There are a lot of easily removable products which could be used for warning labels ranging from plastic film, to post-it notes, to the gum that is used to attach new credit cards inside the folded fliers they are enclosed in, all of which leave no trace when removed.
It should be simple to have a very prominent warning sticker on the non-removable film which can be easily removed and even replaced without any adverse effect on the TV.
My impression is that Samsung just could not care less.
But why? Is the problem prevalent and they are evil miscreants trying to dodge their responsibilities or is it because it hardly ever happens? We donât know.
If they accept one return and fix it they would have to accept all.
Maybe it happens relatively often.
$ $ $ and a lot of headaches for Samsung.
That seems to be the assumption here but I see no data to support it.
This is apparently an âunlistedâ Samsung production. How hard should it be to make it (the relevant information for the model) prominent in the box and on the product regardless if it is 1, 1,000, or 1,000,000 customers who erroneously assume it is a protective film and they remove it - destroying their TV?
Makes sense to me.
What about all the other ways that you could kill your TV that are not mentioned should there be message to refrain from them too? How many possible problems can you make prominent on the box before none are prominent?
I donât understand what is so difficult about following the existing written instructions. If model A says remove the film do so, if model B says nothing about the film do nothing.
Would you quote those written instructions as well as related warnings that many of us accept would be reasonable to include (at no extra cost to Samsung beside the minuscule amount of ink and a few mm^2 of paper to hold it? That seem to be elusive?
If not for some recognition of consumer confusion why would they publish the how to on youtube as well as on their eu.community?
You seem comfortable by the absence of an explicit instruction so might we presume all of your electronics and appliances still have the stickers applied - since few (if any) instruct to remove them?
Iâll reveal I have admittedly transgressed since although my TVs, monitors, washing machine, dryer, and what and sundry other items I have, including toilets have omitted explicit instructions to remove this and that protective film, efficiency tags, registration QRs, and so on, I removed them.
OTOH I know people who still have the original watermark tags on their toilets, washing machines, etc, etc, so we each have different views, eh?
How do you know this?
Slow day in lockdown? Iâll leave you to ponder my mystical powers 
the cost of small claims is only about $80. you can present yourself and there have been a number of suggestions about what approach might have legs
I havenât read all t he replies but if no-one else has said it - get on to the NSW Department of Fair Trading. Youâll be surprised how the suppliersâ responses change when contacted by FT.
That is so brillig. Are your toves slithy too?
I am not entirely sure whether toves are slithy only when they are in the wabe, gyring and gimbling.
Drat!
Youâve got me wondering if our Teac for the kitchen had one of these filters. And whether we removed it along with all the other clear plastic when unwrapping. I donât recollect any setup instructions down to that level of detail.
IMO the difference here is that a âreasonable consumerâ could easily presume there is a plastic screen protector for transport. I could see myself making the same error, as every screen Iâve ever ordered had one
I have had different experiences. I havenât bought any LED/LCD devices recently that havenât had a removable protective film. The only device we have bought recently which had had a protective film is our Vivo phone, which had a factory installed screen protector. Both TV purchases (Sony) in the past few years didnât have a removal protective film over the screen, but were shipped within a plastic bag. The only removal film was on the screen border to protect the border from rubbing during transit.
It appears that Samsung has some models which have a protective film installed to protect the screen during transit, while others donât. Those that do it is advised to remove the protective film before use.
A reasonable person canât expect that something should be done outside the manufacturerâs setup or instruction manual. As the manual didnât say that the film should be removed, one shouldnât assume that it should be. If we accept that manufacturers should be responsible for things that we assume should be done to or used for purposes outside the setup or instruction manual, then warranties or the consumer guarantee should be broadened to include accidental damage.
As outlined in earlier posts, the damage to the screen would likely to covered by some home and contents insurance. There is opportunity to claim accidental damage against oneâs contentâs insurance, but one has to weigh up whether it is worth it in the long run.
I sympathise with @BrisLin for accidentally damaging a brand new product. When one buys something new, often they are excited, look forward to a long service live and enjoyment in its use. When one damages something by accident, it takes away the pleasure of the purchase and leads to tremendous disappointment.
The question in relation to the situation at hand is âŠshould a product manufacturer provide information on all the possible does and donât associated with its products, based on what a customer may assume or do. It appears that Samsung is no different to other manufacturers where there is an expectation that the product will be used and installed/setup in accordance with the setup guides/instruction manuals (this is supported by the Australian Consumer Law as uses or actions outside that outlined by the manufacturer would be misuse and outside the ACL consumer guarantee). It appears within the community there are differing views to whether Samsung (and other manufacturers) should prepare an extensive list of âdoes and donâtâ based on what they think a customer may assume, to protect them from uses or actions outside information they currently provide on a particular product.
I fully agree with you here, the more you complain and persist, the more likely they are going to give in eventually, l find. Mention all this on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram that people should not buy SAMSUNG TVâs, they will not like it !!!.
You could also mention on PRODUCT REVIEW SITE, l have mentioned problems with a Bosch Dishwasher, only 2 year warranty, failing and Bosch replied to see they could HELP !!!.
Iâm told that a basic principle of retail sales law is that a product has to be âfit for purposeâ or the sale is void (ie, never happened, so money back).
So, if a flimsy, lightly attached, undocumented in the instructions, film is necessary for the fundamental functioning of the Samsung TV and Samsung have not made the consumer aware of this PRE-SALE, then I think you have a strong complaint (and Samsung have a PR disaster).
I am most surprised the ACCC did not tell you this, so I can only assume they did not understand your enquiry fully. Try them again.
Cheers
Mark
Update to my last post. I have just read all the responses and the differing opinions on what might be common knowledge.
It seems to me many helpful folk are over-looking a very basic fact - there was an obvious film which could be removed, not just a soundly sealed screen. I can only say again that if something is so important to the functioning of a TV, how can a competent manufacturer supply it in such a âthrow awayâ manner and not expect complaints? (rhetorical question).
Looking at the general principles here, I would expect Choice to exert some advocacy.
[I had a comparable problem with a locally-made weighted blanket, which in very tiny print said ânot to be washedâ (found later). Yet itâs labelled a âblanketâ, Australia is the allergy capital of the world, so why would a consumer even think it might not be washable? Fitness for purpose? Please Choice look at this broad issue!! ]
I have found when nothing else works posting on their Facebook page gets a response.
