Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

[greekdude]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Sorry dude... But this isnt Thomanns first rodeo. They know what the law is, they know what they can and cant do. The scratches that you caused not scratches that came with it make it impossible to return it as unused. IF the guitar was defective it needed to be returned immediately but instead you chose to try to remedy this yourself by modifying the guitar. They know this, you have even admitted this. At this point they cannot determine was the guitar defective or did you cause it. At the very best you have an uphill battle. Thomann was within the law when they offered to fix it for you. This is actually more than many vendors will do. Many as soon as they have seen you have modded something will tell you you're on your own.

Sorry dude but this is plain BS. I explain (for like the 20th time or so) :
- I never claimed that I used the 14-days period on the basis of not liking the UNUSED item, because the item was clearly used, I returned on the basis of DEFECTIVE item in the FIRST 6 MONTHS of ownership and also within the first 2 months from detecting the problem.
- I never modified anything. Royal BS.
- They had all the time in their .... labs to prove that I damaged the guitar. Instead they reverted with a statement that the fix was trivial. This proves that they DID NOT think that I caused any damage, since they never claimed that there was any real damage. On the contrary, my issue is that they did not do their job, and this will be proven in the near future (by lots of evidence)
- Again, since you have difficulties in grasping this : I HAVE NOT MODDED ANYTHING, If I did, they would go very vocal about it.
- They (Ibanez) provided the neck screwdriver - multi-tool in order for the user to be able to set it up correctly. I used the Ibanez tool. That's all.

Anyways, the case will be transferred to the "European Consumer Center" soon, and we will see who has done the most Rodeos.

 

[kramersteen]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

HAHA oh my golly gosh.

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Sorry dude but this is plain BS. I explain (for like the 20th time or so) :
- I never claimed that I used the 14-days period on the basis of not liking the UNUSED item, because the item was clearly used, I returned on the basis of DEFECTIVE item in the FIRST 6 MONTHS of ownership and also within the first 2 months from detecting the problem.
- I never modified anything. Royal BS.
- They had all the time in their .... labs to prove that I damaged the guitar. Instead they reverted with a statement that the fix was trivial. This proves that they DID NOT think that I caused any damage, since they never claimed that there was any real damage. On the contrary, my issue is that they did not do their job, and this will be proven in the near future (by lots of evidence)
- Again, since you have difficulties in grasping this : I HAVE NOT MODDED ANYTHING, If I did, they would go very vocal about it.
- They (Ibanez) provided the neck screwdriver - multi-tool in order for the user to be able to set it up correctly. I used the Ibanez tool. That's all.

Anyways, the case will be transferred to the "European Consumer Center" soon, and we will see who has done the most Rodeos.

Dude you admitted in a thread here that you unscrewed the neck and added a shim... that my friend is modding.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Dude you admitted in a thread here that you unscrewed the neck and added a shim... that my friend is modding.

Oh yes, I touched that flying 0.0001mm thick shim which was installed PARALLEL to the neck, and put it back in the correct manner. I guess this is a crime in most countries right?

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Oh yes, I touched that flying 0.0001mm thick shim which was installed PARALLEL to the neck, and put it back in the correct manner. I guess this is a crime in most countries right?

Drama queen much? I didnt say crime but it will invalidate a warranty claim. Anything that isnt in the manual as user serviceable can possibly do so. Dis assembly is a big no no when it comes to warranties.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

^^^ lets say it is a way for a company to screw its customers and send them away.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

I received it. With the same exact problem. Again I cannot make the neck pup move, it seems like stuck in there :

It seems like it is in the exact "optimum" state as when I sent it back to them. Clearly if the neck pup was parallel, one of thew screws would not go all the way in. I am at a total loss.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Just thinking, it strikes me that you consider upgrading to carbon rods, (which is a MEGA-intrusive mod and unneeded in 99.99% of the cases - how many prestige ibanez's, fenders, gibsons etc... from 1970-- have any kind reinforcement? and still going strong?), while you seem considering seting up a wrongly installed factory shim as ... modding. Ok I know the different contexts that you put the two different situations, but reading it together in the same post it does not make sense. It is hugely disproportinal.
BTW, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_expansion_coefficients_of_the_elements_(data_page) the difference in thermal expansion between Carbon and Titanium is in the range of 17%. Is that a dramatic improvement?

And there you make a crucial mistake. You're looking at the atoms, not materials. Titanium is a metal which in and by itself is, itself. Or an alloy, of course. Carbon is just an atom which can be used in a plethora of ways, For example, grafeen, diamond, or in fiber material grafted to a resin, akin to epoxy. Which is exactly what the carbon rods are made of: carbon with a resin, which makes is incredibly light and stiff. That's the trick.

