(already subscribe? log in).

Sony’s offer leaves TV owner unhappy

CONSUMER ALERT

THIS STORY APPEARED IN

December 30, 2011|By Mitch Lipka

Q. I purchased a Sony rear projection TV six years ago for $2,000. Recently, a large area of the display has turned purple. It appears that this is a common problem with the optical block on this series of TVs. I contacted Sony, and the best resolution that they could provide was a discount of $80 on a replacement TV. Previously Sony had been offering repairs of the TVs or larger discounts. I feel Sony was negligent for not informing me of this defect. I would like to know if I have any other course of action to obtain a better offer from Sony.

Ryan Amara, Tewskbury

A. In 2008, as you now know, Sony identified a recurring problem with these TVs and extended the warranty period through part of 2011. Unfortunately, that was before your TV exhibited the problem.

You were right to press Sony to make an exception since repairing the TV would be so costly, and the discount amounts to about 10 percent off the price of a new one, which today sells for between $800 and $900. But Sony was apparently not interested in hearing from you or me on this one. After adding three years to the warranty on these TVs, Sony says, it has more than done right by its customers and won’t extend its repair offer.

“The warranty for parts and labor on this TV model was extended . . . to cover customer concerns,’’ Sony spokeswoman Elizabeth Boukis said. “As an out-of-warranty customer, Mr. Amara was offered a new replacement LCD TV for a significantly discounted price, along with free shipping. This accommodation offered is just an example of our commitment to customer satisfaction.’’

As committed as they might be, that decision didn’t play well with at least one customer - or me, for that matter. It would have been nice to start the year with a company going over and above and making an exception to a rule.

Certainly some big companies have done just that. While some companies might be afraid of setting precedent by breaking from policy, proclaiming commitment in the face of rejecting a consumer’s request seems arrogant.

In this case, a customer who had been willing to spend $2,000 on a TV is now an angry former customer.