Common knowledge is like common sense. It is everything but common and one should not make any assumptions based on past experience. As seen from the range of posts, assuming the removal of the polarising film or not isn’t common knowledge.
Because it could potentially be removed, doesn’t necessarily mean a fault with the product.
There are many products which have things that can be removed that could damage a product. An example which is similar is the stone chip protector film on a car which can be on paintwork in areas where stones may be flicked up and chip the paint. These films possibly be removed if one thinks that they should be…and removing them could damage the underlying paintwork depending on the method of removal. Does this mean that since the film is obvious and is removed (because it looks like removable film) causing damage it is the fault if the manufacturer?
Fit for purpose isn’t about if something can be easily damaged or something easily done by a consumer affecting a products operation. The ACCC has indicated this as well by saying it falls outside the consumer guarantee which includes ‘fit for purpose’.
A product damaged because it is used or actions exerted on it outside that or undocumented in the instruction manuals does not mean it is not fit for purpose. If the product was used in accordance with documentation provided by a manufacturer and as expected…such as worked as expected as a smart TV, then it is fit for purpose.
As outlined above, the same manuals don’t say not to wash a remote control in a dishwasher. It is common knowledge that a dishwasher is made for cleaning and washing things. If one used the dishwasher to wash the remote and the remote failed, is the manufacturer responsible as the washing of the remote in a dishwasher as it is undocumented by a manufacturer. This is the same as removing a film. One shouldn’t assume it can be done if the manufacturer information is silent on the matter. If this approach is taken, then as also outlined above, the consumer guarantee would need to be broadened to include accidental damage caused by actions of the consumer (such as damage caused by removing a film when instructions don’t say it needs to be removed…or placing a remote in a dishwasher because the instructions don’t say it can’t be done).
A question to ask should the consumer guarantee be changed to include the circumstances similar to that which occurred above (would need to occur since the ACCC has indicated the removal of the polarising film sits outside the current Australian Consumer Law ‘consumer guarantee’). Doing so could have unintended consequences…it could result in costs for products to increase dramatically, some manufacturers may chose leave the Australian market as the risks become too great. Those which are sold could come with a phone book of terms of conditions which outline all the possible does and don’t associated with the product. Such won’t be in the interest of the consumer.
I am sorry to hear about your ordeal BrisLin. I am also used to seeing protective films on TVs and computer displays. If the film were easy to lift off and peel back, I would agree that Samsung could have warned their customers with a sticker. I would also assume that a large display with plastic film may scratch easily as well.
Hi all. Just by way of update, I’ve had no success in reaching the Samsung CEO. I tried with the email address kindly provided by @Gaby , mentioning that Choice had an active interest in the outcome, and have been trying to follow that up, having had no response or acknowledgement (nor delivery failure advice) since 5th Oct. Haven’t been able to find any alternative email address, either anywhere on their site or by requesting it using their customer support contact details(no reply at all to that). I think I’ve been blacklisted
A PS about how confusing films can be, empathising with @BrisLin.
I bought a Panasonic microwave a few months ago and thought I had taken all of the protective films off. A few days ago a small bubble started over one of the numeric pads and I speculated it was probably a protective film. If it was not it would have been back to the shop for a replacement.
It was not easy to find the edge of the film, sans any grip point peeling it began using fingernails, and it was moderately difficult to peel away.
It was indeed protective film - nary an instruction or clue it was there because it was fitted so perfectly.
They shouldn’t be making it this confusing or difficult on any product.
The gold standard is tracked real mail, platinum standard adds sending with signature required - but many companies will refuse to accept anything requiring a signature since it is probably something legal, like your claim, or worse.
Snap! I had the identical experience with a Panasonic microwave. Phoned them up when it was only a few months old explaining about the bubbling over the numbers and they told me it was protective film that needed to be removed. This whole protective film / not protective film business is a real minefield.
An aside regarding Product Review. When I submitted my review, I noticed someone had posted this question a few months prior. Not only was he faced with the same confusion over whether to remove the film, but he’d received a reply to recommend he go ahead, so it seems there are a lot of people who are making the same incorrect assumption.
