1173
Louis Rossmann is suing Samsung after firm offers $330 refund for defective SSD while selling the drives on Amazon for $949 — spat over 4TB 990 Pro SSD is headed to court (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
147 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 88 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 248 points 5 months ago (11 children)

St Louis fighting for us again. We don't deserve this hero but we fucking need him

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 65 points 5 months ago* (8 children)

    It's small claims court, so anyone else getting fucked by this wont benefit. It's going to take a bigger case. This will be forgotton about in a coupke months and Samsung will keep doing it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    Not true. If you can cite another similar small claims case against the company, the Judge will take that under consideration as well.

    It's only not beneficial if they settle outside court and have a non disclosure agreement. And that's not going to happen with Rossmann. There is zero doubt in my mind that he would turn down a million dollar payout to keep quiet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago*

    I also don't expect him to settle. Louis has principles and a DGAF - get it done attitude and an extreme allergy to bullshit. Truly a hero for the people. All he asks is that we participate and speak out on these issues. My next guys poker night (or equivalent) might include a group email writing session. I know several people who I would not have expected to get involved who have written their reps regarding right to repair and other consumer advocacy and freedom issues.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    Unless Rossman shares a template for individually suing them in any state. Maybe they will start to play fair when they are defending 25,000 individual lawsuits.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    You do realize that is exactly what he will do, right? He’s a spiteful little shit. John fucking Deere is terrified of him for a reason.

    I have to wonder, what are the horcruxes of Louis Rossman?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    I admire his level of pettiness. When it comes to pettiness, Louis comes second only to the hungry hustler, OG Afroman. The way he was dropping diss tracks all up and through the trial and had the court of public opinion massively on his side was legendary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 54 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    This and the battery thing are some good content.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Oh the battery thing is delicious drama. Just chef’s kiss

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    I’m glad he knows where to look for the company’s financials. Paints a very clear picture of what’s going on with those batteries.

    Since Trump, it’s like the entire world feels validated in being more openly shitty in regard to commerce, consumers, and working class. We were on a decline already, this just feels accelerated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Do you have a link? OOTL

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    This is a good starting point I think.

    I'm pretty sure this is Part 2

    And I'm waiting with baited breath for Part 3

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 47 points 5 months ago* (22 children)

    Just had a similar thing happen to me. Bought some WD reds. Two drives were DOA. Since no drives were available to replace them, I could return for a refund. Then had to buy drives when they were in stock again at double the price.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 24 points 5 months ago (17 children)

    It’s like DoorDash giving you a partial refund and not actually getting you what you ordered when there is a fuckup by the restaurant.

    How satisfied are you with your customer support? I didn’t get what I fucking ordered!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (15 children)

    doordash is a horrible example...

    they do nothing but keep you lazy.. they don't make the food, package the food, or see the food.. that's the restaurant's problem, not doordash

    that said, don't use doordash... or Uber...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    You have no idea how helpful DoorDash/Ubereats is for people with health issues and no support network. I'm not going to share any of my details but I'd be in a much worse situation if I couldn't rely on DoorDash for meals.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    ya... I don't agree with a corporation being the solution to that at all..

    neighbours exist. communities used to help each other, until corporations got involved and made us not be communities anymore.

    most neighbours will help, if you ask. I'd rather see communities helping each other, even paying neighbours rather then some shit company, that's screwing you and the employees over.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    I really don’t mean to be disrespectful but it sounds like you’ve been lucky enough to never have anything like this happen to you. I’m glad for you, I wouldn’t wish this on anyone. But please realize you’re talking about an idealistic view that doesn’t match, at least my own, reality.

    I know DoorDash is expensive, I’m fine paying the prices and tipping the drivers extra well. The service is useful and important to me. And taking care of the drivers with tips and them taking care of me with service IS my community. I love those people that bring me food and it means the world to me that I can get the food I need, when I need it, with such little friction. (Which btw, is not pizza and Chinese food. I WISH I could eat those things 😭) That’s well worth the extra costs I’m paying. Plus I get to support local businesses that I otherwise wouldn’t be able to patronize.

