- Jul 1, 2018
canned air, lint free towel, and swabs?
Got a little dusty...
Got a little dusty...
Despite what the federal law is, DJI assumes the role of judge, jury and executioner about warranty claims.
You're right. That's why I put that whole statement in my original post.
But my original point is still the same - opening your electronic items, modifying them, upgrading them, etc. will not void your warranty in the US, as that is against federal law. What it can do, is give the manufacturer a simpler "excuse" to deny your warranty claim. Anything, in fact, can give a manufacturer an excuse to deny a warranty claim, and just because they do, doesn't make it legal or acceptable. Knowledge of the actual law, instead of the universal misunderstanding of what people believe to be the law, is what allows companies like DJI to continue to get away with denying warranty claims under bogus pretenses.
However, if consumers learn the actual truth against such common misconceptions related to warranties, armed with such information they can push back against those companies and we might ultimately make a difference in preventing such abuses. One individual might think they have no chance going up against DJI. In theory, that may be true. In practice however, you'll find DJI and similar companies much more amenable to placating you as an individual consumer if you're aware of the law and reinforce your warranty claim, just to keep the misconception alive.
If you threaten legal action against DJI or other such firms for refusing to abide by federal law, or threaten to take them to the state attorney's office, or other such legal entities, they are going to be much more willing to allow/pay your warranty claim than to fight it in any public manner. If they lose (which they will) to someone who is willing to take legal action against them (especially if they are aware of and back their position with federal law), and it becomes public record, they then risk all the other false claims that they could get away with for claiming such false pretenses of denying warranty claims. It's far better for them to pay you your $500 for a new drone to keep you quiet than it is to risk their continued denial of thousands of valid warranty claims with other consumers.
So the first step in the fight back against these companies denying valid warranty claims is education of the facts and knowledge of a consumer's legal rights - which is why more people should spread the word against such a public misconception such as opening up a device might invalidate its warranty.
Think of it this way - if DJI, for example, decided to start denying warranty claims against customers who decided to put a "skin" on their drone or paint/mark something on the outer shell of their aircraft body, people would immediately know that it would be a bogus reasoning and the push-back and outrage would quickly result in them reversing course and honoring those warranty claims. If consumers knew the same excuse for not honoring valid warranty claims due to opening an item (stickers/seals or not) were equally bogus (instead of maintaining the status quo of misinformation of the law), manufacturers like DJI would change their tune. Manufacturers rely on such misinformation being widely spread and when other consumers reinforce their "message", it only helps them in efforts to spread such propaganda and obfuscation of the law.
Have you dealt much with DJI? If not, DJI will teach you what the acronym GITNIP means.
But I have had equivalent experience with numerous other monolithic companies with similar, if not more onerous processing of warranty claims.
as a multi-billion dollar company, they have attorneys that understand the legal ramifications involved with going up against a consumer or consumers armed with a clear understanding of US federal law.
Some serious questions - How many valid warranty claims have you or your customers had against DJI that were denied due to an "opened" device?
Of those claims, how many of them did you or your customers approach DJI management with and countered their warranty denial with a clear demonstration of the legal basis of DJI's requirement to honor their warranty, despite the device being opened?
Of those, how many times did you or your customers have an attorney draft a letter stating their intention to proceed with appropriate legal action if they continue such denials?
Companies such as DJI rely on the fact that the time, money, and effort in fighting a "No" far outweighs a customer just sucking it up and giving in. However, that's not actually the case as the federal law is even more on your side as a consumer and everyone needs to know that.
One of the most important parts of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act is its fee shifting provision. This provision provides that you may recover the attorney fees incurred in the prosecution of your case if you are successful – independent of how much you actually win. That rational behind this fee-shifting provision is to twofold: (1) to ensure you will be able to vindicate your rights without having to expend large sums on attorney’s fees and (2) because manufacturers are able to write off all expenses of defense as a legitimate business expense, whereas you, the average consumer, obviously does not have that kind of economic staying power.
So anyone with a valid warranty claim that is denied by DJI should be pushing back - not giving in. It's easy to feel frustration when faced with such a denial.
a small bit of perseverance and effort can go a long way.
Perhaps then a class-action lawsuit would be the way to proceed. I am a licensed attorney but I don't practice law for clients other than the businesses I manage directly and I am by no means an expert on class-action litigation. But if things are as bad as your perception of things with DJI is, I know there are plenty of attorneys/firms that make their living going up against major manufacturers, especially ones with as deep of pockets as DJI, and would be happy to take on cases that are in such clear violation of US federal law.