Batronix - A mixed DS1054Z RMA experience - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 08:40:29 am
content: Hi GuyzzAs i wrote here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg681416/#msg681416My brand new DS1054Z from Batronix was defective and either locked up or crashed with garbage on the screen.Based on the experiences from other with Batronix RMA i was quite confident that it would be a painless experience.My new scope is under way, but i have a mixed feeling about the "good experience".Read the following mail dialog , and tell me if i'm wrong.MeQuoteBatronixQuoteMeQuoteBatronixQuoteMeQuoteBatronixQuoteMeQuoteMe (A few minutes after the above mail, now i just want my new scope)QuoteBatronixQuoteMeQuoteMy new scope is shipped, and i have gotten a tracking number.But i still don't understand why Batronix, does not allow me to send the scope insured for the amount it would cost me to buy a new one if it got lost.Especially because they apparently can't arrange a returnlabel in Denmark , and as stated below they expressed what i in the beginning thought of as excellent service.QuoteMy RMA experience with Batronix would have been to A+++ if they had just accepted the insured return postage.What do you think ?/Bingo

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 08:52:13 am
content: Quote from: bingo600 on June 06, 2015, 08:40:29 amBecause a) it costs money and b) the scopes cost them less than that.

author: con-f-use
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 08:52:59 am
content: I think you're right. The save thing for everyone involved would be to pay insurance. It sounds a bit cheap on their part. On the other hand, they can probably stomach a lost scope once in a while better than the premium DHL is earning on the insurance on all their packages. Then again, dicking around with you this much, probably cost them the same amount in time and you your nerves. Anyways, you should have asked them whether to send it insured and whether they carry the risk.

author: jimon
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 09:01:23 am
content: From their perspective - scope is already defective, so they just lost 400 eur + shipping from you + shipping back to you in operations. Ok, in like 2-3 month rigol probably will fix it (then rigol will loose some money, because they probably will just throw main board away) + shipping costs back and forth. After repair they need to sell this scope as "refubrished" ... and VAT's/Taxes/Import charges everywhere. So as you can see it's too much hassle for them ... if "no scope - no problem" (scope is lost) they will not really loose much more money, but will save time.Other companies do even worse, for example Logitech repair policy : you destroy faulty device on your own, send them pictures (+serial code), they send you a new device, they save more money not dealing with repairsI guess the best option was to ask them how they want you to ship package ... but well, it's in the past now

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 09:02:54 am
content: Quote from: con-f-use on June 06, 2015, 08:52:59 amI think i have learned that lesson too.I just didn't think about it, based on the good reputation Batronix have had here.And i wonder why Batronix didn't mention it in their initial mail, that i should chose the cheapest uninsured shipping, and they would accept the risk if lost./Bingo

author: con-f-use
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 09:47:40 am
content: They also didn't ask you to but it in a cardboard box.

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 09:52:57 am
content: Quote from: con-f-use on June 06, 2015, 09:47:40 amI don't think that comparison is fair.It came in the Rigol Box, and ofcause it left in the Rigol box.It simply felt logical to ship it insured for the "new value" amount, as they stated that they would, only ship a new one when they have received the old one.I did NOT ship it insured just to spend Batronix money, but to make sure i would be able to buy a new one if it got lost.And i did not select expess or anything fancy./Bingo

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 09:55:20 am
content: I think the only thing that you did wrong, is not asking themupfrontabout what carrier and what insurance to use.I can understand their reservation of not paying the insurance.Every time I had some warranty issues (with any company), I was first very happy that my case was taken care of and I received a new item. Batronix took very well care of your needs and sent you a new scope right away. This counts more in my book, than anything else, even if you have to pay the difference in insurance.

author: con-f-use
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 10:27:22 am
content: Don't get me wrong, I'm with you on one important point: I think Bartronix should have carried the principle the risk of the package getting lost. It's up to them how they do it, however. Apparently their way is to risk one scope getting lost and write that off instead of giving the shipping company a small profit on the insurance of every warranty package. After all, not many packages get lost. It's a legitimate way to deal with such things and not uncommon. At least I hope that's there way. Could also be that they wouldn't have sent you a new scope had the old one been lost and sent via uninsured mail. Would be interesting to know their policy then. But, at least today, we won't know.So in my opinion none of you did anything wrong, it was just a simple misunderstanding. You should have asked, and they should have told you. But you both made assumptions the other didn't share.

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 10:28:55 am
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on June 06, 2015, 09:55:20 amI'm not unsatisfied with the Batronix RMA process , it was painless.Just their way of handling the coverage of my return shipment.But it saddens me, that i'm left in an unequal position as opposed to ie. you in Germany, where a DHL returnlabel probably would have been possible. You would have gotten a "free" returnlabel from Batronix, and could have used that one with "full" coverage (insurance) from Batronix.I on the other hand, can not get the same security. As am not allowed to get a full refund for my insured returnpackage.So i agree that my mistake was : Not to write to Batronix what kind of shipping they would accept, and still cover if the package would be lost./Bingo

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 11:00:38 am
content: IMHO it is weird they ask you to send a piece of equipment worth 400 euro without insurance. Then again insurance from the postal service usually is very cheap.

