Is Rolex Warranty Transferrable?

[Lemur]

I see advertisements of people selling the pre-owned watches on here and often times they advertise that it comes with the warranty card or it's still under the warranty. But as I understand it from just speaking to a Bob's Watches rep on the phone, Rolex warranties are non-transferrable? Is this accurate?

[locutus49]

Here we go again.

[Jemspeed]

This is very debatable. The warranty issued by Rolex USA is a full warranty and should be fully transferable. YMMV. Watches warrantied by Rolex SA, meaning originally sold outside US are more debateable, but are generallyvalid with a bill of sale. You should review the warranty terms issued by Rolex with a lawyer familiar with Magnuson Moss to get the legal advice you seek

[Lemur]

Originally Posted by locutus49

Here we go again.

Yes, yes. I have read the previous topics on it and it looks like no one knows the answer, at least in the US. Some say it follows the watch, others say the owner. I live in NYC and evidently the NYC RSC is not easy about this, and this is a big factor into whether I would go pre-owned or not. Just wondering if there has been any more clarity upon the situation in recent weeks.

[Lemur]

Originally Posted by Jemspeed

This is very debatable. The warranty issued by Rolex USA is a full warranty and should be fully transferable. YMMV. Watches warrantied by Rolex SA, meaning originally sold outside US are more debateable, but are generallyvalid with a bill of sale. You should review the warranty terms issued by Rolex with a lawyer familiar with Magnuson Moss to get the legal advice you seek

Cool, thank you. I guess that's why pre-owned watches with the warranty card that has the AD's name stamped on it may be priced a bit higher.

[RichM]

Yes

[KevNev]

If you want to erase any doubt, go to an AD. I have no issues with buying pre-owned and dealing with RSC if necessary.

[qadhi]

warranty is tied to the warranty card and Rolex will facilitate anybody who can produce it at the time of service/warranty claim

[Singslinger]

Yes it is in Singapore.

[modee]

Who here has ever had an issue with a Rolex during the warranty? I own many expensive watches and the only one that ever had a warranty issue was a Jaeger LeCoultre which all they ever did with it was clean it (insides) and send it back to me.

The two Rolexes I had issues with, I bought them from non authorized dealers, both were used, one vintage, and the dealers in both cases just took them back, cleaned them replaced maybe a part or so, and returned to me without charge been working fine since.

I also have a two tone Daytona that had a tendency to just stop, but after two overhauls/cleanings it works great. Bought used, not a warranty issue.

I don't know anyone who has obtained a brand new Rolex and had an issue inside the warranty period. The warranty is 5 years now, but still, odds are won't happen. Not to say it doesn't happen but it's rare and frankly I wouldn't fixate on the warranty validity; I'd concentrate on the watch itself and the price. The warranty paper or card itself is what increases the value of the watch, maybe because it authenticates the watch somewhat ("box and papers"), not so much that the warranty is still in effect.

[Lemur]

Originally Posted by modee

Who here has ever had an issue with a Rolex during the warranty? I own many expensive watches and the only one that ever had a warranty issue was a Jaeger LeCoultre which all they ever did with it was clean it (insides) and send it back to me.

The two Rolexes I had issues with, I bought them from non authorized dealers, both were used, one vintage, and the dealers in both cases just took them back, cleaned them replaced maybe a part or so, and returned to me without charge been working fine since.

I also have a two tone Daytona that had a tendency to just stop, but after two overhauls/cleanings it works great. Bought used, not a warranty issue.

I don't know anyone who has obtained a brand new Rolex and had an issue inside the warranty period. The warranty is 5 years now, but still, odds are won't happen. Not to say it doesn't happen but it's rare and frankly I wouldn't fixate on the warranty validity; I'd concentrate on the watch itself and the price. The warranty paper or card itself is what increases the value of the watch, maybe because it authenticates the watch somewhat ("box and papers"), not so much that the warranty is still in effect.

How do you like the TT Daytona? I am looking at the TT with white face right now. Between that, the SS/black dial and SS/white dial.

[ec51]

Originally Posted by qadhi

warranty is tied to the warranty card and Rolex will facilitate anybody who can produce it at the time of service/warranty claim

I was required to produce a bill of sale at the NYC RSC when I brought my 14060 in with its original Rolex SA warranty card (with my name on it).

