Warranty Card w/Someone Else's Info?

[Actsulb]

TRF Members,

I spoke with salesperson at an AD and he said that they don't take Rolex warranty cards with someone else's name on it for service even if the Rolex is still under the warranty period. Does that sound right?

I am not sure if his statement was a sales tactic. I did a quick search on previous posts on this topic but didn't find a response.

Thank you in advance.

[Oyster Junkie]

There is some truth to it, but I'd send it to Dallas Rolex Service Center; from what the folks say here, they will honor the warranty even though your name may not be on the card. YMMV.

[The GMT Master]

Yep, in the USA, the warranty is for the original purchaser only, it will say so in the smallprint in your warranty booklet

[Numismatist]

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=144592

Sometimes you are lucky!

[Wehtiko]

So if you buy a watch and decide to sell it, then the warranty is essentially void?

[Scott95]

Why not send the watch in to the warranty center using your address and the name that's on the warranty card? How are they going to know?

[rr-nyc]

The watch, not the name on the card, is covered under warranty. As long as the warranty card is AD stamped and dated, its covered for two years from that date.

[moviefreak]

Service warranties don't have a name...

[Tools]

Here is what the US Warranty states...

[DolphinV8]

Theoretically, yes. However, an AD could send the watch to RSC for you and the warranty would be honored.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Tools

Here is what the US Warranty states...

Thanks for posting that. I was too lazy to dig up a box with the papers. It says nothing about the warranty being limited to the first owner, which wouldn't be legal in the US. You can be the 100th owner and it wouldn't make a difference as long as it's within the two year warranty period and the warranty card is completed as required by Rolex.

If Rolex ever turns down a warranty claim because you're not the first owner, speak to a supervisor. If they refuse, tell them to contact their legal department and refer to the Magnuson-Moss Act of 1975 (P.L. 93-637) United States Federal Law (15 U.S.C. § 2301). Among other things, it explicitly states that warranty service applies to the rightful owner of the product during the warranty period and not limited to the original purchaser. This applies to all consumer good in the US. Similar to buying a used car... the remainder of the manufacturers warranty always comes with the car.

[Grissom]

I thought about referencing the Magnuson-Moss Act.......excellent addition to the thread, Renato! As I have told folks many times, here in the US, warranties follow the product, irrespective of whether or not it has changed hands, and I do believe Rolex USA knows that, even if they like to put out something a bit different (in order to discourage Grey market sales).

In recently speaking with Rolex, New York, I was again informed that the warranty followed the watch, as long as the watch was originally purchased thru an Authorized Dealer, as long as that dealer properly filled out the warranty card, and as long as no unauthorized service or modifications had been performed on the watch. She indicated that (as an example) were I to purchase a watch as a gift for someone else, the recipient would have no problems sending in for warranty service, with the warranty card filled out in my name...they would simply indicate the watch was a gift. That is what they told me.....for what it is worth! I have bought over a dozen Rolex watches over the last 30 years, as corporate gifts, with each and every one of them in my name, with never an issue, regarding warranty service.

It would be interesting to see how they might go about asserting, and then proving, that an "intervention" had occurred, if they chose to go that route in order to deny warranty service, should the current owner of a watch still under warranty, present the watch, and a warranty card filled out with someone else's name, absent any other potential "disqualifiers" noted.

Note that at the end of the Rolex warranty, the qualifier that you may have other rights which vary from state to state.....so in the US, state and/or federal law always trumps the written warranty, always in favor of the consumer/owner, should the law be more lenient/less restrictive, or provide more of, or a longer period, of warranty.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Grissom

I thought about referencing the Magnuson-Moss Act.......excellent addition to the thread, Renato! As I have told folks many times, here in the US, warranties follow the product, irrespective of whether or not it has changed hands, and I do believe Rolex USA knows that, even if they like to put out something a bit different (in order to discourage Grey market sales).

In recently speaking with Rolex, New York, I was again informed that the warranty followed the watch, as long as the watch was originally purchased thru an Authorized Dealer, as long as that dealer properly filled out the warranty card, and as long as no unauthorized service or modifications had been performed on the watch. She indicated that (as an example) were I to purchase a watch as a gift for someone else, the recipient would have no problems sending in for warranty service, with the warranty card filled out in my name...they would simply indicate the watch was a gift. That is what they told me.....for what it is worth! I have bought over a dozen Rolex watches over the last 30 years, as corporate gifts, with each and every one of them in my name, with never an issue, regarding warranty service.

It would be interesting to see how they might go about asserting, and then proving, that an "intervention" had occurred, if they chose to go that route in order to deny warranty service, should the current owner of a watch still under warranty, present the watch, and a warranty card filled out with someone else's name, absent any other potential "disqualifiers" noted.

Note that at the end of the Rolex warranty, the qualifier that you may have other rights which vary from state to state.....so in the US, state and/or federal law always trumps the written warranty, always in favor of the consumer/owner, should the law be more lenient/less restrictive, or provide more of, or a longer period, of warranty.

