Panasonic Refuses To Fix Smokers’ TV
A British couple is furious with Panasonic after the electronic manufacturer is refusing to honor the warranty on their broken flat screen TV.
The couple noticed issues with the quality of the picture on their screen and took it to a repair a shop. However, the tech at the repair center said there was evidence that cigarette smoke had gunked up the inside of the TV and caused damage.
Panasonic said since the damage was caused by the couple’s smoking and not a manufacturer’s defect, that they wouldn’t pick up the tab. The couple admits to smoking 20 cigarettes a day, but say they don’t think that could cause the problem. Having worked for many years in television, I can definitely say that smoke can be a real threat to equipment. Especially since a TV has vents that can be easily infiltrated by smoke. So if you won’t quit smoking for yourself, think about doing it to spare your innocent TV.
Daily Mail Considers Yahoo Purchase
Next on the list of suitors for Yahoo’s email business is the UK’s Daily Mail. The popular tabloid admits that it has been in talks with Yahoo to purchase their e-mail and web-portal side of the business.
Yahoo wants to unload the email side of their business to concentrate on its share in the Chinese export business Alibaba.
Robot Waiters Fired
It doesn’t look as if the robots will be taking over all of the jobs for us just yet. Three Chinese restaurants that introduced robot waiters have fired all of the robots.
It turns out the robots were terrible at taking orders and clumsy to boot. They spilled drinks on customers and soup on the floor. Plus, they frequently broke down.
~ Cynthia
They should not honor the warranty to fix the TV.
They should not honor the warranty.
shouldnt there be a distinction among nicotine, marijuana, and wood-burning smoke? habit, pleasure, and necessity?
I Love it !! Especially about the robots since I used to be a waitress–I can just picture it and had a good laugh!
That’s a tough one.I can understand the manufacturer’s point,but people do have a right to smoke. It Su…. but that’s there choice.If the manufacturer’s get away with this that’s just going to be the beginning of a way for manufacturer’s (in all thing’s ) to get out of paying for repair’s. I think they should pay.Just think, your car brake’s down and the car doc say’s your car broke down because you smoke and the computer’s under the hood.The manufacturer say’s were not paying for repair’s because smoke is the the problem. As I said, that’s just the beginning.
Gino needs to learn to spell.. It is break, not BRAKE. Go ahead and smoke. If it kills you, try to collect on your own warranty. Gino can’t spell we are and makes a conjunction that should be we’re. not were. Not brake’s, it is breaks. Lord, Gino get off the computer and get a spelling and grammar book and study that.
did the warranty exclude smoking and if so, was there an approved amount? Is smoking allowed from the origin of manufacturing- shipping of units- the place of sale- delivery and setup. Have outside & indoor air quality caused any smoke damages?(smokestacks/cooking/fireplaces/exhausts etc)Was quality point established at store that sold the unit for future verification? The law doesn’t allow a business or citizen, to give themselves immunity. Like when a dry cleaner puts “not responsible for any damages” on their ticket! OF COURSE THEY ARE. They should establish proper chemical procedures by doing tests inside the fabric in unseen areas. If not, pay the man! I’m not a politically correct robot. Use some common sense.
I agree. If smoking causes lung problems and is well known that it is bad for you, how much more so for other things besides humans. Smoke get in everywhere including nonsmokers lungs. So, why do something that you know is not good for you and blame the manufacturer of one of your components.
i guess it should be printed in the warranty if hey are not going to cover that kind of damage. the disclaimer could cost them business and then where would they be.i understand both points of view. in thie instance it is not a disclaimer and they should fix it.
The fault was far more likely to be caused by dust build-up than the tar from smoking, to affect a piece of equipment that badly they would need to smoke about 200 a day in a badly ventilated room, I suspect that the repair centre is one that is well known in the UK for finding excuses not to honour manufacturers warranties, the couple should report it to the ombudsman as it amounts to theft, they have stolen the warranty which is supposed to be guaranteed for a set period regardless of the cause of the breakdown
I believe that if you choose to smoke that there are conse
If Panasonic or any other tv or computer manufacture doesnt want to pay for under warranty damages, then they should state in the warranty information that they won’t fix equipment from smokers homes. Just an example,, my sister and her daughter smoke, she bought a carton of ice cream that the daughter likes,, but she didnt eat it and went back home,, so sis gave it to me. It had been in her freezer maybe 2 or 3 weeks,, we couldnt use it either because the outside of the carton smelled so bad I didnt want it in my fridge.