This is my experience:
In early May ‘18 I made a request to the customer service of a statutory corporation in VIC.
Wrote and made phone calls. Responses were in the negative.
In June I wrote to the CEO and a month later my request was approved and received.
Perseverance, trying different methods of approach?
Doesn’t hurt to try
I hope that the person who posted the question didn’t remove the film.
The person who answered isn’t a representative of Samsung. The person indicated that purchased a new TV June 2021 and wouldn’t have done such with their own UA43AU8000, otherwise they would have know that it would have potentially destroyed the TV.
Looking online and at our own Panasonic microwave manual, it states:
Control Panel - The control panels are covered with removable protective film to prevent scratches during shipping. Small bubbles may appear under this film. When this happens, remove film carefully
Our own film has bubbled and we have decided to leave it on. While unsightly, we have taken the approach as it may provide additional protection in the long run. We will remove it totally if it starts to sheet off/detach in large pieces.
Panasonic seem to make it clear in their manuals that the plastic film can be removed, this is different to the Samsung TV where any such advice was silent.
Good luck with pursuing Samsung. Hopefully they show some goodwill since your local Office of Fair Trading or ACCC have indicated that it falls outside the Australian Consumer Law. The cost to replace the TV might be a small price to pay to keep a customer happy.
@BrisLin have you started an action in your Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The ACCC as normal show little action in regard to the problem, Fair Trading are typically as useful as you doing nothing. It will cost you to lodge a formal complaint but you can include that cost in what you want to recover from Samsung. You should seek legal advice before commencing any action, there are several Community free Consumer legal advice centres (we have listed some at Free Legal Advice Centres - Services - Community (choice.community)) that can help you prepare and mount a case. With the history of this occurring to others it seems you would have some decent evidence to back up your claims, nothing ventured nothing gained as the saying goes.
Thanks for this advice. I’ll have to think about whether the prolonged stress of taking this through the Civil & Administrative Tribunal, following obtaining legal advice, is really in my best interest, apart from the fact that I might be throwing good money after bad since having the TV repaired to get it functioning again.
The legal advice would be free if you used the free services available, as many of them concentrate on consumer issues the advice should give you a fair idea if the case has good merit or not. Then with that advice behind you the risk of good money after bad should be easier to assess.
Have you thought of getting A Current Affair or similar to air your case if they are willing? Sometimes a social campaign can bring results that otherwise would not be successful. However please get legal advice first before any of these steps.
Latest update. I’ve finally had a response to my communication addressed to the CEO. It was intercepted by their usual customer service team, with no reference to the fact that I was requesting my communication go to the CEO, and reiterating the previous advice. They have confirmed from the authorised repairer that the film had been removed by me, and reiterated that; “Samsung’s express manufacturer’s warranty provided with the unit does not cover physical damage caused by, among other things misuse, incorrect operation or not following instructions as stated in the Product Operation’s Manual or manufacturer’s instructions provided with Samsung consumer product.”
So… customers are not able to contact company CEOs? Is this something I have a right to or is it at Samsung’s discretion?
Their discretion whether it reaches the CEO or not. Even using the words Personal and Confidential do not mean that it will reach the CEO without other hands being involved before it reaches them (or even if it does reach them).
It is unlikely that you can contact the CEO directly. Most emails are read and sorted by their personal assistants/communications officers - it is standard practice in large businesses/government agencies which have employed staff for such purposes. These staff will make an assessment of whether the CEO responds (say an email from a director/reporting manager etc) or it is forwarded to another employee (such as communications, legals, accounts etc) for action and response.
Posting a letter or other forms of communication will get the same course of action. They will be diverted to those in the organisation with duties to deal with such issues.
You don’t have a right to have access to the CEO, a business can chose who deals with operational issues such as complaints, unpaid invoices, safety issues etc.
Ensure that if you do seek free legal advice you give them all the information/responses from the ACCC, Office of Fair Trading, Samsung or other parties. Also provide them copies of all literature (set up guides, manuals, labels etc) provided with the TV when purchased.
This will save them significant time and also won’t get them offside (by being seen to waste their time by inviting the same responses again or trying to find the same information).
