FYI... PP 2 yr. warranty is non transferable to the second owner.

[Dancing Fire]

Originally Posted by martinr

If you crop the photo a little it will show up properly.

I am not computer savvy..

btw; For reasons unknown I can't reply to your PM..

[PJ S]

Originally Posted by Dancing Fire

Hummmm...It does not show a rotate button after I click cancel...

Read the post again – “next to the Cancel button”.

[PJ S]

Originally Posted by 77T

A bit OT -
Wouldn't it be nice if they came up with a "PatekCare" option for post warranty remedies? Something like AppleCare where you could purchase a 2 year plan when factory warranty expired.

Sure, the sensible thing to suggest is that a $40K luxury item needs another $500 (arbitrary figure) spent, for a couple of years additional cover!
Patek just isn’t making enough profit to afford either a 3 year minimum, or 5 years like Rolex (and Christopher Ward!).
Maybe, like Applecare, they could operate this new warranty such that it covers the product for the entire duration, and not just the original buyer of the extended coverage – how’s that for a novel idea?

And on a similar obviously-I’m-only-joking note, since when did asylum patients get access to the internet?
Remember, don’t swallow the blue pill…or is it the red one? Mine were purple, and I only swallowed on alternate days.

[Jetkopite]

Hey guys, ive just messaged my friend at the Geneve salon and he sais even if name is different on the certificate warranty is still valid??

[lapince]

Originally Posted by jon_jon

This can certainly kill the gray market if the warranty only applies to original owners.

Again I don't think PP will ask anyone for their papers when they bring a watch in for warranty, but this is insane and ridiculous...

Originally Posted by Marciano490

The warranty is only two years anyways, so it's only affecting the immediate flippers.

Sure, but a brand which does this kind of crap is worrying if you want to invest in it, with the 2 I have and the 5711 coming in I don't really care as anyway I will keep them more than 2 years, but this is insane.

Originally Posted by 77T

If I was buying PP pre-owned, I'd look for 2y.o.'s...

Originally Posted by Marciano490

As a lawyer, I'd advise you that the repair would be far less than hiring me. Now, a class action...

On the other hand, I disagree with PJS reading. Patek puts your name on the papers. It's signed by the AD, as referred to in his quote. It seems pretty clear the "your" is addressed to the person whose name is on the materials.

You're a lawyer?

[Racerdj]

This is a surprise. I purchased a used 5980 1R and experienced the sticking date issue July 2015. I was the second owner and the watch was sold from an AD in Spain but filled our the certificate completely. I was not on the certificate as the first owner was listed. They fixed it under warranty without question.

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by Racerdj

This is a surprise. I purchased a used 5980 1R and experienced the sticking date issue July 2015. I was the second owner and the watch was sold from an AD in Spain but filled our the certificate completely. I was not on the certificate as the first owner was listed. They fixed it under warranty without question.

Common sense, your experience, Capt Andy's official confirmation puts this to bed. As long as the papers are complete, signed and dated by an AD the warranty is valid and follows the watch not the person...if HSNA has a different view on the interpretation the OP needs to contact Geneva....it's not PP that needs the cash but obviously HSNA!

[liu_watch]

Originally Posted by malarky_hk

Not just a good way to kill the secondary grey market but the whole secondary market. Shocking.

My view is that this will not kill the secondary market, rather I can imagine the following:

1) the grey market will lower the price to a point where a customer is willing to accept the 2-year risk. Most grey market watches come with their own warranty, not manufacture warranty. And if it did break, most owner will likely it send to Patek, paying out of pocket, instead of claiming the grey market seller warranty.

2) prices for those still under warranty pre-owned watches will drop to reflect the fact that the non-original owner will not be covered.

3) because prices for the LNIB watches drop, a potential new buyer of Patek will likely "demand" a larger discount at AD to minimize the future loss.

4) if AD has a firm discount policy their sales will likely drop.

Regardless, it's sad to hear the news.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by liu_watch

My view is that this will not kill the secondary market, rather I can imagine the following:

1) the grey market will lower the price to a point where a customer is willing to accept the 2-year risk. Most grey market watches come with their own warranty, not manufacture warranty. And if it did break, most owner will likely it send to Patek, paying out of pocket, instead of claiming the grey market seller warranty.

2) prices for those still under warranty pre-owned watches will drop to reflect the fact that the non-original owner will not be covered.

3) because prices for the LNIB watches drop, a potential new buyer of Patek will likely "demand" a larger discount at AD to minimize the future loss.