I had to quit smoking due to medical. Did I like my smoking??? I LOVED my smokes when I smoked and still get the urge from time to time. BUT if MY smoking caused issues with something, it would be MY problem. MY smoking caused the health issues so if I had a TV and smoking caused the problem……that would have been MY problem. I would NEVER get down on someone who smokes (their choice) but if their smoking caused issues with something then it is their problem.
If you smoke, either your lungs or tv will suffer from your habit. If you are
dead from lung cancer or COPD, you can’t watch tv anyway. Smoking= no warranty.
We don’t smoke and vacuum around the computers and TV’s several times a week, just to keep the area pristine. Dusting the house which is spotless now is also
part of the routine.
Definitely smoke jams up the works. My husband used to play an organ and sing in a night club. After a short few months the organ was not working up to par. On opening it up it was clear to see that nicotine was jamming up the works and it cost a great deal to fix it. Not only that, but the fans he had set around the organ to keep the smoke from being inhaled as he sang- also were slowed to a stop with a thick slimy gunk from the cigarette smoke. No warrantee should cover people’s bad habits if they are the cause of the jam up. That’s just not right.
If it isn’t stated in the warranty, then they should have to pay. If it IS stated in the warranty, then of course, the company should not have to pay. I don’t believe the company would or should win if this issue went to court.
Sure as long as that is made clear at point of purchase. They cant make up the rules later
What a bunch of bull. I find it hard to believe that a Co. the size of Panasonic would try to pull a stunt like that. I smoked for years in my truck and it never gave up me for smoking. I had a hi-tech sound system in it and I’d bet it’s still noisy as original. Thats after twenty years of puffing up to five packs a day. What did break was one of my lungs had to have the lobe removed because of the smoking.
Whatever the warranty is, the company should honor it. I can see that changing the warranty to 1 year from 2 years for those smoking, for example, might be reasonable. BUT, no warranty at all would keep me from buying that product.
I don`t think the company is liable. Don`t they state that the warranty is for any factory defects ? Not for something the owner caused..
The problem is the product in question was never properly troubleshot. As a Tech myself for 21 years, I would have at least tried to clean some of the “gunk” away so I could have. I would take the TV to another repair shop to see if they would do a better job at troubleshooting.
I worked on electronic equipment for 21 years and never had equipment fail due to smokers habit. Sure it “gunks up” the insides and makes it a nightmare to work on and troubleshoot because it makes things sticky. But it can be properly trouble shot and the real problem found. I would say that the problem here is that the Tech did not want to take the time to do a cleaning to troubleshoot the TV in order to find the problem. Cleaning can take a long time and will usually take up the whole of the troubleshooting budget that Toshiba will pay, leaving nothing for the actual troubleshooting. This is not uncommon for a warranty item. A Tech has to open up the item, determine what is wrong, and fix it in a set time to make money on the warranty. If the tech determines there is a problem beyond repair the Tech escalates it to the manufacturer who then decides to fix or repair it. In this case they uses a very poor excuse not to fix or repair a product and as such I would never use any of there products.
Tend to agree with Panasonic. Damage caused by ANYTHING the consumer does is not covered by warranty. If I spill coffee in my laptop, should Toshiba fix that for free?
It definitely could affect the warranty but I think the TV company would have to specifically state that fact in the original agreement . They can’t just make it up and add it after the unit is sold to the public.
I am not a smoker and do not appreciate smoking around me. However, I agree with this post. Cannot move the goal posts during the game. What next, no breathing allowed? After all we emit CO2 in the breathing process. Would seem that might have an impact on the TV as well. Was there a disclaimer that smoking could be harmful to your TV health? How many more warning will now be required? They will have to have a DVD with all the limitations going forward. Take them to court and get a new TV as part of the settlement!!!
