Shattered Expectations: My Battle with Samsung

Before buying the new Galaxy S23, know their repair practices

A version of this article was published in the NZ Skeptics newsletter.

I was frustrated and disappointed last year when Samsung refused to repair my Note 20 Ultra 5G under warranty. Despite my efforts to fight for what I believed was a just cause, Samsung gave me the cold shoulder. As a long-time Samsung user (and I still own one now, even after my bad experience), I know the brand can produce great products, but I’m concerned that my recent experience with their practices could be breaching the law.

I purchased my Note 20 Ultra 5G during a Black Friday sale at PB Tech. At the time, the Note 20 Ultra 5G was one of the latest high-end phones, with a price tag of over $2000. The phone was in near-perfect condition, apart from a small crack that formed on the rear glass, starting at the bottom right corner of the camera bump and extending to the right edge - after only five months of use! I always kept my phone protected with a case and screen protector. The crack was not caused by any accidental or abnormal use damage, which would be legitimate reasons for Samsung not to fulfil my warranty claim.

So I visited the local Samsung store at the local mall about one month after noticing the problem and asked the staff to check my phone. The two staff members (one was a manager) said Samsung doesn’t repair physical damage but admitted that they “couldn’t feel the crack” and that, therefore, I should try to have it repaired under warranty. They gave me a card with a number to ring.

My Samsung Note 20 Ultra with a crack.

When I found my receipt (after annoyingly misplacing it for ages), I contacted Samsung through their website in December - without a response. I contacted them again in January, this time in a live chat. They couldn’t find my original message, so I gave them all the details again, and they said they would investigate. Eleven days later, Samsung responded and agreed to examine my phone, instructing me to send it to PB Tech for mailing. However, they stated that the issue was likely not covered under warranty due to the physical damage. This was a statement I strongly disagreed with!

In February, I handed the phone to PB Tech, and the technician inspected it and rated it with “no visible damage” on the entire phone except for one “crack on the back”.

PB Tech’s inspection document.

The phone was sent to Samsung Authorised Service Center (SASC), and ten days later, they reported “Physical damage verified. Warranty void”. No checks were reported to see if the glass was defective. They quoted $270 to replace the rear glass panel.

I tried to talk to the SASC about how the issue should be resolved under my consumer rights. They ignored some of my questions and, strangely, talked about me and not to me during our discussions. Still, they replied: “...any kind of physical damage not caused by manufacturing fault - which includes crack on the back glass - will not be covered under warranty”. They also said, “we do not have the authority to make decisions whether this can be covered under CGA [Consumer Guarantees Act]”. 

SASC chat log - talking about me, not to me.

So it appears that Samsung has a blanket rule that they don’t repair cracks under warranty, even if it’s from faulty glass. The Service Centre told me to contact Samsung directly. So after plenty of back and forth, I was passed on to the Assistant Manager at Samsung’s Customer Escalations team (not to be confused with the SASC), Vikas Salotra. He said, “as there is clear evidence of physical damage, this will not be repaired under warranty”.

Something that I didn’t check at the time but have noticed since, is that Samsung’s warranty exclusions did not exclude damage under normal conditions.

“E. This Warranty does not cover damage caused by: 

•misuse or abusive use of the Samsung product, including physical abuse;

•incorrect operation…

•incorrect or improper maintenance…”[1]

A few days later, Vikas sent me a PDF reply saying that Samsung “will be closing this case as our Management team have reviewed all information in this investigation and confirmed that Samsung will not be covering the repair under warranty since physical damage is not considered a manufacturing fault.” Additionally, PB Tech charged an $80 inspection fee because the phone was not under warranty, and at that time, they ignored my request to pay for the repair.

Samsung’s final message to me.

After this, I dived into the law; the government website “Consumer Protection” says the following about the Consumer Guarantees Act:

"The Consumer Guarantees Act (CGA) offers protection against things going wrong. If your device or appliance is put to normal household use, this protection can last longer than the manufacturer's warranty.

If your gadget or appliance doesn't work as it should, the CGA gives you the right to a remedy — either a refund, free repairs or a replacement.

This right covers problems with both physical and digital products bought from New Zealand businesses, eg a computer's hardware (screen, keyboard) and its software (operating system, apps)."

“You must offer products that:

• match the description given”

“You may be covered by the Consumer Guarantees Act (CGA) when you buy consumer products usually for personal or household use, but find they:

• break too easily”

“Any products you buy should be of acceptable quality. This means the products should:

• last for a reasonable time”

“These factors are used to test whether a reasonable person would think a product is faulty or not, taking into account:

• statements made about quality or condition by the salesperson or in advertising”[2]

It was clear that the law was on my side. Furthermore, the marketing material around Samsung’s Note 20 and its usage of Gorilla Glass Victus led me to believe that this phone would not suffer from glass issues, especially as it also has an IP68 rating. Here are some example quotes from Samsung about the Note 20 and its glass exterior:

• “toughest Gorilla glass ever in a smartphone.”

• “Corning® Gorilla® Glass Victus™ available only on Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G.”