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 11:11:53 am
content: Quote from: bingo600 on June 06, 2015, 10:28:55 amNot everything is great with DHL Germany.I bought something on ebay, Germany, paid Euro 650 by bank transfer and the seller shipped right away. This was at the end of April. The tracking still stands on May 5th. Obviously the package got lost. You would not believe the paperwork involved to get this resolved by DHL. At the end I will be lucky, if I will get the Euro 500 insured value back from them.So, you think you have good insurance and still something goes wrong.So, you think you have arranged everything correctly and something goes wrong.In your case it seems to be a small penalty to pay for getting a new scope so fast.BTW, in Germany, 500 Euro insurance is included with every real PAKET automatically with DHL.And 500 Euro extra will cost may be 3 or 4 EuroThat seems not to be the case in Denmark?

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 11:21:06 am
content: IMO insurance is a kind big scam. My friend who works in freight transport company said exactly this too. You will run circles to get something out of it if anything. Moreover if you doing in volume it is cheaper and easier to just write off some loses, rather than dealing with insurance.

author: John Coloccia
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 11:38:33 am
content: Insurance is for the shipper's protection. It's not reasonable to expect them to pay for your insurance, any more than it's reasonable for them to pay for your gas to get to the post office. I know that it seems like it's just part of the shipping costs, but it's really not. Don't ding Batronix for this. They're being very nice and are doing everything right. It's just one of those costs that you have to eat if you choose to use insurance.Anyhow, I rarely insure anything. I ship most product through the US Postal Service, and problems for me are exceptionally rare...and they've yet to loose a single package. I had one disappear for a month once, but even that one eventually showed up. With all the money I've saved on not buying insurance, I can loose some packages and still be ahead.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 12:31:45 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on June 06, 2015, 11:00:38 amWhy? It's already broken and the possibility of it vanishing during transit istiny- certainly not worth the cost of paying 1% extra for insurance.If you're shipping hundreds of devices a day then it adds up to a loss - better to have one go missing every few weeks than to pay extra on every single package.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 12:46:03 pm
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on June 06, 2015, 11:11:53 amThe other insured sums are EUR 2500 for EUR 3.50 extra, and EUR 25,000 for EUR 15 extra (within Germany). A packet with EUR 500 insured value and a weight up to 10kg to Denmark is EUR 21,99 (5kg is EUR 16,99).I've checked some RMA policies and all tell the customer to send an insured packet, which makes sense from a legal point of view. Bingo600 did everything right. If the packet would have been lost, Batronix could simply say sorry and close the RMA. I think the cause of the problem is that DHL's standard packet already includes an insurance (covering the value of a DS1054Z). And at the moment Batronix told bingo600 to pay the packet and that they will reimburse him without telling him that they will just reimburse the postage without insurance, they are obliged to pay the complete postage including insurance. No business would expect an uninsured packet.

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 01:22:04 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on June 06, 2015, 12:31:45 pmBut that statement would only make sense if Batronix, would cover it if it got lost with standard shipping.Else the saving from Batronix would impose a higher risk on me.Defective or not that scope had a value of 400€ for me, if i had to get a new one./Bingo

author: con-f-use
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 01:58:13 pm
content: Insurance from delivery companies has always puzzled me. Shouldn't a shipping company pay for all damage or loss in any case (within reasonable bounds of course)? After all you trust them with your stuff. It's the implied contract that you pay an agreed-upon sum and they get your stuff from A to B without damage and within an agreed span of time. If I break something at a restaurant, I have to pay for it. I take the risk. If I'm afraid of the risk I have one of three options: Insure me against it, risk it anyway and hope nothing happens (and pay up if it does) or don't do it.I always feel screwed over when a delivery company offers me insurance. Do they have a free pass to handle my shipment as recklessly as then want if it is uninsured? Do they play soccer with all their uninsured packages and give them to Bob the hobo to deliver it afterwards?Of course I need to take extra precautions if I were to sent my extremely fragile ming vase or fresh meat or something. And of cause I should inform them if I have an extraordinarily expensive freight to send. But in the vast majority of cases, a 500$ oscilloscope including, its their damn fault if they loose or damage it. They didn't do their job so they should pay the damage, insured or not.