4) if AD has a firm discount policy their sales will likely drop.

Regardless, it's sad to hear the news.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you buy pre-owned from a PP AD that implies the warranty is also not extend. Doesn't make sense

[texex91]

We can keep going back and forth with what 'if' statements.

Can some owner get IN WRITING from HSWA what the truth is...seems like something simple a watch manufacturer could clarify IN WRITING.

Plain, simple email stating YES or NO.

Still stunned it's only two years. Wow.

[liu_watch]

Originally Posted by KarlS

If you buy pre-owned from a PP AD that implies the warranty is also not extend. Doesn't make sense

Wow, their noble cause "fighting the grey market" doesn't sound too noble now. This essentially transfers the cost to either the AD or the customers, depending on who has more negotiation power during a given transaction.

I read it here weeks ago about how Patek boasts itself of keeping the service time under control - from 8 months to 5-6 months (if I recall). Perhaps the result comes from this non-transferability strategy?? By nature, owners under warranty are more likely to send in their timepieces...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[conkers]

Originally Posted by Dancing Fire

Roger
PP will probably treat you with much higher regard since you do own a big and very expensive collection. This is my 4th PP, but I'm still a little fish in a big pond, so I guess PP don't give a $hit about a little fish like me.

In theory you would think this would be the case, but in practice we are all small fish in a big pond. I have never received any sort of preferential treatment, invitations, gifts, allocation of limited pieces etc..

[77T]

Originally Posted by texex91

We can keep going back and forth with what 'if' statements.

Can some owner get IN WRITING from HSWA what the truth is...seems like something simple a watch manufacturer could clarify IN WRITING.

Plain, simple email stating YES or NO.

Still stunned it's only two years. Wow.

Agreed - the OP said he would post what PP provides him via email. We should keep in mind the original statement by a counter person at HSW (made to the OP's brother in law) could be wrong or out of context.

[KarlS]

Whole thing is none sense....Geneva have confirmed.....there is another reason why it's not being honoured! IMHO

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by Dancing Fire

This is the second paragraph on the back of PP's certificate of origin.

The guarantee is valid only for timepieces accompanied by a signed, dated and stamped Certificate of Origin given to the purchaser by an Authorized Patek Philippe retailer from whom the watch was purchased.


The bold part is where they got me by the balls.

The way I read this is that the watch had to be sold by an AD to an individual. It doesn't say it has to be your name ....

[Jetkopite]

Originally Posted by KarlS

Whole thing is none sense....Geneva have confirmed.....there is another reason why it's not being honoured! IMHO

Its black and white.. I dont see why this is still being discussed !!! Geneve salon telling me it doesnt matter whos name is on it to honour warranty should be good enough.

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by Jetkopite

Its black and white.. I dont see why this is still being discussed !!! Geneve salon telling me it doesnt matter whos name is on it to honour warranty should be good enough.

Because haters will hate!!!!

[martinr]

Monday morning I'm going to email HSWA and see what the response is. HSWA is Patek in the USA so it wouldn't make sense for them to have a different policy than Geneva.

[nyc2la]

Originally Posted by KarlS

Because haters will hate!!!!

Not sure it's hating by everyone stating it's non-transferable. Although for some, I agree it may be --- there are some haters on here . However, to be fair, and as I mentioned in my earlier post (#2), I heard from one of my ADs that if your name is not on the CofO, the warranty will not cover the work. Now, he could be wrong or misinformed, but that's what he relayed.

[nyc2la]

Originally Posted by martinr

Monday morning I'm going to email HSWA and see what the response is. HSWA is Patek in the USA so it wouldn't make sense for them to have a different policy than Geneva.

Excellent! Hopefully this will answer the question! I will be speaking with them this week as well --- my 5140p is due back from the spa this week. I will ask when we settle up.

[Passionata]

Originally Posted by KarlS

The way I read this is that the watch had to be sold by an AD to an individual. It doesn't say it has to be your name ....

Exactly my thought if AD part completed fully than the warranty should be fine.


iPhone/Tapatalk

[PJ S]

Originally Posted by lapince

Again I don't think PP will ask anyone for their papers when they bring a watch in for warranty, but this is insane and ridiculous...

As per my comment in post #7, a photocopy of the CoO must be provided with the watch on submission to a Patek Service Centre or Boutique/AD.

[lapince]

Originally Posted by PJ S

As per my comment in post #7, a photocopy of the CoO must be provided with the watch on submission to a Patek Service Centre or Boutique/AD.

