Sony India Complaints & Reviews

Sequence of failures and details of defects for which the mobile has been submitted at Service center

I - Nov 28, 2014 (refer attachment “invoice.pdf”)

• Defective Sony Xperia Z1 (IMEI number : [protected]) purchased on Nov 28, 2014 for

Rs 31, 670.40 (CIN NO: U01100MH1999PLC120563) from Reliance Digital, Janakpuri, New Delhi

II - Dec 5, 2014 (refer attachment “JOB SHEETS.pdf”)

• Job Number # W[protected]

• Mobile was submitted at service center as ingoing and outgoing voice was not audible at all. Only extreme

noise and disturbance was audible in the mobile and it was impossible to talk on this mobile.

• As this issue was diagnosed within 1 week of purchase of mobile, customer demanded a refund of the

purchase amount of this mobile. This was refused by service center and the customer was persuaded to

collect the repaired mobile on the assurance that this defect will not recur.

• However, it should have been declared “dead on arrival” and reimbursement processed then and there.

III - Dec 19, 2014 (refer attachment “JOB SHEETS.pdf”)

• Job Number # W[protected]

• Mobile was submitted at service center as the mobile was not getting charged.

• USB lead of the mobile was found to be defective.

• As this was the second defect diagnosed within 3 weeks of purchase of the mobile, the customer again

demanded refund of the purchase amount of this mobile. This was refused by service center and the

customer was provided with a new USB lead to charge the mobile.

IV - Feb 2015

• The mobile was repeatedly getting hanged.

• Mobile was again submitted at the same service center.

• Software update was done by Service center so customer was not provided with Job sheet.

V - June 13, 2015 (refer attachment “JOB SHEETS.pdf”)

• Job Number # W[protected]Repeat Job Number # W[protected] ; this is mentioned in Jobsheet)

• Mobile was submitted at service center for 2 problems:

o Ingoing and outgoing voice not audible. Only extreme noise and disturbance audible because of

which impossible to converse on this mobile. Mobile was submitted at service center for this same

problem on Dec 5, 2014

o Mobile getting extremely hot after around 30 minutes o[censored]sage (charging / call / any online usage)

VI - June 25, 2015 (refer attachment “, Delhi, XPERIA Z1 C6902, [protected], 25-06-

2015.pdf”)

• Customer received a letter from Sony mentioning that

o Mobile has been received only once earlier. FALSE.

THE FACT IS THAT THE MOBILE WAS SUBMITTED 3 TIMES PRIOR TO SUBMISSION ON JUNE

13, 2015 (refer Job numbers - W[protected], W[protected], Feb 2015 submission when

software was updated)

o All the defective parts have been replaced and now the mobile is in working condition. FALSE.

THE FACT IS THAT WHEN THE MOBILE WAS TESTED IN THE SERVICE CENTER BY THE

CUSTOMER AND THEN BY HARMEET FROM SERVICE CENTER STAFF ON JULY 1, 2015 THE

MOBILE WAS NOT WORKING PROPERLY.

VII - June 30, 2015

• Customer received a call from Nitish from Sony Corp and Harmeet from Service center assuring the customer

that mobile has been repaired and the customer should collect it.

• Nitish from Sony Corp assured verbally that in case the complaint occurs again, the customer will be provided

with complete refund of purchase amount

• Harmeet from Service center also similarly assured that in case the complaint occurs again, the customer will

be provided with complete refund of purchase amount

• After these assurances the customer agreed to collect the mobile from service center on July 1, 2015

VIII – July 1, 2015

• The customer tested the mobile in the service center (prior to collecting it), to verify whether the mobile has

been repaired, as claimed by

o Sony in their letter dated June 25, 2015 to customer

o Nitish from Sony Corp on telephonic conversations with customer on June 30, 2015

o Harmeet from Sony Service center on telephonic conversations with customer on June 30, 2015

It was observed that the mobile was still not working; as whomever the customer called to talk was not able to

hear the voice of the customer. Also the customer was not able to hear the voice of the other party.

When the customer refused to collect the mobile, as the mobile was not working the service center person

(Harmeet) called up his contacts from the defective mobile. The people he called, also were not able to hear

his voice and neither was he able to hear their voice.

The customer was then persuaded by Harmeet from Service center to collect the mobile. He mentioned that

as Sony has instructed him that the defective parts have been replaced he cannot keep the mobile any longer

with him

• He agreed to process refund for the defective mobile if the mobile is again submitted in service center after 2-

3 days. This agreement is mentioned in the Job sheet. One copy of this agreement is available with customer

and other copy is submitted at the service center. Based on this agreement only, which was signed by service

center staff and then by the customer; the customer collected the mobile.

IX – July 2, 2015

• The customer tried to use the mobile but as voice was not audible, it could not be used for talking to anyone.

The customer informed this to the service center.

X – July 3, 2015

• The customer received a call from Nitish from Sony Corp that the customer should again submit the mobile at

service center. It is to be noted that during this conversation, Nitish himself was not able to hear the customer

and agreed that the mobile is defective.

• The customer received a call from Harmeet from the service center requesting that the customer submit the

mobile at the service center.

It is to be noted that during this conversation, Harmeet himself was not able to talk to customer and agreed

that the mobile is defective. He then called the customer at an alternate number for further discussion.

• Recordings of this discussion are available with customer. These recordings have been heard by Customer

relations manager of Reliance Digital, Janakpuri, New Delhi

XI – July 4, 2015 (refer attachment “JOB SHEETS.pdf”)

• Job Number # W[protected]Previous Job No : B1W[protected]Repeat Job Number #

W[protected] and W[protected]

• Service center staff tested the mobile and confirmed that the incoming outgoing sound is not clear. Also the

mobile was also getting overheated. Thereafter the customer submitted the mobile at the service center for

refund.