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by Lemur

Cool, thank you. I guess that's why pre-owned watches with the warranty card that has the AD's name stamped on it may be priced a bit higher.

Not sure what you're trying to say. May be priced a bit higher than what - a watch without a valid card? Then yes, it would be priced higher because it has a warranty and the watch with no card does not.

In the USA the Rolex warranty follows the watch for the warranty period. But, per the terms of the warranty, the owner submitting the watch for warranty repair must also submit the valid card with the AD name stamped on it. So, no card = no warranty work. Now having said that, the RSC may accommodate someone, but they have no obligation to do so if the owner doesn't have the card.

One last point: The Rolex USA warranty also states the watch must have originally been purchased by "a consumer" from an authorized dealer. Apparently this wording is to put the onus on the consumer to police their dealer network from selling out the back door by giving them the right to refuse warranty service on resold watches. I have no idea how Rolex could actually prove this and refuse service. And they would be refusing service to a lot of innocent people who bought a watch used with a warranty card, not knowing who purchased the watch originally. But there you have it. I've seen very little on this forum regarding problems getting warranty work performed with a valid card - aside from a few instances of the NY RSC asking for a bill of sale on international cards. The Dallas RSC to my knowledge has never required this.

[peterskinner]

If you read the international guarantee issued with the Rolex it avoids making any mention of the rights of second owners. It just says nothing on the subject.
In practice, Rolex do honour the guarantee if you have the card. I think they have to because so many Rolex watches are given as gifts. This is in Europe, don't know about the RSC in New York, which appears to exist in a world of its own (judging from the forums.)

[R1@160@alltimes]

Buy bnib for a peace of mind.

[modee]

Originally Posted by Lemur

How do you like the TT Daytona? I am looking at the TT with white face right now. Between that, the SS/black dial and SS/white dial.

My two tone Daytona is an older one, ref. 16523, 1993 year:


It is sometimes my daily wear watch. I like it, although for whatever reason I believe that the corresponding stainless ones are considered more valuable. I also have a 2015 white dial stainless 116520, and an all yellow gold "Paul Newman" 116528 with the red sweep.






I've gone through two white dial WG 116509, and one older yellow gold non-fliplock all yellow gold 16528. All three lost/stolen. I have bad luck with Daytonas.

The yellow gold 16528 had a champagne dial like my current two tone. Actually, I prefer the champagne dials against yellow gold. For what it's worth, girls love that champagne dial contrasted against yellow gold. Just trust me on this one, lol.

When I replace the 116509 it will be with a meteorite dial. Third time's the charm, I hope!

As far as dials, I prefer the white dials to the black on the stainless or WG models.

[enjoythemusic]

No warranty!


So best send me your Rolex to take care of. i'll simply send it in to Rolex service Texas or California and pay for small regulation and polish. She'll come back and include a warranty card and two year warranty from Rolex. Yeah, it's a BIG hassle for me to do but you'll thank me later for helping you get rid of that nasty Rolex you have doubts about. It is, after all, the least I can do for fellow fourm members.

[japenney]

If i had a dollar for everytime this was asked i would have several dollars. Fairly sure i answered this earlier today. Hahaha.

[MovieGuy]

..

[Andy355]

Service warranty follows the watch not the owner - London AD

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by locutus49

Here we go again.

It's because people respond with false information to muddy the water

[AgentHsu]

I called Beverly Hills RSC today, and they said that as long as I have the warranty card, and the name or information has not been scratched, crossed out, or tampered with, the warranty will stand without a problem.

Call your local RSC and you should be fine. People need to stop asking questions here that they can easily find the answer to through a simple phone call!

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Jemspeed

This is very debatable. The warranty issued by Rolex USA is a full warranty and should be fully transferable. YMMV. Watches warrantied by Rolex SA, meaning originally sold outside US are more debateable, but are generallyvalid with a bill of sale. You should review the warranty terms issued by Rolex with a lawyer familiar with Magnuson Moss to get the legal advice you seek

It's ironic that you mention the Magnuson-Moss warranty act yet claim Rolex USA warranty is a full warranty because it's not. Rolex's provides a limited warranty.