Agreed, carbon rods aren't necessary per se, but it will help that tiny extra bit. I've made two neck recently. One with carbon, one without. both were used on an extensive world tour; the carbon neck needed virtually no adjustments whereas the other required the usual work after a 15 hour airplane flight. It's just that EXTRA bit of stability and security.

And yes, it's a major intrusive job but I'd only do it when all other avenues to fix the guitar have been exhausted and there is nowhere else to go but go 'total overhaul' with the guitar. In other words: when you can't appeal to your warranty.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Base plates' stripped threads is a an easy job to repair. Just did an old licensed FR plate yesterday using V-coil M3 kit. The result was so strong that the screw in the v-coil'ed thread managed to "crush" the saddle.
Now as far the knife edges are concerned I really cannot tell. By the eye, the edge zero II seemed superior by design (inspired by Gotoh), compared to an idea of 1980+ (OFR). How exactly did you measure the hardness of the knife edges of OFR vs Edge Zero vs Edge Zero II ?
BTW the edge zero ii stud :

seem better designed than the OFR one:

Thanx for sharing your ideas.

You can measure it by a tensile strength measurement. All I know is that by some basic testing and playing I was able to see that the iba plates are softer. And I doubt that's in dispute. At all.

Anyway. I see virtually no difference in stud design. Both use a bushing, both use a threaded insert with a groove for the knife edge of the baseplate.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Thanx,
btw how exactly did I mod the guitar? I dont think I did that. Ibanez gives the multi tool which includes the screwdriver for the neck. I cannot really go through all this for the N-th time. The guys at jemsite freaked out on hearing the story about voiding the warranty by unscrewing the neck.

Besides, if it proven (e.g. by measuring the scale as you said) that the guitar has a problem, the euro law does not care if the item is unscratched or not. If it has fundamental issues it is covered by 2-years guaranty. Thomann/Ibanez had their chance to prove that I damaged the guitar and blew it. . Now, I doubt that any court will be interested in the minor scratches in the back. What Thomann expects is me starting setting up their guitar again, which will not happen. I am just gonna wait for the guitar to prove its strength in the first 6 months. If it breaks within this period, the euro law is more than clear on that. If not, most probably it will never will.

The guitar (supposedly) was in Ibanez/Germany for whatever work they did. If they had noticed anything "bad" by me, I think they would be more than eager to use this against me. So, no, there was no alteration to the instrument. Only a cheap and dirty excuse by Thomann and/or Ibanez that won't work if I go the legal way. Also, Thomann gave absolutely ZERO documentation about the guitar being in any Ibanez service. They did that to erase the "reset" of the historical maintenance of the guitar. Nice trick, but it won't work, since I have all the emails at any legal authority's disposal.

Thomann isn't required to give you any documentation.

And yes, you modded it. By detaching the neck, tweaking the intonation etc etc... all clear voids of warranty. You are not 'allowed' to do that, only if you're a qualified, licenced (ibanez approved?) luthier. Now, since most luthiers aren't officially qualified by any builder but most guitars are either way beyond the warranty period, this is usually a non issue. THe problem at hand, though, is that Thomann nor Ibanez can, will, would or could prove that the problem with the guitar was there from the beginning.

In other words, the argument could be made (by them) that the problems are a result of your own mishandling of the guitar and therefor, they are no longer responsible for the problem and any and all repairs they are executing is a courtesy, not obligatory.

I'm writing that in a different font, a tad larger, to imprint it onto you. It's not a matter of 'the guitar is fault'. It's a matter of proof: can you prove that the guitar was faulty from the beginning? If so: hand it over! That means, unboxing pics and photos or preferably a video where you show the guitar in it's faulty state to begin with.

The fact that you played it and the guitar has scratches means the guitar cannot be returned or exchanged for a new guitar.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

To prevent further misinterpretations of the law, (and save any potential Ibanez-Thomann fanboys the trouble), here is the law :
http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/shopping/shopping-abroad/guarantees/index_en.htm



So the fact that I may have scratched one two scratches in the back that any serious automotive shop can fix for 10 euros is not a serious argument. It is a cheap, illegal, irrelevant argument. I didn't ask Thomann to replace the guitar because I did not like it in the first 14 days. NO!! The law says that the product MUST BE UNUSED in order to send it back in the first 14 days. I never claimed that I did not use the product. My claim is that the PRODUCT WAS FAULTY SINCE DAY 1. Although the law favors me since this is within the first 6 months, Thomann/Ibanez were UNABLE to prove that I damaged the guitar or caused the conditions for this damage myself. If they were able they would have given full documentation about it. THOMANN NEVER PRESENTED ANY DOCUMENT PROVING ANYTHING ABOUT THE GUITAR BEING IN ANY WORKSHOP , IBANEZ OR NOT.