If their smoking caused the problem, then they should be responsible for fixing it. The manufacturer should only be responsible for damage caused by improper or shoddy work performed by their employees.
I don’t smoke,and smoking might have damaged this unit. I think Panasonic should pay for the repairs. This seems strange, never heard of this being a problem.
I don’t know if smoking could actually hurt the tv or not. I do know that both my parents were 2 pack a day ciga-holics and our TV’s ran fine. Panasonic should be responsible for the repairs UNLESS they had put an exclusion to warranty coverage related to cigarette smoking in their warranty when the set was sold.
I have NEVER heard of this problem AT ALL. We had three in-house smokers for about 15 years and never had a problem. We have all quit in the last 2-3 years so they can’t use the excuse that we didn’t have modern equipment. PAY FOR THE FIX or you will lose an awful lot of business.
I am glad to see that Panasonic has taken a stand regarding the impact smoking had on the television.
In the future, manufactures may want to specify that damage due to smoking will not be covered. However, I believe that based on the typical wording in warranties, they are not liable for damage due to smoking.
I am one of those strange people who reads warranties but how many people normally actually read their warranties if they do not have a problem?
Panasonic should pay unless it was stated in the warranty that smoking would void it. I smoked for 46 years and never saw anywhere that smoking would invalidate any warranty of any kind.
If that is the way Panasonic is going to treat this situation then I will never buy another Panasonic product. Televisions have been built when smoking was popular and in the movies or on television, this is BS all the way. This is a first for me, I never heard of such a load of crap, they wouldn’t have sold anything back in the 50’s, 60’s, or 70’s.
In the future, manufacturers should make special “smoke safe” sets with forced ventilation through special filters that have to be regularly changed. Of course, these sets would cost significantly more than a regular set. The warranty on regular sets would specify that smoking voids the warranty.
If second hand smoke can cause birth defects and Kidney disease in a fetus before the 4th month , it can certainly damage a television . My first child was born with birth defects that required surgery to correct and had to be on diyalsis by the time he was 23 years old. Had to have a kidney transplant in Sept. 2000.
I have had my tvs for 10 & 8 yrs. smoke every day and no problems, just keep vents clean.
Having heart disease from second hand smoke and having seen what smoke does to equipment onboard a submarine I wholeheartedly agree with the manufacturer for not honoring the warranty. If the people want to smoke they should accept the responsibility of their choices.
Considering that, while smoking is banned in many public places – It is NOT banned in private homes, and I presume this TV was marketed as a retail sales product for sale to the general public, as in (private) householders.
While the laws banning smoking apply to public areas they, mostly, specifically exclude private homes.
So the product was for sale without specific exclusion of use in smokers areas –
That, to me means that it is within the EU legislation for expected usage life of electronic/electrical goods, and it’s sale in the UK falls within the UK sale of goods acts, as well as misrepresentation and enticements to purchase.
So – if you buy an item from a retail outlet, and that retail outlet is representing the item as having a 3 year warrantee – then the seller is liable.
Panasonic may have limitations in their warrantee and believe that their unpublished & undeclared concepts of use apply – but unless those are made evident to the purchaser before they purchase the item, then the seller is, I believe liable for the goods robustness and safety in any environment that the user could reasonably be expected to keep and use it.
And – as a computer user – I’ll add – have the sellers of Computer equipment considered the limits in the warrantees of IT equipment – as in –
Seagate USB connected hard drives have a 2400 hour usage limit – see the specification of Seageate ‘retail’ quality drives – and just try finding similar specs for other manufacturers.
PC’s – well who bought a PC 10 years ago with the sellers assurance that they would not be able to run Windows (XP) on it after 2014.
And – the printer – and camera – compatible with windows XP – You did realise that did not mean it could be used with a 2015 computer, well you were told that were you not?
I work on tv/computers. The 1st question I ask is, is it from a smoking household? If they say yes, I tell them I will not service it. I can’t stand the smell, and it would stink up my shop. I can blow the dust out, but that layer of dark smelly film coats everything.