author: linux-works
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 02:33:06 pm
content: I would feel annoyed if the company denied me insurance fees on a return shipment I made to them.what if the unit was lost? why should I, the consumer, be out that amount? that's what is going on. risk that is not necessary for the end consumer to take.yes, its a scam that shippers charge this when they should always include it and BE RESPONSIBLE. but they figured out (bean counters) that they could make 'reliable shipment' an 'option' (??) and if you don't pay, you don't get to have coverage.a scope is too big and heavy and expensive to risk. I would NEVER EVER ship something like that without insurance. and getting insurance to cover loss is a PITA but at least its better than not having any at all.a big business can afford to write-off losses. end users simply cannot.the fact that the seller could not or would not pay in advance for return shipping put them at the customer's mercy, really. all they had to do was send out a prepaid shipping label. is denmark a 3rd world country? sheesh! I have never been there but I seriously doubt that its that hard to send a prepaid shipping label to someone in dk!so, the seller told the buyer to send it back and they'd cover it. now, they put conditions on it.buyer didn't ask about insurance first, but also, seller did not say NOT to spend on insurance!if I buy an item on ebay and have to return it, I'm required to pay tracking and insurance. why would this buyer not be allowed that same simple courtesy?the only thing that would give batronix an 'out' is if they said in advance, 'buy this shipping service, do not pay for insurance, have it trackable and if its lost, we'll cover it'. did they say that, exactly, or did they just say 'send it back to us' ?

author: lpc32
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 03:46:56 pm
content: Quote from: con-f-use on June 06, 2015, 10:27:22 amI don't think he had an obligation to ask. The "professional" side here is the store, they are the ones that should have the experience both in shipping and in customer interaction. It's their failing.They should have covered the insurance even if their initial assumption was that it would be shipped uninsured. And the best course of action was actually to send back 4 impedance adjusters, like bingo600 asked, which would have benefited both sides.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 03:51:13 pm
content: Quote from: con-f-use on June 06, 2015, 10:27:22 amI wouldn't call 25 euro on insurance per each 400 euro worth scope a small profit.

author: mzzj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 08:54:41 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on June 06, 2015, 12:31:45 pmVery much this.Insurance usually makes sense if the possible loss would be substantial or devastating for you.Ship 400eur scopes a dozen per day, 1% get lost =acceptable risk and if you want insurance to cover it it will be more expensive than pulling the money from your own pockets directly.Ship 400000000eur scope twice per year, 0,01% get lost =lower probability but many would call it unacceptable risk.

author: cncjerry
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 09:29:04 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on June 06, 2015, 11:21:06 amThis hasn't been my experience with US domestic UPS or USPS. We had some silly things broken in transport, like one of those tesla lights, for example, which are fragile to begin with and they started the paperwork prior to our complaint.I recently had a box thrown over my low dog fence by UPS with a pretty heavy piece of test equipment. I took a picture, complained and got full coverage again.I guess it depends on country and carrier.Jerry

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2015, 11:06:11 pm
content: They're not going to fix it - it's going in the dumpster on arrival, or maybe they get reimbursed by Rigol CN who throw it in the dumpster on their end. The main reason they want you to send it to them is so they don't get taken advantage of by scammers - they really don't care about the scope per se. There may also be accounting or tax reasons they or Rigol CN need to receive it. It would be silly to pay to insure something that's going in the dumpster on arrival anyway.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 12:08:09 am
content: Yes,if they were the ones taking the loss. But they're not. The customer would be liable, and so it's only totally fair for the vendor to both require and reimburse insurance. And if indeed it's just going in the trash and the unit is required only as a security token to prevent fraud, then it's just as valuable as a working unit, and thus needs all the insurance a working unit would demand.

author: dadler
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 03:51:10 am
content: Batronix certainly did at least one thing wrong-By being cheap, this thread is now preserved for eternity. Seems like an expensive customer service decision on their part.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 11:24:19 am
content: Quote from: bson on June 06, 2015, 11:06:11 pmBut when the packet with the broken scope gets lost, they will consider you a scammer, because you didn't send the broken scope. So you lost your broken scope and won't get a working one in return. If the packet would have been insured you would get the money to buy a new one. The broken scope isn't worth much by itself but the warranty attached to it is. So the broken scope, while within the warranty period, has nearly the same value as a brand new one for you.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 11:50:18 am
content: Quote from: dadler on June 07, 2015, 03:51:10 amQuoted for truth. Amazing how many companies are willing to piss away customer goodwill over some absolutely trivial amount of money.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 02:26:35 pm
content: I have to say, the first thing I thought when I read the opening post was, "Shit, postal rates/rules in Denmark are completely ridiculous!" Maybe that's why the Batronix people reacted the way they did? Perhaps it's time for the Danes to opt-in to the Euro?From the Netherlands, a package by normal post between 2 - 5kg (which is what the DS1054Z weighs) is, at base level, automatically insured for € 500 - and to send it to Germany costs € 21.15. If you want extra insurance (up to € 5,500), the cost is € 27.00