I guess this last post will put the final nail on this case, as far as its legal aspect is concerned.

All well and nice, but this states nothing. This is just a case of jurisprudence and you'll be needing a damned good attorney to get your presumed right. Again, the issue at hand is:

(and again in a contrasting font: )

Can it be proven that the issue at hand is due to a factory slip up or due to your own mal doing?

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Edgecrusher: we rarely meet eye to eye, but we are in total agreement in this one. Needs to be said.

 

[Edgecrusher]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Edgecrusher: we rarely meet eye to eye, but we are in total agreement in this one. Needs to be said.

*faints* ..... mg: :beerchug:

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

And bear in mind that you might not be entitled to a refund if the problem is minor, such as a scratch on a CD case. (sic : so a scratch is not considered a problem )

Here, you are drawing the wrong conclusion again. This phrase, in bold, means that you can't get a refund from the seller if the issue is minor. It doesn't mean that a scratch YOU made is irrelevant.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Can it be proven that the issue at hand is due to a factory slip up or due to your own mal doing?

YES :
1) CAUSE IBANEZ RETURNED IT JUST LIKE I SENT IT TO THEM, and said that their setup was easy and trivial. Apparently they didn't look at the pups in the right angle.
2) The timestamps of shots were minutes after the records of DHL final delivery, I could not hit the tools even if I was the superman. The timestamp of today's pic was shot also minutes after DHL brought it here at work. And of course i have plenty of people here that can prove that I did not touch the guitar, (nor am I willing to until a solution is found)

 

[Dahla]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Greekdude: you keep citing EU law, but what does the sale agreement you had with Thomann say? If you check the the little box that says "I agree with the sale and user agreement yada yada yada", you can't say that you didn't agree later on. They might have some clause in there about returns and such.

That is also in the EU legal system. A binding contract is binding between two consentual parties when they sign it. Basically, you have agreed to the new terms.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Greekdude: you keep citing EU law, but what does the sale agreement you had with Thomann say? If you check the the little box that says "I agree with the sale and user agreement yada yada yada", you can't say that you didn't agree later on. They might have some clause in there about returns and such.

That is also in the EU legal system. A binding contract is binding between two consentual parties when they sign it. Basically, you have agreed to the new terms.

A sales contract is void if it doesn't fall within the confines of EU law. That's kinda how it works here.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

Greekdude: you keep citing EU law, but what does the sale agreement you had with Thomann say? If you check the the little box that says "I agree with the sale and user agreement yada yada yada", you can't say that you didn't agree later on. They might have some clause in there about returns and such.

That is also in the EU legal system. A binding contract is binding between two consentual parties when they sign it. Basically, you have agreed to the new terms.

i dont remember ticking on any checkbox anywhere. All variations of the local EU policies can deviate from the spirit of the main backbone, but only to the benefit of the buyer. Anyways in the near future we will know for sure. If there was any such "new terms" Thomann would be pretty damn loud about it, and I would be aware of it.

 

[orpheo]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

YES :
1) CAUSE IBANEZ RETURNED IT JUST LIKE I SENT IT TO THEM, and said that their setup was easy and trivial. Apparently they didn't look at the pups in the right angle.
2) The timestamps of shots were minutes after the records of DHL final delivery, I could not hit the tools even if I was the superman. The timestamp of today's pic was shot also minutes after DHL brought it here at work. And of course i have plenty of people here that can prove that I did not touch the guitar, (nor am I willing to until a solution is found)

1: a slanted pickup is, for them, hardly an issue. It isn't a structural problem. So... this point is, from a manufacturer's perspective rendered moot.
2: timestamps can be falsified.

If the slant of the neck pickup is the issue, there are ways around that. If the intonation or stability of the guitar is at stake, THEN they have to fix it.

 

[greekdude]

Re: Problem with Ibanez UV70p Thomann does not want to replace

^^^ the latter is definitely a problem. Will revert on this. The slant is not an issue if this is caused by some wire underneath. When it is cause because the neck heel is pushing this, (or the pickguard was installed wrong), then this is definitely an issue as well.

If timestamps can be falsified, then the same can be said about emails, photos, text, anything in our digital world, basically. But the upload times at flickr were recorded, and this is hard to mock unless you have someone from inside right? I dont imply the timestamps metadata embeded into the pic itself, but actual yahoo records.