• IT HAS BEEN UPDATED IN THE TOOL USED BY SERVICE CENTER TO PREARE JOB SHEETS, THAT

THE MOBILE IS DEFECTIVE AND HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR REFUND (and not repair).

XII – July 9, 2015 (refer attachment “, Delhi, XPERIA Z1 C6902, [protected], 09-07-

2015.pdf”)

• The customer received a second letter from SONY mentioning that mobile has been received only twice

earlier. FALSE

THE FACT IS THAT THE MOBILE WAS SUBMITTED 4 TIMES PRIOR TO SUBMISSION ON JULY 4, 2015.

• This letter mentioned that “the mobile is working normally” and the customer should collect it. FALSE

WHILE THIS LETTER FROM SONY CLAIMS THAT THE MOBILE IS WORKING NORMALLY, AT THE

SAME TIME THE JOB SHEETS CONFIRM THAT THE MOBILE IS DEFECTIVE. ACTUALLY, AT THAT

VERY TIME THE MOBILE WAS SUBMITTED AT THE SERVICE CENTER BECAUSE IT WAS NOT

WORKING PROPERLY.

XIII – July 26, 2015 (refer attachment “NOTICE 1 BEFORE FILING CONSUMER COMPLAINT IN CONSUMER

COURT.pdf”)

• In the time period July 9 to July 26, 2015 the customer tried to contact multiple people from Reliance and

Sony to process the refund. However, the concerned people just kept mentioning to the customer to collect

the defective mobile and did not take any responsibility for the Sony mobile, though it is in the warranty period

and THE PROBLEM STARTED FROM THE VERY FIRST WEEK AFTER PURCHASE.

XIV – July 27, 2015

• On receiving the notice from the customer, Nitish from Sony called the customer. The customer again

explained the case in detail and reminded Nitish that as discussed and agreed earlier with him and Harmeet,

refund should be processed.

• Call recording is available for this discussion

XV – July 28, 2015 (refer attachment “, Delhi, XPERIA Z1 C6902, [protected], 28-

07-2015.pdf”)

• Customer received a letter from Sony mentioning series of wrong details. Please find attached the letter and

evidence to prove each claim made by Sony in this letter as false.

• You can also hear the call recording of the discussion and then you will know that all false details are

mentioned in this letter.

• One of the serious false claims this letter mentions is, “As agreed and confirmed by you to Mr Nitesh

Bhardwaj, the note mentioned on the retail invoice bill is written by you without any discussion with the

service manager / staff, while collecting the mobile from service center on July 1, 2015.”

AS MENTIONED ABOVE, AFTER AGREEMENT WITH NITISH AND HARMEET THIS WAS MENTIONED IN

THE JOB SHEET AND SIGNED BY SERVICE CENTER STAFF AND THEN BY CUSTOMER IN BOTH

CUSTOMER AND SERVICE CENTER COPY. CALL RECORDINGS OF THIS DISCUSSION DONE ON

JULY 3, 2015 IS ALSO AVAILABLE. CUSTOMER RELATIONS MANAGER AT RELAINCE DIGITAL,

JANAKPURI HAS HEARD THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION.

XVI – July 31, 2015

• The customer explained the case to Saurabh Girdhar, Area Sales manager, Sony and shared details of case

with him. Response has not been received from him.

• The customer shared details of case with Manpreet Singh, Account Manager for Reliance, Sony. Response

has not been received from him also.

• The customer shared details of case with Arun Deswal, Area Service Manager, Reliance. He has responded

to customer on Aug 5, 2015 suggesting that the customer should collect the defective mobile.

• Reminder email was sent by the customer to all these people on Aug 4, 2015.

XVII – August 1, 2015

• The customer explained the case to Kapil Mathur, Area Service Manager, Sony and shared details of the

case with him. Response has not been received from him. Reminder email was sent by the customer to him

on Aug 4, 2015.

XVIII – August 5, 2015

• The customer has sent a second notice with details explained to the individuals involved from Sony and

Reliance.

On July 4, 2015 the mobile was submitted at service center for REFUND and NOT REPAIR. Manager at Reliance

Digital has heard the recordings of this defective Sony Xperia Z1 where voice is not at all audible. Manager at Reliance

Digital has also heard the call recordings where Nitish (from Sony Corp) and Harmeet (from Service center) on July 3,

2015 have agreed that mobile is defective.

As per Sony Terms and Conditions

“If, during the warranty period, this product fails to operate under normal use and service, due to defects in design,

materials of workmanship, Sony authorised distributors or service partners, in the country/region where you purchased the

product, will, at their option, either repair, replace or refund the purchase price of the product in accordance with the terms

and conditions stipulated herein” (Reference page 14 of “Sony Important Information”[protected].2 document)

• This document is provided to customer in the same box which contains the mobile, accessories and other

supporting documents

Keeping in view the above evidence where the customer has given Sony four chances to repair the mobile and they have

FAILED to do so, the customer has submitted the mobile for the fifth time on July 4, 2015 for refund.

MORE THAN A MONTH IS OVER AND REFUND IS STILL NOT PROCESSED

Sony has to recall this product. I got my mobile SONY XPERIA M4 replaced once but again it hanged and started overheating and it stopped functioning. I have not used this phone without problem continuously for even a week.

Just after one year of purchase, I have got problems in the set. The service being provided by the Service Centre is very poor and they are doing nothing, simply deceiving their customers.