Bought from well known grey dealer - RSC says warranty voided

[nickrb]

I bought a Submariner from a very well known grey dealer/second hand dealer in August. The warranty period was still valid and the watch was advertised as being under the original manufacturer warranty.

When I got the watch it was running slow about -8 seconds per day. The grey dealer emailed me to follow-up after the purchase, and I told them it was running slow, but did not get a response.

I sent it in to RSC Dallas last month, and today got an estimate from them. I included copies of the front and back of the warranty card when I sent in the watch. Nevertheless, RSC has indicated that they are not honoring the warranty because there is evidence the watch was repaired before by a third party. Specifically, their estimate noted that: "Warranty void due to evidence of previous repair."

I have contacted the grey dealer and I hope they will make it right by paying for the repair. Hopefully they will do that, and maybe more than that, given that I bought the watch from them in August and it won't be back to me until February.

Bottom line is: even if the warranty card indicates a valid warranty, if Rolex sees evidence of the watch being opened by someone, they may not honor the warranty. So, when buying from a grey dealer, even one of the biggest, well known greys, caveat emptor.

[shammad10]

It's these kind of stories that make me really really hesitant to buy from are dealers. No-one knows what has happened to the watch. Even these sod called trusted sellers that people bang on about

[WS9D]

hopefully the grey will make it right for you. Keep us posted.

A little surprised at the RSC response. Just for discussion sake, if someone opened the case back to confirm authenticity, is that enough for RSC to say "evidence of 3rd party repair"?

[Scholar]

Wait, RSC will not honor a watch warranty if it got a “third party repair”?

So if I took a Rolex to a nearby independent with a Rolex parts account for a service, that would void warranty? Doesn’t sound right… It might be true, but stupid if so.

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by Ks6pd

hopefully the grey will make it right for you. Keep us posted.

A little surprised at the RSC response. Just for discussion sake, if someone opened the case back to confirm authenticity, is that enough for RSC to say "evidence of 3rd party repair"?

I believe so. That's why I think those verification services (like what Ebay offers) should come with some kind of disclaimer about such.

It's also possible that someone other than RSC/AD's certified watchmaker attempted to regulate it.

Question for the OP is: Was it sold as "new" or pre-owned? If sold as new, I'd be asking for a refund.

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by nickrb

Bottom line is: even if the warranty card indicates a valid warranty, if Rolex sees evidence of the watch being opened by someone, they may not honor the warranty. So, when buying from a grey dealer, even one of the biggest, well known greys, caveat emptor.

A standard condition of any warranty agreement and a calculated risk when buying used.

[nickrb]

Originally Posted by Scholar

Wait, RSC will not honor a watch warranty if it got a “third party repair”?

So if I took a Rolex to a nearby independent with a Rolex parts account for a service, that would void warranty? Doesn’t sound right… It might be true, but stupid if so.

The entirety of their statement on the matter is: "Warranty void due to evidence of previous repair."

So, yes, it is true.

[Starlord]

I had this issue before. I bought a used 116234 from a known grey dealer in newport beach. When winding the watch it was a little crunchy so I had sent it into RSC to get it taken care of. They would not honor the warranty as the watch had been polished by a 3rd party.

I told the grey dealer and requested a refund. Part of the purchase was getting a valid warranty. I am now very weary of buying used watches even from a reputable grey dealer.

[rmwill]

It is not from opening it. Its from a botched repair attempt.

Name the dealer.

Originally Posted by nickrb

I bought a Submariner from a very well known grey dealer/second hand dealer in August. The warranty period was still valid and the watch was advertised as being under the original manufacturer warranty.

When I got the watch it was running slow about -8 seconds per day. The grey dealer emailed me to follow-up after the purchase, and I told them it was running slow, but did not get a response.

