This is apparently true but AFAIK it's to get on a waiting list for the rare ones. If you saw one in an AD window you could buy it there and then - there's no way of the AD referencing it against known vetoed punters. Certainly for Rolex anyway.Originally Posted by vcarter
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If this list exists it must be covered by the DPA, even if held on paper. A SAR by anyone who thinks they might be on the list will reveal whether or not it exists.
If the list does exist and either the retailer, Patek Philippe or Rolex (whichever one(s) receive a SAR) don't divulge what information they hold about the individual then they would be breaching the law and could be in trouble with the ICO.
Last edited by markrlondon; 27th July 2017 at 05:20.
However should they maintain that no list exists and it did, no one would know unless there was a whistleblower - no?
If true (and I doubt it), perhaps they would hold the list centrally in Switzerland where the same law might not apply?
I suspect its more the UK regional sales director keeping a personal / unofficial (but perhaps known by Switzerland) list and checking against that?
This is so, until they are caught out. Then they might come to regret not being honest. It's a risky strategy.
If it touches any UK business (e.g. Rolex UK, a UK retailer, etc.) then it will be covered by UK law. Just because a business is owned by a Swiss parent doesn't exempt them from UK (or EU) law.
That would be covered by DPA too. There is no such thing as "unofficial" in this context.
Of course, employees of companies can lie. But this is always an unwise strategy that will almost certainly be found out eventually.
If that list exists, I reckon it's managed centrally. I can think of a scenario, when eg. WF is checking a serial with the manufacturer and while confirming it's clean the same time it's flagging the customer in the system if sold within 'x month(s)'. And when the same customer would buy the next watch, the system would refuse to activate the warranty.
Rolex's arrogant interference is the reason why, as an existing Rolex owner I now say that Rolex can go *uck themselves with a bass broom! I have a nice Audi that I paid cash for, it belongs to me, every nut spring and washer, whatever I choose to do with it is all of my business and none of Audi's. Rolex is no different in my mind.
Humblebrag
Not so, I consider my point valid! Whatever!
Last edited by KavKav; 27th July 2017 at 14:39.
Ha!
Ok, I fell for it!
😂😂 They can keep em! Vetted to buy a mass produced trinket ffs.
This is all starting to sound so daft I wonder if it's all just playground chat among ADs. We do love our stories.
I think this is ADs trying to scare off flippers. As said by others previously, they don't have access to the full serial numbers of grey watches for sale. It was only with the Ceramic Daytona that I have experienced a central waiting list, most of the time it appears to be a note book with a physical list of names.
Next time you pop into the Kingston AD, drop a couple of fairly basic model numbers/Rolex movement numbers or a few facts that every member of this forum might reasonably know (sel's, parachrom hairsprings, availability of LV inserts for a vanilla 16610 etc) and you'll see thinly veiled bemusement and a vacant look behind the eyes - they just won't know what you're on about as they generally have very poor knowledge - or knowledge some way behind the curve when compared to enthusiasts on this forum. And they never admit they don't know, they roll their eyes and make stuff up!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I know it's been done to death but regarding the whole stickers/warranty card theme, I've just spoken to the manger at a Rolex AD who I'm reasonably friendly with and he tells me that the removal of stickers is a Rolex stipulation as they are only 'for protection whilst the watch is in transit', and the keeping of the warranty card is store specific and not an instruction from Rolex. His words, not mine-don't shoot the messenger!
Let's say for argument sake such a list does exist - they have two problems from next may when the Data Protection Act is replaced by GDPR.
The first is that they GDPR is much stronger in consumers consenting to the transfering data to a third party - so if they do plan to transfer it to Rolex they will need to get explicit consent.
The second is there is a much stronger right it to be forgotten, so you can demand as soon as the watch is in your hands for them to delete all of your details (and they couldn't insist for warranty purposes) and if they still retained it they would be in the brown stuff.
This goes against what Rolex itself told one member here, that it's usual to do it because that's what most customers want and expect, but it isn't mandatory.
I expect it's a case of slightly different interpretations by various ADs of the standard Rolex 'here's how you present a new watch to a customer' process.
Funny - I read this thread and thought about commenting on GDPR, then I figured it's not really watch forum material!
My honest view is that it's all just a load of AD sales staff talking nonsense.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have heard the same from a Rolex retailer, not a salesperson but someone up the food chain. I feel for these guys as they are in a lose lose situation, but Rolex is tracking the grey market dealers and knows where they come from. The ADs are getting some real grief over those ending up on the grey market and the withholding of warranty cards is understandable.