Environmental limitations are not inclusive of anything other than heat, humidity and physical damage. The warranty says repair or replace based on failure analysis of any parts, that would not include cleaning, I don’t believe that the owners only smoked that much, but if the residue buildup caused arcing or some other real damage then Panasonic should pay for it because it is not specifically mentioned as an exclusion.
Number one, I’d hate to see the insides of their lungs.
Number two, smoke particles are like a bolder on a computer Hard drive platter.
Number three, smoke leaves a film on everything, I know because I used to have to clean the the glass of the insides of smokers automobiles when I was a kid back in the fifty’s at a Carwash earning money for college. (I hated it)
Fourth, I agree with that fellow in the repair business that he didn’t want the set in his shop.
Fifth, I agree with Panasonic, let the peolpe buy a new set.
I can understand the problem but some disclosure needs to be made in the warranty papers so a person will know.
People that were smoking for 30 years & just quit 5 years ago. These were the OLD type TV’s. I use to work in electronics. The NEW TV’s are more sensitive to gunky smoke.
I will not let anyone smoke in my house. To many electronic things it can bother now days.
So I say Panasonic done the right thing by not paying for a repair the people caused.
I would say that “ALL NEW” TV’S be equipped with a new warranty. Therefore, there would be no questions about it.
I quit smoking 25 years ago and whilst getting the nasties out of mys system embarked on scrubbing the interior of my house from top to bottom, the window cleaning was akin to cleaning homey off the glass and the walls and ceilings similar. I’ve never smoked since then and also never allowed a smoker to smoke inside my home. I well believe that the smoke will penetrate everything.
I believe Panasonic should pay to have it fixed, unless it specifically states in the warranty that it’s not covered due to cigarette smoke? I don’t smoke myself, but both my parents were heavy smokers! They never had any problems with their TV sets. So is this a problem with just newer style flat screen models? Being there are a lot of smokers out there, I would think they would make a TV that wouldn’t be effected by cigarette smoke, or otherwise heavily advertised their equipment to be unsafe around cigarette smoke and no warranty would be honored under those conditions!
The warranty, as written, does NOT proscribe smoking; therefore, the warranty must be honored.
I think people have gone to the nutty extremes on this issue. Consider the impact of pollution due to our excessive use of motor vehicles. Each time a car engine runs, soot and oil particles are spewed into the air, coming into buildings. The soot and oil particles have a far greater impact (on electronic equipment, as well as our lungs) than the residue caused by smoking tobacco. Buildings are not air-tight.
Need to find another brand, Panasonic you are full of it. I will never buy another Panasonic product ever again. If smoke can hurt it, that shows just how cheep your product really is. I’ll look very close and any thing with the Panasonic name I’ll just leave on the shelf.
Never have had our cigarette smoke damage any TV in 56 years of smoking. Never ever heard of this before either. That was just a pure BS excuse. And we are so sick and tired of the anti smoking do gooders attacking us. Just leave us alone with our right to smoke. Does anyone tell you what kind of food to eat or beverages to drink or cars to drive or homes to live in.
To those who say smoke never hurt TV’s in the 50s,etc” Tv’s are made differently now.
To those who say that the warranty should mention smoking specifically, I agree, but sadly most of us don’t read warranties.
To blame Panasonic is useless. Smoke must affect other company’s TVs as well. The whole issue just needs more publicity, if true.
Many years ago, I repaired TVs and saw the effects of smoking. I refused to repair the set and agree with Panasonic. If smokers could see what they are doing to the guts of a TV, MAYBE they would think twice about what they are doing to their own lungs and body!!
Would this attempt to avoid paying for a repair also apply where inner city traffic pollution is the cause of a breakdown? If the components are suseptible to damage then better cooling air intake filtration should be provided.
It has been well documented for years that cigarette smoke affects electronics. The telephone companies banned smoking years ago around their equipment. An electronics co. should not be held responsible for the consumers bad habits. Their should however be a very obvious label explaining the affects of smoke on their product.
No way should Panasonic replace the TV. Maybe it will be a good excuse for this couple and anyone else reading about this to finally quit smoking.
Seems fair to me – no specific exclusion is req