Thats a good point about proving an intervention occurred. I don't think it would be worth their time to go through all that effort unless it was obvious - like an aftermarket part within the movement. I can't see a company like Rolex risk its reputation on something like that unless it was blatantly obvious. There was a post on this forum that questioned if an intervention can be a 2nd owner. The answer is no, period. An intervention is unauthorized, third party did work on the watch. You don't need anything more than basic English skills to know that. For them to assert that a third party is a 2nd would be insane. I'd tell them that kiddie time is over and someone of higher authority needs to get involved before they make a costly mistake

I actually like the last part and would like to find out if there are any watches, within the warranty period, that had to be brought in multiple times for the same issue. According to the law, it would be similar to our lemon laws. At the discretion of the owner, they can choose to have a replacement or refund if multiple attempts to repair the same issue fail.

[azguy]

Great thread, very educational and dispels some common beliefs

[masterserg]

Dallas RSC will honor the warranty regardless of whose name is in the card as long as the watch is within the warranty period (I called them and asked and that was the answer). Obviously the warranty is void if somebody else touched the watch (intervened?) as with any other warranty / product.

[globalmedia33]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

The watch, not the name on the card, is covered under warranty. As long as the warranty card is AD stamped and dated, its covered for two years from that date.

Agreed.

[Actsulb]

Thank you all, very informative.

[MoBe]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Yep, in the USA, the warranty is for the original purchaser only, it will say so in the smallprint in your warranty booklet

Oops , would you like to try again?

Just pulling your leg mate.

[jonnyz1245]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Yep, in the USA, the warranty is for the original purchaser only, it will say so in the smallprint in your warranty booklet

Actually, it doesn't say that in the booklet. Re-read # 1 in the 2nd paragraph. It states as long as the watch is sold to a consumer by the official Rolex jeweler whose name appears on the card.

This is only stating that the AD had to have sold the watch. It is the AD name and not the consumer. While it has to have a consumers name, Rolex is simply trying to trace the fact that the watch was sold in the store instead of out the back door to a grey dealer with open papers.

And, as others have mentioned, in the US, the warranty has always followed the product, not the purchaser.

[springbar]

Rolex USA has such a poorly-written warranty that not even their own employees and authorized agents can agree what it means.

As a practical matter, though, consider that the RSC doesn't require a copy of your ID when you send in your watch for warranty service, just the original warranty card.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by springbar

Rolex USA has such a poorly-written warranty that not even their own employees and authorized agents can agree what it means.

As a practical matter, though, consider that the RSC doesn't require a copy of your ID when you send in your watch for warranty service, just the original warranty card.

This is exactly why we, as consumers, need to know what it says and what the law says. They can say no all they want but it doesn't make it true.

[Mikel212]

JonnyZ nailed it on the nose. Rolex is only concern that the watch was sold from an AD AND followed the warrantee "fill-out" instructions. They dont want to see OPEN warrantee cards and will void the warrantee thus the "whos name appears on the warrantee card". It has to have a name, any name.

Companies this size do not just write their warrantee policy over lunch. The language and wording was chosen very very carefully. It sounds like on thing, but has a very different meaning. I'm sure this was done on purpose. They can easily just say "warrantee is not transferable", but for all intents and purposes, it is. The AD assumed wrong.

[Wolfgang427]

Anybody's name could be on the card and the warrenty is still valid. What about all the Rolex watches given as gifts, does Rolex only honor the original purchaser who's name is on the warrenty, : no its still under warrenty regardless of who owns it now.

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by MoBe

Oops , would you like to try again?

Just pulling your leg mate.

Originally Posted by jonnyz1245

Actually, it doesn't say that in the booklet. Re-read # 1 in the 2nd paragraph. It states as long as the watch is sold to a consumer by the official Rolex jeweler whose name appears on the card.

This is only stating that the AD had to have sold the watch. It is the AD name and not the consumer. While it has to have a consumers name, Rolex is simply trying to trace the fact that the watch was sold in the store instead of out the back door to a grey dealer with open papers.

And, as others have mentioned, in the US, the warranty has always followed the product, not the purchaser.

My apologies, I was working from memory, some wires must have gotten crossed. Thankyou for clarifying

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by Mikel212

...Companies this size do not just write their warrantee policy over lunch. The language and wording was chosen very very carefully. It sounds like on thing, but has a very different meaning...

Not in the US. We have laws that require warranties to be clearly stated in writing and what the warranty implies or expresses, not the opposite. The manufacturer loses when it tries to deceive the consumer. In cases of warranty disputes, any ambiguity will side in favor of the party who did not write it 100% of the time.

This warranty is clear as day. It's when people try to read into it that starts to become unclear.

[Grissom]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Not in the US. We have laws that require warranties to be clearly stated in writing and what the warranty implies or expresses, not the opposite. The manufacturer loses when it tries to deceive the consumer. In cases of warranty disputes, any ambiguity will side in favor of the party who did not write it 100% of the time.

This warranty is clear as day. It's when people try to read into it that starts to become unclear.

x1000!

[rulessapt]

What's the warranty situation with watches which are sold, such as on this forum, with the ADs name on the card, but no date and name filled in ?
This seems to be a common occurence and offereing in the For Sale section.

Would the AD have had to register the sale, or from what time does the clock start ticking on the warranty? How does that work?