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 05:16:20 pm
content: Postal rates are very expensive in Denmark/Sweden, seems like the falling number of letters due to e-mail has to be compensated by increasing all postal rates.Did you check if the insurance you mention is also valid when sending to other countries ?I could NOT find any info about insurance when sending a package abroad, on the Post Denmark homepage.And therefore told the lady at the postoffice, that i needed a coverage for 400€.She said that then i needed to insure it for that amount./Bingo

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 05:45:58 pm
content: Quote from: bingo600 on June 07, 2015, 05:16:20 pmSure - here's a link for rates / insurance coverage to all international destinations from the Netherlands - you can just chose the country from the drop-down menu:http://www.postnl.nl/tarieven/tarieven-pakketten/?country=DEI had to send an MSO1074Z to the Czech Republic last week - the weight was over 5kgs (because of the extra connectors, grabbers, etc) and I wanted the full €5,500 insurance, so it cost € 38.50.

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 07:00:04 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 07, 2015, 05:45:58 pmThat's a nice price for the postage , not for the MSO1074ZBut unfortunately not so for packages here in DK./Bingo

author: David_AVD
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 09:46:41 pm
content: I think it's perfectly reasonable to have to pay the freight back to the supplier for a warranty repair. It's not the supplier's fault that the customer is not local to them. If you wish to insure the package against loss or damage, then that's also up to you.

author: jadew
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 11:19:39 pm
content: Quote from: David_AVD on June 07, 2015, 09:46:41 pmIt's not the buyer's fault that the supplier sent him a broken product and the buyer shouldn't incur any loss because of it. It's the seller's responsibility to fix the situation and saying that they will send a new one, once they receive the broken one, but at the same time asking you not to get proper insurance for shipping, is basically forcing you to take the risk of losing all your money or to pay extra for their failure (they sent you a broken item).

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2015, 11:55:10 pm
content: Quote from: David_AVD on June 07, 2015, 09:46:41 pm+1Really a distributor should ensure the unit at least powers up, do a couple of checks, then dispatch.If a problem then arises, one would imagine the customer has made a error in usage and return should be at their cost.For goodwill, your distributor MIGHT return at his cost, however if a model/series has ongoing issues the distributor must protect their profitability as it's likely the manufacturer won't reimburse the freight.It's a bit of a minefield IMHO and big distributors will have a set shipping policy, probably inflexible too.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2015, 11:22:18 am
content: Quote from: David_AVD on June 07, 2015, 09:46:41 pmActually we don't need to discuss this because the German seller has to pay for anything related to a warranty case, i.e. during the warranty period required by law (extented warranties are something else). This includes shipping or picking up the broken device.Back to the question about the insurance (did some research). When the buyer sends the broken device back to the seller for a warranty repair the seller has to take all risks. If the device is damaged even more by transport, it's the problem of the seller. But to have proof of everything the buyer should take a picture of the broken device put into the packet, also a witness would be great, and he should have a receipt tag from the post office that he has sent the packet, i.e. given it to the post office. Therefore an insurance isn't needed and the seller doesn't have to reimburse that. The only thing to complain is that Batronix didn't tell bingo600 how to send the scope in more detail.

author: David_AVD
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2015, 12:14:58 pm
content: Quote from: madires on June 08, 2015, 11:22:18 amDoes that condition apply when a German seller sells an item to somewhere outside of Germany?

author: KJDS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2015, 12:19:23 pm
content: Quote from: David_AVD on June 08, 2015, 12:14:58 pmIt applies to any EU business selling anywhere within the EU. There are some minor country to country variations but they should meet the spirit of the European directive.

author: bingo600
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2015, 02:21:55 pm
content: Quote from: madires on June 08, 2015, 11:22:18 amThe vitness part seems undoable, from a trustpoint of view.So the package delivery slip that i got, was enough proof that i have shipped back the scope to Batronix, if somehow it got lost ?That would have been a nice info to get from Batrionix, prior to me shipping.When they wrote they would ship a new one,when they have received the broken one.I was quite sure that if they didn't receive it, i would NOT have gotten a new one.Package receipt or not./Bingo/Bingo

author: Mariuz
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: February 12, 2019, 01:06:53 pm
content: Quote from: dadler on June 07, 2015, 03:51:10 amJust made this acct to post that we decided against them as a supplier for the time being, based on this incident. A company that tells customers they will be reimbursed without specifying the conditions, then refuses to honor terms after the customer has spent the funds to be reimbursed, rather than sinking the cost with an “in the future...” comment and reviewing their internal guidelines for communications, has an unacceptable attitude to customer satisfaction and customer service. I don’t want dealing with a supplier to be like pulling teeth, and this interaction tells me that’s exactly what will be the case any time it’s more convenient for them to give us the finger.Thanks to the OP for sharing this warning.