Nokia is a brand which is fast losing out to its competitors. One of the reasons appear to be its insensitivity to quality even in the premium product range.
Last year Nokia marketed E7 phones as a lead product. However it appears that the phones sold at least in India were having a serious manufacturing defect in the USB Connector. My phone showed a problem of proper connection of the charger from day 1 and after using it with the defect for about 3 months I took it to the Nokia Care service center in Bangalore. I was told that there was a manufacturing defect. It  was corrected free of cost since the phone was under Warranty.
Now it is about one year since the repair/replacement of the part was done and the phone developed a similar problem of “loose connection”. The USB connector is used both for connecting the charger and the USB cable to the computer. Because of the loose connection the contact gets broken and it is difficult to use the charger or the computer cable.
I again approached the Nokia Care Center. Initially the Care center employees tried to convince me that the problem was with my charger and if I buy a new charger for around Rs 1200/- it should be OK. However after lengthy argument they agreed that there was a problem with the phone end of the connector. But I have been told that the problem can be rectified at a cost of Rs 2800/-. This is around 12% of the original cost of the phone and is therefore a major part replacement. I donot understand how the end part of the connector can be considered such a premium element. At this rate the individual part replacements should add up to twice or thrice the new phone cost. This is a clear indication that the company is trying to cheat the public and make unfair profit out of the inherent defects of the product.
My argument with the company is that the connector being a daily used part, if it can go bad twice in an year, it indicates that there is a serious manufacturing flaw or otherwise the part should be considered as a consumable and should be replaced at a more reasonable (lower) cost.
It appears that this problem is wide spread and hence I believe that Nokia is aware of the defect and yet is trying to make an unfair gain by forcing the users to incur a recurring expenditure of around Rs 2800/-. For the same reason the Company has not taken steps to even suggest renewal of the warranty nor fix a more reasonable cost to the part.
Since I also consider that it is possible that the repair can be achieved without replacement, I have been demanding that the mobile be opened in my presence along with a technical expert and we jointly evaluate if the part requires replacement. So far the Nokia Care center has not agreed to the suggestion.
My complaint to the Nokia head office in India has not been responded to so far.
In view of the above I am considering taking up the issue as a “Consumer Complaint” and would be happy if any other customer in Bangalore with similar problems join me in taking up the issue strongly and demanding that Nokia recall the defective pieces and provide a reimbursement or a free replacement.
Those who are interested may contact me on email or through the comments below.
Vijayashankar, Bangalore, India
Loading ...
9 users commented in " Nokia India is marketing defective smart phones "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackWill Nokia (India) do something ? I think Nokia (India) is most likely to find the above words objectionable ! At the same time, it can definitely affect the reputation of the company I think, do you agree.
Hi, sorry to hear about your experience. Please do write to us on nokiaindiadigitalmarketing@ovi.com and do leave your contact. We’ll try our best to resolve it.
This is a response to Nokia. I thank them for the response. But for the information of others I would like to inform that I have sent the following email.
I refer to your comment on the bloggernews.net and I am forwarding a copy of my complaint which provides all the details.
My main contention is that the USB connector is one the most used parts of the phone and is expected to be rugged and should last for
atleast 3 to 5 years of normal usage. In my case the problem started from day one and hence it was a manufacturing defect. When replaced
under warranty the replaced part did not last for more than an year.
If due to frequent insertion of cables it is natural for the the points get worn out, this part need to be designed in such a manner
that it can be easily replaced like a consumable. Presently the replacement is being priced higher than 10% of the cost. Had it been
replaced without additional cost for the part or at only a nominal cost, I would have perhaps forgotten the issue then and there.
We are in the world today where electrical switch points operate for millions of time abrasive usage without getting worn out. In fact even my MicroMax low cost phone has a more sturdy connector than E7. I therefore feel that Nokia has not devoted enough attention to design
this part of the phone properly. This is also reflected in the many consumer complaints to which I have separately referred to in my
earlier complaint letter.
Further the system adopted for attending to repairs is that the repairs are done by the Nokia care personnel in a secretive manner and
not in front of the customer. This gives room to a doubt that the part may or may not be defective and we may be charged without reason. I have seen Samsung care centers opening the phone in our presence at the time of estimation though the replacement may be done later. This
atleast gives us some additional confidence though we may not be technically qualified to disagree with the technician if he says that
a particular part is to be replaced.
Another point I am aggrieved is that the standard warranty clause on repairs indicates 30 days as the warranty time. This is ridiculous.
When you charge 10% of the cost of the phone as replacement charge and we do the repair at the authorized center where genuine parts alone
are used, then restricting the warranty period to 30 days means that your confidence level is only that much for the part. This means that
even in the original phone the quality of the parts is only sufficient to be guaranteed for 30 days though you absorb the risk of failure
within one year. Any period less than 1 year therefore is a self admission that either the parts replaced are not original or the
expected guaranteeable life time on the original parts itself is only 30 days.
This is not fair on any customer and more so on premium model buyers.
It is open to an organization to market different models with different assurances. There can be an economy model in which the
assurances can be low. But E7 was the leading model when I bought and hence should have carried the highest level of assurance.
I had high confidence on Nokia when I bought the same and now I am waiting to see how your customer service responds to the complaint. I
am happy about your contact but the proof of pudding is in the eating and I wait for further action in this regard.
Till now there is no response from Nokia beyond the “Some body will contact you within the next 24 hours”.
It appears that Nokia is one of the companies which is in consumer business but does not keep any channel of communication open to the customers. I have not been able to get the proper physical address and email of the Country manager in India.
I look forward to any of you to provide me a proper address of the Nokia India office to which legal notices can be sent.
I had a discussion with the Nokia Care center and my view that the problem is arising because of a fundamental design/manufacturing quality problem is strengthened.
It appears that the same problem is with some of the other models also.
I am collecting more information. Welcome contributions from others.
It is interesting to note that in August 2012 Nokia was ordered to pay a compensation of Rs 67000/- towards another consumer complaint. (Refer here: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-08-30/telecom/33498570_1_nokia-india-unfair-trade-practice-gross-deficiency
When there is a “known Issue” with a brand, it is necessary for the manufacturer to make a “Disclosure” at the time of sale.
It appears that the USB connector problem referred to here is a “Known Issue”. It recurs more often than the battery replacement and costs more than the battery replacement.
Normally a buyer knows the battery issue of a mobile and hence enquiries about the life and cost of the battery.
However a buyer does not anticipate the USB connector problem because it is considered part of the fixed hardware. It should have a reasonable life time which in my opinion not less than 3 years.
I intend raising these issues and seek a judicial order for withdrawal of all E7 phones marketed with “known issue”.
Others who have similar issues may contact me.
Further Developments:
A final notice for consumer action has been served on Nokia India. Response awaited.
Vijayashankar
Status
Nokia agreed to repair the phone without charge. The phone has since been returned in working condition after replacement of the part. The contemplated consumer action was therefore dropped.
Leave A Reply