Voided warranty if water has been detected?

[brendanb581]

Apparently the warranty is voided if water has been detected on the phone?

Doesn't this make the waterproof feature kind of pointless? I submerged my phone in a glass of water for about a minute, 2 days later and the speaker is STILL quiet? And potentially now I can't even return the phone to get it fixed because that might of voided it?

What a joke.

 

[Hadron]

I can actually see some sense in a water-resistant phone having moisture detectors. The waterproofing is only supposed to be good if all of the port seals are in place and closed. So if an owner took the phone into a damp environment with these open, they are not using it as intended and it would be their fault if it got damaged.

Not saying that applies here, just noting that as a scenario in which it would make sense for them to reject a warranty claim.

Now I'm not a lawyer, but I think that as long as all of the ports were sealed then if the immersion you describe damaged it they should repair or replace. If I may quote from their own promotional website:

"[2] In compliance with IP5/7 and IP5X, Xperia Z is protected against the ingress of dust and is water resistant. Provided that all ports and covers are firmly closed, the phone is (i) protected against low pressure jets of water from all practicable directions in compliance with IP 55; and/or (ii) can be kept under 1 metre of freshwater for up to 30 minutes in compliance with IP 57. The phone is not designed to float or work submerged underwater outside the IP55 or IP57 classification range and should not be exposed to any liquid chemicals. If liquid detection is triggered on the handset or battery, your warranty will be void."

That does say that the warranty is void if liquid detection is triggered, but it also says that it would be OK in deeper water and for longer than you subjected it to. So if the ports were all sealed tightly at the time and yet it got damaged, despite their saying clearly that such usage should not damage it, I'd be tempted to argue that this means that the sealing in the handset was defective, and hence the goods supplied were not fit for their intended purpose (as laid out in the Sale of Goods Act of 1979).

The problem is that I could imagine it coming down to your word against theirs about whether ports were sealed.

BTW, I'm not a lawyer but it's clear that whoever wrote that footnote isn't a chemist. "should not be exposed to any liquid chemicals" but "can be kept under 1 metre of freshwater for up to 30 minutes" - what do they think water is if not a liquid chemical?

 

[brendanb581]

I can actually see some sense in a water-resistant phone having moisture detectors. The waterproofing is only supposed to be good if all of the port seals are in place and closed. So if an owner took the phone into a damp environment with these open, they are not using it as intended and it would be their fault if it got damaged.

Not saying that applies here, just noting that as a scenario in which it would make sense for them to reject a warranty claim.

Now I'm not a lawyer, but I think that as long as all of the ports were sealed then if the immersion you describe damaged it they should repair or replace. If I may quote from their own promotional website:

"[2] In compliance with IP5/7 and IP5X, Xperia Z is protected against the ingress of dust and is water resistant. Provided that all ports and covers are firmly closed, the phone is (i) protected against low pressure jets of water from all practicable directions in compliance with IP 55; and/or (ii) can be kept under 1 metre of freshwater for up to 30 minutes in compliance with IP 57. The phone is not designed to float or work submerged underwater outside the IP55 or IP57 classification range and should not be exposed to any liquid chemicals. If liquid detection is triggered on the handset or battery, your warranty will be void."

That does say that the warranty is void if liquid detection is triggered, but it also says that it would be OK in deeper water and for longer than you subjected it to. So if the ports were all sealed tightly at the time and yet it got damaged, despite their saying clearly that such usage should not damage it, I'd be tempted to argue that this means that the sealing in the handset was defective, and hence the goods supplied were not fit for their intended purpose (as laid out in the Sale of Goods Act of 1979).

The problem is that I could imagine it coming down to your word against theirs about whether ports were sealed.

BTW, I'm not a lawyer but it's clear that whoever wrote that footnote isn't a chemist. "should not be exposed to any liquid chemicals" but "can be kept under 1 metre of freshwater for up to 30 minutes" - what do they think water is if not a liquid chemical?

Thank you for the detailed answer mate!

The thing is, the ports were sealed ( I know that, they don't ) but it's only the speaker which is malfunctioning.. it's just quiet as if it's still wet.. so they shouldn't be able to argue about the ports (other damage would have probably occurred)

 

[Hadron]

Yeah, I've seen another thread that explains that the speaker going quiet is supposed to be a temporary protective method (I guess to prevent damage while the speaker membrane itself is damp). So for whatever reason your phone hasn't reverted to normal volume, but the fact that this "quiet speaker" thing is a deliberate feature implies that it can be activated without the internal moisture indicators being set off. So with any luck there shouldn't be any argument about moisture.

 

[Slug]

The warranty wording is simply Sony covering themselves. With headphones connected, for example, the IP5/7 compliance doesn't apply as a port must be exposed. This speaker issue sounds (no pun intended!) like a simple hardware fault; you've done nothing that I haven't seen Sony's own reps doing with their own handsets.

 

[Geoffxx]

Apparently the warranty is voided if water has been detected on the phone?

Doesn't this make the waterproof feature kind of pointless? I submerged my phone in a glass of water for about a minute, 2 days later and the speaker is STILL quiet? And potentially now I can't even return the phone to get it fixed because that might of voided it?

What a joke.

Not sure that would be the case, they market the phone with the specs and claims, I'm pretty sure that water on the outside of the phone is allowable, I'm also sure that the phone has water detectors inside which if they detect water then could create warranty problems unless there was a defect in the shell that allowed water inside, if you have done nothing wrong then I suspect a defect of some kind which I would expect Sony to honour - there's too much at stake in this cut throat market to have blemishes over their flagship device - it's doesn't take much bad press to throw a spanner in the works

Have you tried blowing hot air over the speaker grill for a short while to see if maybe there's still moisture in there triggering the sensor

 

[Slug]

I'm also sure that the phone has water detectors inside which if they detect water then could create warranty problems unless there was a defect in the shell that allowed water inside

There are tiny moisture indicator tabs under every port cover which will turn pink/red if activated. I hadn't noticed them until they were pointed out to me.

Btw, I was assured today that any damage occurring due to moisture ingress when these tabs are not activated will be covered by Sony under warranty.

 

[Aokusman]

Why did you have to place it in a glass of water?

 

[Hadron]

You mean if you had a waterproof phone you'd *not* be tempted to test it?

 

[Spicyfish]

The moisture paper is found within the flaps (look for the small white squares), as far as I was aware after a lengthy discussion in a mobile network store they were only voided should you leave them open.

 

[oj88]

Here's me tempting fate.

I washed my phone with a gentle hand soap the day I bought it... the dang fingerprints. But after reading this thread and seeing some XZ going mute after submersion, I think I'm back to wiping it with no more than a damp cloth.