4 years on and where the situation was at a year ago, before balance of warranty expired. HOW TO LOOSE $2500 DOLLARS WITH EIZO
I am going to write up my $2500 Gripe with Eizo for everyone to read
I purchased a CG21 Eizo monitor direct from Eizo Australia
It was "factory demo/refurbished"
I live/work elsewhere in the Pacific
I was told the monitor was 1 out of around a 100 monitors that was purchased by fairfax, and this one was returned for what was thought to be the dead pixel warranty but none was ever found. I was under the impression it had only been checked to see the dead pixel, and resell as a demo unit. I believe it was returned because it would never calibrate for target brightness as there are no dead pixel/s.
The monitor would never calibrate for brightness but would send an add hoc target brightness , it would give a screen warning that would state that it could not reach the target luminence (no matter whether the target luminence was set at 50 80 90 100 110 cdmi) it would make no difference the warning was still there, and would send an add hoc target brightness between around 90 and 120 each time you did the calibration. Sometimes 90 sometimes 100 sometimes 110 and so on.
It would give the warning send an add hoc target cdmi and then the navigator would say it had calibrated correctly. When it hadn't. So you would just keep doing it a dozen times until it was close enough!!!!!!!!!!!
After countless emails back and forward (because I live overseas, I couldn't just send it in for service) a dozen installs of colour navigator on clean installs etc several different graphics cards several different computers the problem was no different.
I persisted using this Monitor for around two and a half years and figured it best to finally bring it back before the 3 year component of the warranty was up to finally sort it, again this is because I live overseas from the Eizo Aust. I mention this as this had been my main problem that related to Eizo technical service. However at the same time the screen had also been developing what I know understand to be screen iluminence irregularity starting at the corners, and it had got to the point that I felt that there was something wrong, but as it didn't effect the middle of the screen where the editing area, it hadn't worried me anymore than the other problem.
When I sent it in.
I was told it had been damaged in transit, I had no way of proving otherwise.
They said that the irregular screen luminence had been caused by pressure on the screen. This in itself was crap because today I can push my fist on the screen and it doesn't cause this. THEY KNOW THIS AND there can be no other explanation other than THE fact that they appear to be just trying TO GET OUT OF WARRANTY OBLIGATIONS or passing it off for the insurance company of the courier/transport company etc - Although from what I gather I am not sure whether the warranty covers screen luminence or not, but for the CG21 it seemed to.
( Since using the screen luminence over time has worsened in the last 12 months to around double what it was when I first sent it in. I just use it for the home computer now, this is evidence of the fact it happens progressively)
When I questioned them about the calibration error message originally before sending the monitor in I was never given an explanation as to what causes it other than my setup was wrong. (and this was after forwarding the problem to the manufacturer- if I search the error message on the net nothing comes up, so is not a common problem)
After sending the monitor in, it took weeks before THEY FINALLY ADMITTED THAT THE SAME WARNING IN FACT did come up. But they said that the screen brightness was in the accepted target range and therefore was not covered under warranty. They also said that because Navigator states that it has calibrated correctly (Even though it didn't) that meant that it therefore passed the warranty check!!!
WHAT KIND OF logic is that!!!
When I continued to pursue Eizo Australia and reminded them that the monitor was sent not for any issue over minimum brightness but OVER THE FACT THAT IT WOULD NOT CALIBRATE and had never been able to succesfully calibrate a target brightness It became quite difficult to get a response.
I continued to request an explantion for why they would not cover a monitor that sent an ad hoc target brightness, which they themselves finally admitted occurred, and questioned for an explanatation of why the message comes up. I WAS TOLD THEY DID NOT WANT TO deal with me any longer and I should pursue the matter with fair trading.
What kind of company does not live up to it's warranty!!!!!!!!
What kind of company when you confront them tells you to go to court to solve your problems rather than live up to it's warranty obligations!!!!
What kind of company does everything it can to try to get out of providing warranty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I ASK YOU WHAT KIND OF WARRANTY IS THIS WHERE A MANUFACTURER SELLS SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T WORK AND EXPECTS YOU TO FOOT THE BILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was ALSO told that Eizo Australia had no obligation to offer any warranty because I lived overseas even though they are listed as the distributor for the south pacific, and it was purchased through them!!##@!
I was told Eizo does not repair monitors (replace screens) and they try to do everything they can to get out of warranty service AS IT MEANS THEY HAVE TO GIVE YOU A NEW MONITOR. BE VERY WARY OF BUYING EIZO AND THINKING THEIR WARRANTY IS ANYTHING LIKE WHAT THEY SAY IT IS.
I liver overseas so trying to pursue anything by a tribunal court hearing process would mean a special trip just to see this through.
Mike.