    If you have issues with DoorDash or gig economy type stuff, I’d urge you to think about legislation or unionization type things that would help and evangelize for those, rather than taking it out on the patrons and drivers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Yes, before the invention of DoorDash people with health challenges just died. No one could order food and have it delivered by cabs or the restaurant. Not like pizza places did delivery at all let alone base their whole business model around it. Really just a good thing such Uber and Dash companies came along to be super valuable middlemen charging a fee to everyone involved.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Pizza every day isn’t great.

    And those other contexts were not as pervasive as DoorDash has become.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I worked delivering food when I was young, all food was able to be delivered way back. It was not just pizza and very common, DoorDash and the like have just gaslit everyone into thinking they are needed. I remember the small town I lived in even had a program to pay for cabs to get groceries for people with limited mobility (this was in the 90's). We have abandoned working systems like meals on wheels in favor of for profit middlemen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    DoorDash supplanting meals on wheels is terrible. I don’t mean to argue otherwise.

    I think awareness of the options was really low, though. And that’s probally what I’m speaking to. And I expect my ignorance was shared. I see your point though. And I can see how I was speaking from ignorance there.

    While maybe more people are aware of a way to deliver food and basic supplies in the era of DoorDash, I never really meant to defend them. It just made sense to me that the pervasiveness of DoorDash is improving access. But it’s definitely not improving affordability. Not at all, holy shit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    That is the truly insidious part, people did know and use delivery often back in the day. It was in movies (remember the Chinese take out boxes all the time, those where delivered), it was promoted in every grocery store and was many a young persons first job. But like all things its gone in a weird way, now no one seems to deliver anything out side of being a contractor for an app. Our charities have changed in a similar way, less on the ground help (when I was 12 I helped a version of meals on wheels that had over 6 active vans in a city of 30,000) and more on remote support and fundraising. Not saying they are not trying to do good work, but what people expect in their community now is kinda depressing in its tiny underwhelming way.

    Your right it is driving costs up, and also not always improving access outside of major cites. Here is a personal example; I used to be able to get food delivered at my house in a small rural town (1400 people) from the nearest city (25 min drive away). It was more money since you had to pay for the extra distance, and the delivery people did not like it (it cut down on tips spending 50+ min driving for one call) but it was possible. Now I don't have that option, the Dashes/Ubers/Justeats just don't even try. It might be that no one would take that job, it might be they never thought of it. Oh and we have as a town had to fund and support a local handibus non profit to deliver things to or drive to appointments people with mobility issues (for whatever the reason is).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    Chinese and pizza were the only places you could be sure would deliver. Grocery deliveries, outside of charities that were not well known, were expensive enough to make doordash look like a charity.

    Now if you go back a century or so, you might be able to phone the local General store and have little Jimmy bring a box of stuff for you, but little Jimmy is in the home now, and those times have been long gone before either of us were born.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Really? I used to order subs as a child often. Guess it depends where you where. Here in Canada things are spaced out when not in city's and maybe that made delivery more common?

    Point is still that places like DoorDash and the like are not positives for communities overall and the extra costs while paying less to drivers is causing real harm.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    Well, it’s definitely tangential. The only overlap is how their refunds don’t actually fix anything and there is no path to actually addressing the original customer intent. A new order would be more money, and a gamble on the same error happening (maybe even intentional neglect by the people at the restaurant). And having to go out and get it yourself breaks the whole reason you engaged with the company at all.

    It’s a very broken customer service system they have. And it has to be that way to keep their margins.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    The part that irritates me is the act like they can't refund anything after "the store confirmed the order". One time I meant to check the price of a liquor bottle, dropped phone, between trying to prevent it falling and picking it up I touched the purchase button. The store "confirmed the order" within 30 seconds. Since the store confirmed the order and started "preparing the order" I could cancel it but couldn't get a refund. The issue? It was 11:15pm. Legally liquor stores can't sell packaged liquor after 9pm here. Either a. The store didn't confirm anything and have be not started preparing anything b. The store is openly defying multiple laws. The c. The you are full of shit. Plus what's "preparing" a bottle of liquor? Why can't you send a notification of "put it back on shelf" and be done? Fine yeah my mistake of accidentally pressing button, maybe a 10% "restocking fee" still bullshit but acceptable. Not being able to cancel order at all though???