I sent it in to RSC Dallas last month, and today got an estimate from them. I included copies of the front and back of the warranty card when I sent in the watch. Nevertheless, RSC has indicated that they are not honoring the warranty because there is evidence the watch was repaired before by a third party. Specifically, their estimate noted that: "Warranty void due to evidence of previous repair."

I have contacted the grey dealer and I hope they will make it right by paying for the repair. Hopefully they will do that, and maybe more than that, given that I bought the watch from them in August and it won't be back to me until February.

Bottom line is: even if the warranty card indicates a valid warranty, if Rolex sees evidence of the watch being opened by someone, they may not honor the warranty. So, when buying from a grey dealer, even one of the biggest, well known greys, caveat emptor.

[cornerstore]

Originally Posted by Ks6pd

hopefully the grey will make it right for you. Keep us posted.

A little surprised at the RSC response. Just for discussion sake, if someone opened the case back to confirm authenticity, is that enough for RSC to say "evidence of 3rd party repair"?

I believe that is correct. From Rolex site.

“ Retailer at the time of purchase; and (3) the guarantee card is presented with the watch, either to an Official Rolex Retailer or to an Official Rolex Service Centre. Any work carried out by third parties will render the guarantee null and void.”

[Big Tex Rolex]

The only way the RSC could tell is if there were non Rolex replacement parts in the watch … or something was not repaired correctly (I think) … in either case I would want my grey dealer to make this right.

But, I guess they could claim the risk of buying preowned … and likely, they had no idea it had been repaired by a third party.

[nickrb]

Originally Posted by dannyp

I believe so. That's why I think those verification services (like what Ebay offers) should come with some kind of disclaimer about such.

It's also possible that someone other than RSC/AD's certified watchmaker attempted to regulate it.

Question for the OP is: Was it sold as "new" or pre-owned? If sold as new, I'd be asking for a refund.

Sold as preowned but sold with the claim it was under valid manufacturers warranty.

I'd like, at a minimum, for them to pay for the RSC repair.

[drrd]

Originally Posted by nickrb

...the watch was advertised as being under the original manufacturer warranty.

You found out it wasn't so get your money back.

[train-time]

Originally Posted by nickrb

Sold as preowned but sold with the claim it was under valid manufacturers warranty.

I'd like, at a minimum, for them to pay for the RSC repair.

Interesting! Often Resellers quote the remaining term of the warranty on a pre-owned watch. It could be years remaining and that adds perceived value, but in this case, RSC has voided that remaining term regardless of whether you may need additional warranty work. They most like recorded the serial number in their system with this information.

Sometimes watchmakers make notes on the inside of the case back when they service a watch for historical purposes. Wonder if that was the case.

[nickrb]

Originally Posted by rmwill

Name the dealer.

Watchbox. I sent them emails on August 23 and September 5 mentioning the timing of the watch, and today after getting the notice from RSC. They haven't responded to any of my email messages. I also called them this afternoon, and they suggested sending another email.

Anyway, they seem to have a good reputation, so hopefully they will make it right.

[ag986]

OP, Best of luck with this, and hope you are happy with the outcome...whatever that may be. Please keep us posted.

[4 Aussies]

Originally Posted by nickrb

Watchbox. I sent them emails on August 23 and September 5 mentioning the timing of the watch, and today after getting the notice from RSC. They haven't responded to any of my email messages. I also called them this afternoon, and they suggested sending another email.

Anyway, they seem to have a good reputation, so hopefully they will make it right.

That stinks!! No response since reaching out on 8/23 and 9/5.....AD or zero for me!! Hopefully, they stand behind their sales, at this point, total disappointment. Keep us posted.

[storii]

Originally Posted by nickrb

Watchbox. I sent them emails on August 23 and September 5 mentioning the timing of the watch, and today after getting the notice from RSC. They haven't responded to any of my email messages. I also called them this afternoon, and they suggested sending another email.

Anyway, they seem to have a good reputation, so hopefully they will make it right.

Hope Watchbox will make it right for you.

