Withheld warranty card watch on eBay.

[Liner33]

Surely if one purchases the warranty card with a new Rolex then one owns it and the dealer has no right to retain it, if the warranty card does not form part of the purchase then it cannot be transferred to a new owner anyhow.

Ford seem to be doing similar with their GT, with a "no flipping for 2 years" clause built into the contract

[Griswold]

The initial purchaser can't sell something if that forms part of a contract with a third party without taking that contract into consideration.

Of course they can, but it depends on what you mean by '

taking that contract into consideration'.

Let's say I take out a mobile phone on and 18 month contract. I am free to sell that phone any time I like without telling the buyer that the phone is on contract. Of course, I have to honour my original contract and continue to pay my monthly fee for the remainder of my original contract, but I can sell the phone, (or whatever), for whatever price I like whenever I want.

[jameswrx]

Does retaining the card mean anything anyway?

If the owner flips the watch and the new owner needs to claim on the warranty I assume they still can?

So basically all we’re talking about is a piece of plastic which has zero effect on someone flipping a Watch.

If this is the case they may as well withhold the instruction booklet for all the good it’ll do to stop flippers.

Why not just give the first owner everything but not allow the warranty to be transferable for the first year, that might have some effect rather than the second owner not having a credit card size piece of plastic.

[Liner33]

Of course they can, but it depends on what you mean by '

taking that contract into consideration'.

Let's say I take out a mobile phone on and 18 month contract. I am free to sell that phone any time I like without telling the buyer that the phone is on contract. Of course, I have to honour my original contract and continue to pay my monthly fee for the remainder of my original contract, but I can sell the phone, (or whatever), for whatever price I like whenever I want.

I'm not so sure you are. What if you ceased payments ? They block the phone, they couldnt do that without the ownership of the phone being part of the contract, you could sell it but whether you have clear title to it I dont know

[verv]

Does retaining the card mean anything anyway?

If the owner flips the watch and the new owner needs to claim on the warranty I assume they still can?

So basically all we’re talking about is a piece of plastic which has zero effect on someone flipping a Watch.

If this is the case they may as well withhold the instruction booklet for all the good it’ll do to stop flippers.

Why not just give the first owner everything but not allow the warranty to be transferable for the first year, that might have some effect rather than the second owner not having a credit card size piece of plastic.

No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Still wouldn't stop the cycle.

[Griswold]

I'm not so sure you are. What if you ceased payments ? They block the phone, they couldnt do that without the ownership of the phone being part of the contract, you could sell it but whether you have clear title to it I dont know

They would block the SIM, but that would not have been sold with the phone as that would be pointless. They'd then put you on the debtors register which would lower your credit rating and try to recover any outstanding debt. Rather like if you defaulted on an unsecured loan with your bank. The physical phone would continue to work with any sim from the original provider, assuming it's a locked phone, or with any SIM if it's not locked.

[Kingstepper]

If the initial purchaser chooses to sell the package then the card, as part of that package, 'belongs' to the new purchaser. As there is no contract between the dealer and the new purchaser, then unless the initial customer makes it clear as part of the contract that forms his sale to the new customer that the dealer will retain the card for the remainder of the 12 months, the new customer would be completely within his/her rights to demand that card from the dealer. All they would need to show would be a receipt for said watch signed by the initial purchaser.

How would the dealer know what contract exists if the watch is sold? Should he be provided with a copy?

Anyway, I've solved your problem: -

Sell watch to wife/partner and issue receipt. She can then get card from dealer as 'completely within his/her rights to demand that card from the dealer'. She then sells watch back to you.

Job done, fuss over.

[Griswold]

How would the dealer know what contract exists if the watch is sold? Should he be provided with a copy?

Anyway, I've solved your problem: -

Sell watch to wife/partner and issue receipt. She can then get card from dealer as 'completely within his/her rights to demand that card from the dealer'. She then sells watch back to you.

Job done, fuss over.

That would work.

Mind you, a better solution would be don't buy Rolex in the first place.

[Haywood_Milton]

This thread see the same illogical arguments repeated with no basis in law.

If it is as simple as some think, there will be a torrent of cases successfully brought against main agents. Agreed?

I don't see much point engaging with this discussion further until or unless that happens. If main agents correctly apply the policy, it will not.

[Liner33]

They would block the SIM, but that would not have been sold with the phone as that would be pointless. They'd then put you on the debtors register which would lower your credit rating and try to recover any outstanding debt. Rather like if you defaulted on an unsecured loan with your bank. The physical phone would continue to work with any sim from the original provider, assuming it's a locked phone, or with any SIM if it's not locked.