Last time I bought a Rolex, before taking the payment or handing over the watch, the salesgirl asked me to fill my details on a card/form. She then disappeared with those details for a few minutes while I waited. The sale process only started after she returned. I didn't think much of it at that time but having read this thread I'm now wondering whether she was checking my name against some list before selling me the watch.
Btw stickers were not removed and warranty card was not held back.
It's a very strange situation right now, and in a way, I'm quite glad that I'm not selling new right now. I've been working in ADs on and off for 10 years now, the pressure that is put upon your average AD now is unbelievable. Rolex UK have zero tolerance for what they regard an abuse of the dealership agreement, and when Rolex can account for up to half of a jeweller's turnover, you either play by Rolex's rules, or you fold.
This does seem to be resulting in a less than stellar standard of service to clients, which is sad to see. They have to err on the side of caution, the risk of any transgression is simply too high. The same for the sales staff - it was considered gross misconduct to let a warranty card go out without being properly activated, filled in, and cross checked. That's a pretty heavy burden to bear.
I do hope sense is seen, in the long term this will only harm the brand
A DPA Subject Access Request to the AD should tell you what they did with your information, if you are interested enough to stump up the statutory max £10 fee and write a letter.
Very interesting comments.
Yes, it is harming the brand but, worse, I think it is harming the reputation of ADs who pass on this pain to the customer. It will be remembered.
What would be an example? Giving discounts?
That sounds like something that should be standard practice. Why is that so hard to do for each sale? And cross checked with what?
Interesting contribution BTW, thanks for posting.
More nonsense, again.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
I've a little insight in PP lists due to circumstances this week. I was lucky enough to get a Nautilus quite quickly and whilst going through the paperwork the AD noticed something and asked me to wait a few minutes whilst they went off. They came back and said that the paperwork had another AD's details on it. (I had asked about one a mere 6 weeks before and was told February next year would be when they would know when/if they could get me one, but they had unexpectedly received an extra allocation).
My first question was to ask if this had been delivered to them by mistake. They told me that was their first thought and they had gone to call Patek straight away and were told that it was due to them (relief for them and me). Whilst explaining that I would be sent new paperwork from Switzerland and that it would take a while I asked about the so called 'list' (where the AD gives the name of the intended buyer and they cross check if you're down with other AD's and also that you are worthy etc etc 😜)for watches that I've read on here and other forums. I was told there is no such list for a Nautilus or Aquanaut or many others. However there are certain rare models that have long wait lists and the only way you can get one is to already have a Patek and be known to them. They have a list of all customers in Switzerland so if you ask your AD I guess they cross reference you and what you've bought. This does make sense as I'm sure I've seen the odd rare one up for sale in the grey market at nearly double the retail price. It also seems to clarify that it's the AD who sells to whom they want. This all come up in conversation due to the error on the certificate so was a totally genuine conversation.
Discounting excessively is considered a devaluation of the brand, so that is a bit of a grey area. Discounting isn't forbidden, as that would get you into a real black hole legally, so it's a bit of a fine line.
A more pressing issue is stopping unworn watches from finding their way into the secondary market, and as far as I can tell, that's pursued much more actively in the UK than in other markets. Numerous UK dealerships have been found to be doing this, and the action has been swift and irreversible
I have heard stories regarding Daytonas on WatchFinder from other sources, so it does look like Rolex are actively researching ones that are appearing on the grey market. It wouldn't take a lot for them to find out the serial number, and then it would be a simple case of tracking it back to the original dealership. Sought after watches get sold to the second hand market, the AD gets in hot water. This is where I think the treatment is unfair - if you knowingly sell to a grey dealer, then that for me is a black and white breach of the dealership agreement. However, if you sell to a private individual, the dealership's responsibility ends there. Anyone can do what they want with their own property, and who wouldn't be tempted to flip one when you could make an instant profit of several thousand pounds?
With regards to the warranty cards, again, this seems to be much more heavily enforced in the UK market. In other territories, I regularly see cards that have only a date on it, a name and a date, or even completely blank. To see a full name and address plus date (like what is expected in the UK market) is an oddity on overseas cards. In busy times, it's easy to overlook a step of the process - at my last place, the card would be filled out and activated, a supporting document filled in, a photocopy taken of both sides of the card, model and serial numbers added to the customer's account on the POS system, and then everything cross checked by the manager on duty. Easily a 10-15 minute job, even with plenty of experience. Very easy for a mistake to happen, and potentially lose your job over it
Hope that explains things further
Thanks.