• “Victus is the toughest Gorilla Glass yet, with significant improvement in drop and scratch performance, for the first time ever.”

• “Victus survived drops from up to 2 meters”

• “Competitive glasses don’t even come close”

• “The Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra is the world’s first device to feature Corning Gorilla Glass Victus — the toughest Gorilla Glass yet”

• “Victus has significantly improved scratch and drop performance”

• “Up to 2-meter drops”

• "#tougherTogether"[3]

Screenshots from Samsung’s marketing videos.

I did once mistakenly drop the phone, with a case, off the couch and onto a brand-new carpet. This may have caused the crack. But I definitely didn’t drop it two metres with no case, which the marketing suggested it would be able to withstand.

On top of these claims, there are many reports in online forums where Samsung customers have received Note 20s with defective Gorilla Victus glass. Here is a small sample of the complaints I found online:

"Scratching unbelievably easily, I haven't dropped the phone, it's less than 30 days old, and the screen has been scratched like crazy by putting it into, and taking it out of my pocket."

"Victus seems to be hit or miss, there are a couple [of] threads on the note 20 ultra and the S21 scratching easily, and the only thing I can think of is that it's the Gorilla Glass Victus (potentially a bad batch or something?)"

"I just got the new Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G on August 18, 2020. 3 days later on Friday, I was sitting on the sofa and [my] phone slip[ped] out from my pocket and hit the hardwood floor. Now I have 4 days old brand new Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G with [a] broken back cover.

This phone is the most expensive phone in the market and it doesn't have drop/shock resistance. It can easily can broke either one, screen or back cover which both are glass."

"Note 20 Ultra camera glass broke. [I] woke up this morning to see the glass broke around the telephoto lens.  Have no memory of dropping the phone.  What am I supposed to do now?”

“Note 20 ultra camera glass explosion. The glass on my Hubby's phone exploded and went into his thumb. We have no idea why, anyone else have this issue?”

Have you had a similar problem with your Samsung phone? Share the details in the comments.

These are just some of the posts I found [4]. It has been reported in the media that Samsung has deleted many forum posts, including an open letter, about the broken camera glass issue [5]. The online evidence paints a picture that Samsung has a history of ignoring broken glass issues, and on top of that, a class-action lawsuit in 2021 was filed against them in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey​​. The lawsuit alleges that Samsung has breached its warranty around its S series phones, committed fraud, and broken several consumer protection laws. Many devices have had their camera glass break spontaneously, even without external force. “According to consumers, Samsung refuses to cover the problem and [the consumer] is ordered to pay $400 to send the phone back to Samsung to investigate the problem”. I contacted the law firm of Hagens Berman (responsible for the class-action suit) for an update on the case since they no longer list it on their website. Unfortunately, the court ruled in favour of Samsung and decided that the affected phone owners would have to go through arbitration, despite the owners not being aware that they had agreed to such an agreement. It turns out that the Terms and Conditions that most people skip through may have consequences! The current status of this arbitration is unknown, and I have now been forwarded to the law firm Seeger Weiss which is handling the arbitration, and I’m waiting for their reply.

Both Samsung and PB Tech appeared to ignore the evidence I presented in my emails - including quotes from the Consumer Guarantees Act, quotes from Samsung’s marketing, and examples of other customers having similar issues. They both stopped responding to my emails. 

I reported my Samsung case to the Commerce Commission and Fair Go without any personal reply from either of them. The automatic response from Fair Go said they get a “huge number of story ideas each week”, so much so that they “can’t respond immediately or individually to each one”. Disappointing if we have such a significant problem in NZ that they can’t keep up.

Instead, I talked to my local community lawyer, and they said my arguments had merit and suggested the Disputes Tribunal. They also suggested mentioning the misleading advertising, on top of the potential breach of the Consumer Guarantees Act. I gathered all the information I had submitted against PB Tech and Samsung, paid the $45, and raised my case in April. The Disputes Tribunal had significant delays looking at my case because of COVID. After two weeks, they asked for more information. The very next day, PB Tech finally got back to me, saying they would repair the phone for me. Finally! I would have liked to try out the Disputes Tribunal against Samsung, but instead, I was refunded the $45 fee.

One quick repair job later, I finally got my phone back - and all still under warranty. It “only” took five months from when I first contacted Samsung. In the end, persistence paid off, but the broken glass saga left a bitter taste of unresponsiveness and neglect from Samsung in my mouth, especially for such a simple repair.

P.S. I have had trouble with Samsung before. I had a similar issue getting them to repair a faulty Note 9 phone case, but I must have been persistent enough that they refunded me: “Samsung doesn’t accept liability on the reported fault… However in good faith we have decided to refund the purchase price of the unit”

1. Samsung’s Warranty Information

2. Consumer Protection - Your rights compared

3. Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra and Corning Gorilla Glass Victus marketing video

4. Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Community

5. Android Police - Growing reports of Galaxy S20 Ultra camera glass shattering

6. Blogtuan - Samsung Galaxy S20 broke the camera glass on its own, many users filed a lawsuit