean to offend your choice, or your intelligence, just the choice of brand.

When you got the TV and something didn't work the way it was meant then my first reaction is "makes sense", it is a very cheap and very unknown brand, so something is meant to be wrong.

In the world of electronics if something is this much cheaper than the closest competitor then it is pretty much always a sign that something is wrong.

If this were an A-name brand then you would most likely at least have some kind of support from the company, in the case of Syntax it seems you were simply told to quit complaining. They didn't take responsability for their actions.

IMHO your view of the matter is wrong, it should have been more along the lines of "I bought a really cheap TV, and it turned out that it was cheap for a reason"....

I hope the new model tv you get makes you happier, really I do.

Whatever he does, it sure won't be at the price point of the first TV. He tried to do it on the cheap, and that's what he got. No surprise here.

I think you're failing to understand that we're saying (at least I'm saying) is that one of the things you pay for with a name brand is reliability, honesty, and predictability. You chose to go with a no-name brand which are deeply-discounted because they don't offer these important features, and you're now finding out how valuable these features are.

You can take this as personally as you like, but no one is ignoring anything here except you. You wanted Sony quality at Sorny prices, and you should actually be grateful that you learned of the quality in time to return it or dispute the charge. It would be much worse to learn of it in 91 days when your purchase protection ran out and you find that those pixels start dying out quickly.

Like, Scott, I wish you the best of luck. It would really be great if you could get something for nothing. I can't afford a good LCD TV, which would be about $15,000 for what I would consider acceptable. I'd be at the store tomorrow if I could get what I wanted for half that, but it doesn't exist, at least not from a manufacturer I would trust to deliver on their promises.

I have to chime in and agree with OP on this one, as I see the opposing arguments as rather silly.

Suppose you wanted a cheap mp3 player. You don't need to store photos, you don't need a display, you don't need a smooth-as-silk touch-click-magic controller. You find a $50 512MB mp3 player and the literature says it does what you need - plays mp3 and wav - no aiff, atrac, ogg etc - that's fine, all I want is an mp3 player

So it shows up and:

No screen - OK, I didn't expect one
30 day warranty - OK, it's a low end model, no surprise
kinda cheap looking - I get what I pay for
kinda clunky in operation - ditto
doesn't play mp3, only atrac - ????

Fine, so you return it (I think there's still more to the story that there's such trouble returning it after many posters have reported no trouble getting Amazon to accept returns), but don't expect to get everyone on the internet to get all worked up over it. If there's a valid reason that you can't return it, then accept it and learn for next time.

And, yes, I'm sure all of us have eaten the cost of cheap products that ended up not working as advertised. That's how we learned.

My $.02 - Amazon as a vendor/dealer sold you the television you ordered as represented by the manufacturer/brand. The television received DID have this feature, correct? It just didn't work because of the faulty implementation by the manufacturer. Amazon sold you the product you ordered with the feature you wanted; however, the manufacturer failed to deliver on the promise of the utility of that feature.

As for the mp3 player example, I think it is slightly different...
in my scenario, the mp3 player will play mp3s, but they just sound like they're under water, or maybe it only accepts 32kbit encoding (real low quality). You got the MP3 player. It plays MP3s. It just doesn't live up to your expectations.

That is why we have all these reviews and message boards to refer to when we're making an investment.

Now, don't let me sound like I'm jumping on the "you shoulda got a sony" bandwagon... My family is in retail (not me, yet, though) and we got one of the new sony dlp televisions and it had the strangest problem, not decoding video signals other than 480i intermittently. Ultimately, as it was a problem with Sony's implementation of their feature, Sony was responsible for the problem, repair, and replacement. Sony has a better reputation because they tend to offer better support for their customers when there are issues.

I'm not sure why you would make such a distinction. My contention is that the manufacturer does not offer a "zoom" feature on the set, since it does not maintain the aspect ratio when enlarging the image . . . witness the zoom feature of virtually every other electronic or optical device, where aspect ratio is maintained. The mode provided on this television would more accurately be called a "stretch" mode (and a similar mode is referred to as such on other brands). So Amazon sold me a product without the feature I wanted, a feature that the television is documented as having in its owner's manual.

Since the manufacturer is not offering a fix for the feature, it's up to the manufacturer's sales representative to make it right. Amazon has, at least initially, refused to do so, and I have disputed the charge through my credit card company.

And as far as other posters' contention that I "accept it and move on," I don't think it's ethical for a vendor or it's sales agents to represent a product as having a feature when it clearly does not. Amazon's stance on this issue is unfortunate and apparently illegal, and I'm going to make it extremely difficult for them to profit from it.

ScottC, I understand that you meant no offense, and I appreciate and thank you for your PM to that effect. When making the "deeply discounted fare" comment, I wasn't really lumping you in with the others that have effectively told me to bend over and lube up, saying that I shouldn't have expected any better.