Do you mind if I ask for a further clarification? Assuming you don't, the question is this: the warranty applies to the watch, not to the buyer, correct? If so, then in that case all the warranty card needs is the watch serial number, which would make sense of what you say about many cards being left blank.
To be honest, if an AD told me the sky was blue I'd double check. These Rolex stories seem to get more extreme every year
Yup. When I bought a GMT LN for myself, the European AD left the name blank on the card. Same when I bought wife's Lady Datejust. We wrote the names on the cards ourselves in both cases, long after purchase.
If you read the small print of warranty, it does state that it should be filled in at point of purchase. Whilst you're absolutely right about the warranty following the watch and not the owner, Rolex could, in theory, refuse to do work under warranty if the card hasn't been filled out completely. Now, this is where it gets tricky again - as different Rolex markets have different attitudes towards the guarantee cards, it might be considered sufficient that it has been activated electronically at point of purchase. If that hasn't been done, then I would assume Rolex would refuse warranty work.
Would it really be legal for a manufacturer to refuse warranty repair on an item of their own manufacture on the grounds of a warranty card not filled in? I can see that for a part of the warranty period perhaps, but not for the statutory minimum period.
As others have said - it's all just nonesense. If Rolex really wanted they could just flood the market. Make 500,000 Daytonas and fill the windows with them. Not as though there is a shortage of Datejusts. It's a product, it gets bought/sold and eventually will arrive at RSC where more money will go back to Rolex. They love the mystery/hype around the brand and other brands dream of it.
Are there any laws that concern themselves with manufacturers' warranties? To the best of my knowledge, UK and EU legislation tends to concern itself with the relationship between retail vendor and consumer. Statutory warranties are enforced between the retailer and consumer, and the manufacturer has nothing to do with it (unless the manufacturer sold direct to the consumer).
Manufacturers can of course offer voluntary warranties of their own but they are not, to the best of my knowledge, covered by legislation (other than maybe general contract laws and similar). Thus there is probably nothing to prevent a manufacturer from rejecting warranty support if their terms and conditions have not been properly followed.
If anyone knows otherwise, please do let me know.
I may be off the mark here but does not this sort of action contravene the EU trading laws? Didn't the VAG group and Mercedes get fined for similar practices?
It seems possible, even probable. But it will take a group of businesses affected by it to take action or for some regulator to get off their backsides and take action. And there seems to be too much fear from those with a lot to lose and not enough interest from those with nothing to lose but who should be doing something.
Speaking to a Rolex AD in Kingston yesterday the only watch they withhold cards on is the Daytona. In all cases they leave stickers on as the watches can be returned unused within 7 days and the removal of the stickers is something that turns the watch from ‘unused’ to ‘used’
Very informative, thank you.
A very good question, and not one I would readily have an answer for. I'd wager UK retail law would cover faulty goods as per the Sales of Goods Act regardless of how the warranty was completed, but I'm not certain if/how that would apply on items sourced outside of the country
Indeed, but this involves only the consumer and retailer. It says nothing about the manufacturer as far as I know (unless of course the manufacturer sold direct to the consumer).
(And the Sale of Goods Act has of course been replaced by the Consumer Rights Act).
In short, there is no statutory regulation of manufacturers' voluntary warranties (unless anyone knows better?) because there is statutory regulations of the sale from retailer to consumer instead.
Last edited by markrlondon; 31st July 2017 at 16:12.
So they still all do what they like then!
One I was in this afternoon indicated it was now policy to remove the stickers. But I got the impression they don't retain any warranty cards. Not an issue, because it then only leaves me to remove any they missed.
The crystal on my wife's yellow gold datejust had to be replaced because it was damaged INSIDE and would lead to the watch not being waterproof after being serviced by Rolex.
Damaged inside by what exactly?
Her bracelet banging on the outside of the glass could have damaged it on the inside.
Words out of the mouth of the salesman dealing with a Rolex service at a Rolex dealer just recently.
The biggest load of bollocks I've heard in many a year , your term of "making stuff up " couldn't be more right.
Shameful service from a Goldsmith branch that represents a worldwide brand like Rolex .
Don't tell me the TRF 'The GMT Master' is lurking here :)
According to a four year old thread, they can't be ar$ed aligning the crown when it's fully screwed in !
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