    If it's not clear, the store was closed but order was defaulted to be delivered at 11am the next day as that was next available legal delivery time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Charge back time! That is like full on Karen mode appropriate (a very rare occurrence).

    Since we know what happened is the liquor store just has every order that comes in "confirmed" by default and its just better for them and Dash to work this way. Like what if a child had hit the button? Fuck you I guess?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    I think doa refund is kind of fair. Should compensate you a little for wasting your time but you're made whole. RMA though feels like they should replace.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Yeah, good thing our time is not worth anything. And if those drives are ordered for a project? Eh you got your money back 4 weeks later so what are you to complain about?

    Really this is why things are so bad, we all take this shit and think its fine. If I stole your wallet and you caught me, be returning it does not make the event not happen.

    If I buy a thing, and its DOA the very min is money back and most of the time if that is the case there better be a fucking amazing reason for that. If I spend time, money and effort to first buy a thing then jump though hoops when it does not work I am not made whole by "undoing" that transaction. I have spent many many many hours on hold and texting support chats when bad products are shipped, those are not done to get my $ back, they are to get what I needed when I paid for the thing. If after all that they think I will not burn and salt the very earth the company sits on by giving me my money back, they don't understand. I have and will refuse money back, I will and have paid money to make sure I get what I ordered and if they will not send me a working thing, I will never do business with them again while making sure anyone I can talk to knows what they did.

    And before you think I don't get the other end of the relation ship, I for many years did RMA and or warranty work for places like Cisco and Lenovo. I don't expect mistakes to never happen, I don't expect everything will show up without issue, I don't expect instant results. But I hold places to the same standards I was held to, if I could not fix the thing I had to return to try again, and again, and again until it was fixed. I have never once been able to just say fuck it and give the person the money value of the device and walk away (in fact there where times where my company spent several times the devices value on the service).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 41 points 5 months ago (18 children)

    The wording of Samsung's warranty seems to support this conclusion:

    "{...}during the limited warranty period, and subject to the conditions and exceptions stated in this Agreement, Samsung will, at its option, either: (1) repair or replace the Product with new or refurbished Product of equal or greater capacity and functionality; or (2) refund the then current market value of the Product at the time the warranty claim is made to Samsung if Samsung is unable to repair or replace the Product." [emphasis added]

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 63 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    What's funny is this wording was likely designed to try and screw over the customer and backfired, because historically a used SSD has always been cheaper than the original purchase price. But in this specific market, it works in the consumer's favor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    Exactly that because drives were getting cheaper over time so it saved Samsung money to refund at the going market rate and at worst case it would be just a few dollars more. When they penned that they never envisaged the shitshow we have going on today when the price of storage and RAM has 4x'd or more.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Please review section D of their warranty terms and conditions. It clearly states they are not liable for more money than the original purchase price:

    D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability

    Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade. All expressed and implied warranties are limited in duration to the limited warranty period. This agreement contains Samsung's entire liability and your exclusive remedy for breach of this agreement. in no event shall Samsung, its suppliers or any affiliates be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental or special damages, any financial loss or any lost data or files, even if Samsung has been advised of the possibility of such damage and notwithstanding the failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. in no event will Samsung's liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product. these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.

    So yes, they will totally cover the cost of a replacement or refund of market value at the time of requesting the refund, but they are only liable for that purchase price. If the value goes above what you paid, they are not liable for providing the increased price. This is the having cake and eating it too. It's worded to protect them the fullest, or if they decline to replace it later and it's much cheaper for them to provide you with a market value refund, they will do so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    The problem with that is the first sentence:

    Except for the express warranties stated herein

    It states pretty clearly to me they are liable for the current market price if they are unable to repair or replace.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    That is not a sentence, you took a sentence fragment. Very important distinction in a legal document.

    Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade.

    They are saying they are not liable for any implied warranties. The only warranty that is valid is the one defined in the document. They are not saying that section D does not apply to express warranties, as the next sentence talks about them in terms of limiting duration.

    Reading is fundamental man.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    Stop trying to act like you know the answer. It could go either way, it's up to the judge and judges can have different interpretations, even at the supreme court level decisions are usually not unanimous.

    Fuck you gotta insult the guys reading ability, you both read perfectly fine and neither of you are lawyers so you have no authority even if you read English perfectly well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (7 children)

    I guess the question is what the price was when he submitted the claim.

    Edit: Today's price isn't necessarily the price when the claim was filed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    $949

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Now here’s a guy who at least bothered to read the title.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

    There's a time difference between today and when the claim was filed.

    He sent it off, they sent it back, and he tested it before they offered the purchase price as a refund.

    I know this because I bothered to read the article

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 111 points 5 months ago (14 children)

    Louis taking the financial hit for all of us. One of the few people that are "famous" I would buy a coffee if I were to see him on the street.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 42 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    He seems mean spirited and just a bit unstable to me, but I think that’s just an encode/decode mismatch in communication styles. What’s important is he can speak the truth to power AND BE HEARD. And for that I will absolutly cheer that crazy bastard on.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [+] 23 points 4 months ago* (7 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Unfortunately, I think you're projecting a bit. He's had interviews stating that he has issues with "both" sides, so from what I can find he seems centrist in his views. Also, he's now a part of FUTO which has hosted him as a speaker alongside others with alt-right tech personalities.

    From my perspective, I think he fits the burned out IT professional archetype that is tired of all the BS today, but as far as activism I think he's pretty much only focused on right to repair. Anything beyond that seems to not be in his scope of interest. But to be honest, I would be happy to be proven wrong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    I feel his message is a bit muddied by the overly aggressive tone, particularly to try and reach 'normies'

    But he gets results so all the best to him

    I hope Samsung gets fucked

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I wouldn’t say it’s a "financial hit". He has specifically worded his YT video to make it seem as if he will hire a lawyer and take Samsung et al to court. But in reality he is definitely planning on filing this in a local small claims court.

    Still want to see him win because honestly he deserves it and fuck Samsung. But he does tend to be a bit over dramatic in his videos for the clicks/viewership 😂

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Often these cases are taken on contingency. The lawyers are always the true winners of these lawsuits

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    I highly doubt there will be lawyers involved on the plaintiff side. This is definitely going to a local small claims court.

    If Samsung or this "Total Tech Solutions" company does send a lawyer (very rare), he will get the desired outcome. Probably check for the cost of new SSD + court fees.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 67 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    I'm rooting for him, but I also can't recall any warranty agreement that didn't include something along the lines of "or refund of original purchase price at manufacturers discretion" as an acceptable remedy instead of replacement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 118 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    At the bottom of the article it cites that they have the right to refund if they can’t repair or replace, but since they’ve shown plenty of stock in their own store they can replace. He also cites their own policy which reads “refund the then current market value of the Product”.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 77 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child)

    Agreeing with you here, they probably had the last line there to save themselves money, as historically tech items lose value over time, so if you bought an ssd for $200, and 6 months later needed to be replaced or refunded, historically they can realistically offer you $150, as that would traditionally be the new market value after 6 months, but in today's timeline, now its apparently worth $900 and they probably don't want to pay that.

    Samsung hurt itself in confusion

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    I wonder if these repair companies that Samsung outsources to have internal metrics to keep payouts or replacements as low as possible.

    Gaslight the customer into returning and agreeing to a "refund at original cost". Do this X number of times for contract bonuses or something.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 29 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Get em Louis

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • load more comments
    view more: next ›