A "full warranty" is one that meets the federal minimum standards for a warranty. Such warranties must be "conspicuously designated" as full warranties. If each of the following five statements is true about your warranty's terms and conditions, it is a "full" warranty:
- You do not limit the duration of implied warranties.
- You provide warranty service to anyone who owns the product during the warranty period; that is, you do not limit coverage to first purchasers.[5]
- You provide warranty service free of charge, including such costs as returning the product or removing and reinstalling the product when necessary.
- You provide, at the consumer's choice, either a replacement or a full refund if, after a reasonable number of tries, you are unable to repair the product.
- You do not require consumers to perform any duty as a precondition for receiving service, except notifying you that service is needed, unless you can demonstrate that the duty is reasonable.

If a warranty does not meet all 5 of those conditions, it is a limited warranty and must be
conspicuously designated as a limited warranty.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Lemur

Yes, yes. I have read the previous topics on it and it looks like no one knows the answer, at least in the US. Some say it follows the watch, others say the owner. I live in NYC and evidently the NYC RSC is not easy about this, and this is a big factor into whether I would go pre-owned or not. Just wondering if there has been any more clarity upon the situation in recent weeks.

The answer is yes. The warranty follows the watch. Anyone that says otherwise is wrong, period. There is nowhere in the warranty that states it is not transferable, there is no legal language to interpret, no hidden words, and no fine print.

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

It's ironic that you mention the Magnuson-Moss warranty act yet claim Rolex USA warranty is a full warranty because it's not. Rolex's provides a limited warranty.


A "full warranty" is one that meets the federal minimum standards for a warranty. Such warranties must be "conspicuously designated" as full warranties. If each of the following five statements is true about your warranty's terms and conditions, it is a "full" warranty:
- You do not limit the duration of implied warranties.
- You provide warranty service to anyone who owns the product during the warranty period; that is, you do not limit coverage to first purchasers.[5]
- You provide warranty service free of charge, including such costs as returning the product or removing and reinstalling the product when necessary.
- You provide, at the consumer's choice, either a replacement or a full refund if, after a reasonable number of tries, you are unable to repair the product.
- You do not require consumers to perform any duty as a precondition for receiving service, except notifying you that service is needed, unless you can demonstrate that the duty is reasonable.

If a warranty does not meet all 5 of those conditions, it is a limited warranty and must be
conspicuously designated as a limited warranty.

Which of the above five conditions does the Rolex warranty not meet?

[HogwldFLTR]

With my experience I've had no problem having warranty work done on a watch which was under warranty and of which I was the second owner. The work was done by NY RSC and I had an AD ship it to them along with the registration card.

[Jemspeed]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

It's ironic that you mention the Magnuson-Moss warranty act yet claim Rolex USA warranty is a full warranty because it's not. Rolex's provides a limited warranty.


A "full warranty" is one that meets the federal minimum standards for a warranty. Such warranties must be "conspicuously designated" as full warranties. If each of the following five statements is true about your warranty's terms and conditions, it is a "full" warranty:
- You do not limit the duration of implied warranties.
- You provide warranty service to anyone who owns the product during the warranty period; that is, you do not limit coverage to first purchasers.[5]
- You provide warranty service free of charge, including such costs as returning the product or removing and reinstalling the product when necessary.
- You provide, at the consumer's choice, either a replacement or a full refund if, after a reasonable number of tries, you are unable to repair the product.
- You do not require consumers to perform any duty as a precondition for receiving service, except notifying you that service is needed, unless you can demonstrate that the duty is reasonable.

If a warranty does not meet all 5 of those conditions, it is a limited warranty and must be
conspicuously designated as a limited warranty.

Have you ever read the Rolex USA warranty?

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

Which of the above five conditions does the Rolex warranty not meet?

Duration or time. My Rolex came with a 2 year warranty and I think I read that new Rolexes now come with a 5 year warranty. Regardless of which, the duration is limited.
In order to be a full warranty, the company must meet all 5 criteria. The company must meet all 5 of the criteria, first one being: "You do not limit the duration of implied warranties."

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Jemspeed

Have you ever read the Rolex USA warranty?

Yes, have you?

There is nothing "very debatable" let alone "debatable", as you say, about the US warranty. By law, per the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, warranties MUST be written in plain English absent of any ambiguity. So if you've read the warranty, please share with us where transferability is even mentioned or at least opens the door to debate

[77T]

It's a debate until you take it (or send it) to RSC with a warranty problem - that's when the debate ends and the real world hits home. If they refuse to work on it, your options are limited...