The block the phone itself , a mate of mine bought a phone on facebook, it had been bought under contract and then they stopped paying , the provider blocker the IMEI and refused to issue a PUK code

[bokbok]

This thread see the same illogical arguments repeated with no basis in law.

If it is as simple as some think, there will be a torrent of cases successfully brought against main agents. Agreed?

I don't see much point engaging with this discussion further until or unless that happens. If main agents correctly apply the policy, it will not.

+1

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

[David_D]

Does retaining the card mean anything anyway?

No

Called in to my AD earlier to have a look at the new GMT.

While having a chat, I was told that they now adopt the withheld card policy.

Apparently someone called to enquire about a (sought after model) Rolex and then declined when told of this. One instance of the policy having an impact.

[Mick P]

Called in to my AD earlier to have a look at the new GMT.

While having a chat, I was told that they now adopt the withheld card policy.

Apparently someone called to enquire about a (sought after model) Rolex and then declined when told of this. One instance of the policy having an impact.

This discussion is rapidly becoming very anal.

Rolex and the ADs have adopted a policy of retaining cards. Either accept that or buy something else. Easy peasy as they say.

Just remember if you walk away, there will be plenty of others who are happy to go along with it.

[David_D]

This discussion is rapidly becoming very anal.

Stop reading it if it causes you pain - especially in that part of the body.

[Mick P]

Stop reading it if it causes you pain - especially in that part of the body.

What I find ludicrous is a load of idiots who cannot accept that Rolex are insisting on conditions of sale and yet they carry on and on and on and on bleating about it.

If you don't like the terms of sale, go somewhere else, it's as simple as that.

[Steelgecko]

I really cant see the side of the argument that suggests a subsequent purchaser of the watch could demand the warranty card from an AD.

This idea of the card automatically and in all circumstances forming part of the 'complete package' on resale is legally fallacious.

The seller chooses to offer to sell the watch how he wants, and the buyer chooses whether to accept those terms. For example, I could choose to sell my Sub with no bracelet and just a person strap, if I wished.

If the seller has the card, fine no problem. If he has lost the card, again no problem - the price is adjusted to reflect this. If the AD has the card, then the seller can choose to offer the card as part of the deal but has a constraint within the terms of the contract he signed with the AD. This in practice means that he (the seller aka original purchaser) will need to turn up the AD after the allotted period of retention and then hand the card over to the new buyer (aka the subsequent purchaser).

If the seller offers the 'complete package' talked about in previous posts, but makes no effort to obtain the card himself, and then the subsequent purchaser turns up and demands AD hand over the card and they refuse - the problem is with the seller not the AD.

The reason is that the breach of contract is between the seller (original purchaser) and the buyer (subsequent purchaser). The AD has done nothing wrong - there is NO such thing as a default right to a complete package - legally speaking, the only thing that matters is the terms defined by contract. And there are two separate contracts here, and the failure in the example above is with the second contract because the seller has failed to ensure his obligations can be completed.

To rectify, he must take into account his obligations in the first contract and attend in person to collect the card. His problem, not the AD.

Simple.

Sent from my SM-G930F using TZ-UK mobile app

[David_D]

If you don't like the terms of sale, go somewhere else, it's as simple as that.

If you don't like the thread, go somewhere else, it's as simple as that!

[Mick P]

If you don't like the thread, go somewhere else, it's as simple as that!

If you don't like a forum that states the reality of a situation, it is time for you to go somewhere else.

No amount of whinging from you is going to change what Rolex do, they don't care what you want, live with it.

[jameswrx]

Why do we have to be “idiots” by partaking in a discussion on a thread about warranty cards on a forum about watches? Charming indeed.

Anyway I didn’t see anyone denying the existence just discussing the ins and outs.


And regarding the gent who said the AD told him “the phone rang” story, may well just be rubbish from the AD to make it sound like it works. It’s not going to put off a grey dealer, it’s now the norm here so if a grey can get a hot model at RRP they’re not going to turn it down for the lack of a piece of plastic. It may be a disgruntled customer that’s stubborn and won’t be dictated to rather than a dealer. But chances are it’s just a little tale from the AD to make you feel like they’re winning the war on flippers (when in reality they’re still taking back handers and just laughing at the genuine collector who’s the one that gets played)

[tiffer]

I finally go my hands on my first Rolex 16610LN yesterday from Watches of Switzerland after a 5 month wait. I was totally unaware of this practice, obviously Id prefer to hold the card but I can understand why they do. They provided me with a colour copy of the card should I have any issues within the year.