To those that have offered nothing but criticism of my purchase decision, I don't expect anyone to get "worked up" over this. My original post was a request for advice as well as a caution to prospective purchasers. If you truly have nothing constructive to offer, feel free to click the "back" button on your browser and move on.

In your scenario - yes, you get low quality of an implementation - you return it if you can due to not being acceptable, or you live with what you paid for.

It's easy to change the conculsion when you change the problem statement.

IMHO, that is not the case here, which is why I proposed the scenario I did. I does not do what it is documented to do. It doesn't do it poorly, it doesn't do it inefficiently, it flat out doesn't do it - thus the mp3/atrac example.

Unfortunately, I do not have an aswer for OP. Amazon's return policy, though well hidden, at odds with all of my experiences with Amazon where returns have never been an issue, and pretty useless with large TV, is documented and they are following it.

Not that I recall. If I don't get what I was promised, I get my money back. I'm selling my iPod Shuffle due to it's lousy sound, but I put that under low quality for a low price. If it didn't work as documented, I'd get my money back.

Not sure why this discussion is still going on, and this thread certainly took an odd turn or two. :)

If you bought the item from amazon.com and it was actually sold by amazon.com (not by an affiliate, merchant or z-shops) Amazon clearly states their return policy on Electronics items as returnable within 30 days. (Go to Help/Returns/Electronics).

Just follow the link, go to the return center and start from there. The process couldn't really be much easier than that.

Did you really want to return the item, or did you just want to argue about the item? :eek:

Hope you're still within the 30 days.

I've really never had a problem returning anything from amazon.com. But, I wouldn't bother calling them .. use email if you have to contact them for some reason. But you don't need to contact them directly for a return within 30 days.

-David

*sigh*

Thanks for playing . . . but you've missed some very important information in the thread that I'm not about to repeat here. It's back there, a page or two.

Right .. it's over 27" so it's not covered by their normal return policy. But where did you say that in this thread? I read every post before I replied.

Now I understand why you're getting those sorts of respnses in this thread.

I'm sorry I wasted my time here. Have fun and thank you for your insights.

-David

Post #8
An important part of being righteous and indignant is being factually correct.


You are correct about this thread having outlived its usefulness

Yes, but the great thing about being online in a large community is that when you're wrong (and I was, I missed that in post#8) is that somebody will always be there right on cue, just to let you and the world know just how wrong you were. And if that wasn't enough in itself, they will also stick it in your face.

Isn't the internet great? :)

-David

I'm going to do something unconventional here and actually try to give a response that may help someone who has an issue like this one get it resolved.

If Customer Service is not OKing a return, explain to them immediately that you intend to proceed with a chargeback on your credit card. Tell them that you have already spoken to the CC company, and they have indicated that you have a valid case for the chargeback. Tell them that you will hold off on proceeding with the chargeback process if they can agree to take back the item.

If the agent pushes back, respectfully ask to speak to a manager. They'll likely tell you that the manager has no authority to do anything more than they can do. Tell them that you understand that, but you'd still like to speak with them. You'll likely have to loop through this conversation 3, 4, 5 times. Even once they escalate the call, you can't be certain whether you're talking to a manager or a peer. In less organized call centers, reps will sometimes just pass you off to another agent who will claim to be their superior, but it's worth a try.

Call during normal business hours. You're more likely to reach the domestic call centers.

Document the time of each call you make, the name of the rep you speak with, and the name of any other people they transfer you to. Also ask what department they're in and note that as well.

If, after 3, 4 or 5 calls (however many you can endure), you still have not obtained the desired result, compose a letter to a high level executive (not the CEO; maybe someone like the COO or a senior VP). Find their contact info on the Web. Make the letter concise, respectful and civil. Include a log of your calls. Send it registered, return receipt. One suggestion found here mentions looking for executive's contact information in press releases.

In addition, you can call the executive's office directly. They employ reps in these offices to address customer service issues, and you'll probably be routed directly to them. They usually have a bit more ability to try and get your issue resolved.

As one almost always snares more flies with honey, be cordial but firm in all communication. Keep your voice calm and pleasant, and treat the situation and reason for your call as something you're doing to help them as much as you.

I support a lot of customer service folks, and having climbed the ladder through a call center CS environment, I'm a little aware of what works and what doesn't.

good luck!

I know you are just trying to help, but have you actually ever TRIED this theory when dealing with Amazon??

yes. It has worked for me with Amazon.

I've also used it with other call centers, and I know from experience that some call centers have policies that if a chargeback situation is already underway, they will go ahead with a return that would normally not be permitted.

I've never had to escalate a personal issue to an executive level, but I have addressed issues raised to this level several times. In many of the cases, the executive contacted actually had read the correspondence personally and forwarded it along for resolution. In most every case, the level of service received and the policies that applied were different in the executive customer service offices than the standard service and policies one receives when calling the main call center.