Sure, certificate of origin, it doesn't have your photo on it AFAIK, and I can't imagine that AD's will ask you your papers, so again just go to an AD which doesn't know you and you're good to go, in advance opening an email under the name of the previous owner might be a good thing for the correspondance

In any case will be waiting to hear the result as this is insane if it were done like this...

[PJ S]

^
I’m not sure if we’re at cross purposes here – your face is immaterial to claiming a repair under the warranty.
Irrespective of where you drop off the watch, it needs a copy of its CoO accompanying it.
As long as it’s valid (signed, dated, AD details or stamp), then the warranty repair can be enacted once misuse/mistreatment has been excluded from causing the problem.

[KarlS]

Originally Posted by nyc2la

Not sure it's hating by everyone stating it's non-transferable. Although for some, I agree it may be --- there are some haters on here . However, to be fair, and as I mentioned in my earlier post (#2), I heard from one of my ADs that if your name is not on the CofO, the warranty will not cover the work. Now, he could be wrong or misinformed, but that's what he relayed.

No I was referring to later posts that despite all the evidence of Geneva and UK confirmations and people in the USA who used the warranty despite not being the original owner, some want to go in circles again! What Martin is doing is effectively what the OP said he was doing / done and even if this is all true....it's wrong and contrary to Geneva policy!

[KarlS]

PJS at some stage you just need to throw up your hands, look towards the heavens and admit defeat!! Your spirited defence (with which I tend to agree) is falling on deaf ears!!

[martinr]

Wrong or not let's wait and see what HSWA has to say. So far we have two people saying it doesn't matter what name is on the certificate and two people that say they were recently told it does matter. As far as sending a copy of the certificate with the watch when warranty work is done, that's always been the policy.

[Russell996]

I am told by my AD that the reason the papers for my 5131R are being held for 2 years is so the watch cannot be sold with the warranty. If I have a warranty issue then no problem Rhone will enable the repair but a second owner will not get a repair. They have done this specifically to stop a warranty repair for a flipped watch. A watch with papers within the 2 year warranty period is covered if it has full papers whoever presents it for repair.

[PJ S]

Originally Posted by texex91

Can some owner get IN WRITING from HSWA what the truth is...seems like something simple a watch manufacturer could clarify IN WRITING.

Is verbal communication sufficient?

Originally Posted by 77T

We should keep in mind the original statement by a counter person at HSW (made to the OP's brother in law) could be wrong or out of context.

Not wrong or out of context – it was relayed to me that the name had to tally with that on the CoO.
The very affable and pleasant lady I spoke with, at HSWA, agreed the name shouldn’t matter, and that it’s something that happens often when someone has been gifted a watch by immediate or extended family, etc.

Originally Posted by KarlS

Whole thing is nonsense....Geneva have confirmed.....there is another reason why it's not being honoured! IMHO

A logical conclusion to draw.

Originally Posted by Jetkopite

Its black and white.. I dont see why this is still being discussed !!! Geneve salon telling me it doesnt matter whos name is on it to honour warranty should be good enough.

But it’s not B&W – HSWA seem to have a different play book they’re working off of, and which seems contrary to consumer rights under the Magnuson-Moss Act.

Originally Posted by martinr

Monday morning I'm going to email HSWA and see what the response is. HSWA is Patek in the USA so it wouldn't make sense for them to have a different policy than Geneva.

Originally Posted by nyc2la

Excellent! Hopefully this will answer the question! I will be speaking with them this week as well --- my 5140p is due back from the spa this week. I will ask when we settle up.

Presumably you’ll both be told the same thing I was, when I phoned to confirm the situation, since this thread is already 2 days behind the original revelation on WUS – which I sent to the lady I had been speaking with, to pass on to her manager when he was back in the following day.
Maybe you should send them a link to this one, so that they’re aware it’s being discussed here too, and a bit more vigorously.

[77T]

[QUOTE=PJ S;7305375





Not wrong or out of context – it was relayed to me that the name had to tally with that on the CoO.

The very affable and pleasant lady I spoke with, at HSWA, agreed the name shouldn’t matter, and that it’s something that happens often when someone has been gifted a watch by immediate or extended family, etc.





[/QUOTE]




I apologize if I was unclear. I was stating that perhaps the counter person at HSW NY was wrong by stating the warranty wouldn't transfer.

Are you saying the original statement made to the OP's BIL was correct and in context?