When I was considering Watchbox, I thought it was strange that many watches on their site were listed as "coming soon" so I asked them. Their answer was that those watches were being worked on by their watchmakers to make them right for sale and most of them were about two weeks away to become ready. I don't know what extent of "work" they may be doing but it is possible at least some of them can be considered by RSC that they were left with an evidence of third-party repair attempt...

[nickrb]

Originally Posted by storii

Hope Watchbox will make it right for you.

When I was considering Watchbox, I thought it was strange that many watches on their site were listed as "coming soon" so I asked them. Their answer was that those watches were being worked on by their watchmakers to make them right for sale and most of them were about two weeks away to become ready. I don't know what extent of "work" they may be doing but it is possible at least some of them can be considered by RSC that they were left with an evidence of third-party repair attempt...

This was exactly the case with the watch I bought. Advertised as coming soon and also noting the time remaining on factory warranty.

[JRell]

Sorry to hear - just another reason I would never go grey for a modern Rolex.

[S7gpt]

thanks for heads up, was considering using WATCHBOX but won't now unless you advise a positive outcome.

[Calatrava r]

When buying any used watch there is risk of this and numerous other possibilities.
Hopefully market availability improves and people can buy new or buy used for a traditional discount to cover all possible misadventures the watch may have gone through.

[dauster]

Jesus you would think watchbox aka govberg who is also an AD would make this right

Tim mosser and watchbox always seem super legit hard for me to believe that they don’t make this right


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gab27]

I'm curious if perhaps the dealer purchased it, found it was losing time (or found it was losing time and purchased it at a lower price), and then tried to regulate it on their own? I guess if it is an older watch closer to the end of the 5 year warranty period, the longer time lapse suggests it is possibly more probable that something happened prior to the dealer getting ahold of it. Rolex's language suggests it wasn't just opened.

If they advertised the manufacturer warranty as being valid, as it is not, they are responsible for making this right IMO.

[DLRIDES]

Originally Posted by rmwill

Name the dealer.

Originally Posted by nickrb

Watchbox. I sent them emails on August 23 and September 5 mentioning the timing of the watch, and today after getting the notice from RSC. They haven't responded to any of my email messages. I also called them this afternoon, and they suggested sending another email.

Anyway, they seem to have a good reputation, so hopefully they will make it right.

If Watchbox does not make this “right” to your satisfaction, please let us know ! This type of deception/lack of response should not be tolerated.

[huncho]

Originally Posted by 4 Aussies

That stinks!! No response since reaching out on 8/23 and 9/5.....AD or zero for me!! Hopefully, they stand behind their sales, at this point, total disappointment. Keep us posted.

i always consider giant grey dealers like bobs or watchbox to be worse than a trusted seller here. those big greys just have too much overhead and volume to be able to attend to every little thing. they're also the first thing people find when looking to go grey so they rely less on word of mouth from clients. from everything i've read on this site, trusted sellers always make things right in cases like this. i guess we'll see what watchbox does

[Kirk Lazarus]

I would push for a full refund

[LA_LEC]

Originally Posted by Scholar

Wait, RSC will not honor a watch warranty if it got a “third party repair”?

So if I took a Rolex to a nearby independent with a Rolex parts account for a service, that would void warranty? Doesn’t sound right… It might be true, but stupid if so.

Why would it be stupid? If the watch is under active warranty why would you take it to anyone besides ROLEX?

If you DID, why would you expect ROLEX to repair something that might have resulted from you taking to a 3rd party who may or may not know what they are doing? I am with ROLEX on this one.

The grey sold it as being covered under ROLEX warranty so the grey needs to step up and do the right thing in this particular case.

[nickrb]

Originally Posted by Kirk Lazarus

I would push for a full refund

First step is for them to respond to my emails.

[subtona]

Some resellers will have it serviced for you and offer their own warranty.

It doesn’t seem outside reasonable that if there is evidence of service by unauthorized tech that rsc would take that position?