WD-65732 Clas Action?!? Count me in!!!
I too have experinced the problems with lamps on my WD-65732. the mThank you for contacting Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, Inc. We are pleased to be able to assist our customers via our website.
Unfortunately, we are unable to assist you with your inquiry via the internet. Please contact our consumer relations department at 800-332-2119 for assistance.
From: ThePup1@aol.com [mailto:ThePup1@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 8:06 PM
To: MDEA Service
Subject: Re: Lamp problems WD-65732
Dear Sirs, On March 23, 2007, We purchased a WD-65732 and took delivery on March 25, 2007. For the first 6 months, my family and I were very satisfied with the unit. The WD-65732 was our third Mitsubishi TV. We've owned a 46" rear projection and a 20" CRT. They both lasted over 19 years! Hence, when it came time to buy a new TV, our choice was simple. As I said, for the first 6 months, all was great. Then just before October 23, 2007, the lamp burned out. My wife and I distinctly remember the salesman telling us the lamps normally last a year or more. While disappointed, I was relieved to find out that Mitsubishi would send out a replacement at no charge to us. On October 23, 2007, the lamp arrived and was installed and the burned out lamp went back to you.
All was good until March 7, 2008 when the replacement lamp burned out as well. I again went online and requested another lamp. The TV warranty is still good until. March 23, 2008. I am told the 2nd replacement lamp would arrive Weds. of this week again at no charge to us.
Knowing 2 lamps have burned out prematurely, I suspected something may be wrong with the WD-65732 itself. Today I called the Customer Relations Dept. They contacted your local service company (Fisher's Appliance/ Service). I spoke with Joan and was told in all likelihood, nothing is wrong with the TV as they have fielded numerous service calls for bad lamps only to find the TV is fine. The lamps are burning out prematurely. They speculated the lamp design may be defective since the mesh screen around the lamp restricts air flow and the lamps overheat until failure. Hence, no service call for us.
I then called Technical Support and spoke with a gentleman named Phillip. I related our frustration and experiences with him. I was not impressed with Phillip. The longer the conversation lasted, the more unintelligible he became. Lots of umms and wells. I then ask to speak with his direct report, was put on hold ~ 10 minutes until Phillip came back on and told me no supervisors were available. I ask Phillip to have a supervisor/manager return my call at their earliest convenience. That has not happened as of yet.
I would like to summarize the frustration I am having with this whole ordeal:
1.) If lamps only last ~ 6 months, I think the consumer should know this up front. Or at the very least be told after the first lamp burns out. I feel this is somewhat deceptive.
2.) According to the WD-65732's owner's manual, the lamp should last a year or more from the date of purchase (page 99 WD-65732 manual).
3.)If a lamp seemingly cannot last a year, either the original or a replacement, as far as I'm concerned the consumer should not have to pay for lamps until he receives a lamp that can last a year.
4.) The owner's manual clearly states the original lamp is warranted for (one) year from date purchase. Why then are the replacements only warranted for 90 days? Are they of sub-standard manufacture? I strongly feel the replacement lamp should carry the same warranty as the original, assuming you are sending out OEM lamps. My problem is simply this, when I receive the next replacement lamp, I can justifiably assume it will last 6 months or less. At which time, my TV will be out of warranty and we will have to pay for the replacements I was told. I strongly feel this is unfair as I have yet to see a lamp that will honor the original lamp warranty of 1 year.
5.) I suggested to Phillip that you send 2 lamps this time. At least when it happens again, I will have a spare so we are not without the TV for a week ( 2 weeks down time the first year).Especially when I can't get your local service rep out to take care of it. It appears the customer is left holding the bag. Needless to say, Phillip declined my offer. He did say your Company MAY extend the warranty of the lamp I will receive later this week to 6 months from the customary 90 days. I asked if this in addition to the 90 day warranty. He said no. Quite frankly, I've only had 1 lamp get anywhere near 6 months, so perhaps you can appreciate my skepticism and asking for another 3 months. This is 9 months total! Not even the 1 year of the original lamp warranty! By the way, I asked Phillip if there were/are any recalls and/or class action lawsuits concerning this problem. He said he was not aware of any but did find out last month the lamp and/or housing was redesigned. If this is true, all customers that have had lamps burn out prematurely should have been contacted. It's the right thing to do.
6.) I sincerely hope we did not spend our hard earned $2400 plus tax for a TV that will be down 2 weeks out of 52 weeks, and a TV that will cost us well over $300 (2 lamps) a year to watch. That would redefine "Pay per View" in my book.
So, I hope we can come to some equitable resolution in this matter soon. I would like to be contacted by someone having reasonable authority to discuss our concerns ASAP. I can be reached at:
anual states the lamp should last a year or more. I contacted consumer relations yesterday and got the song and dance. I emailed them last night and a copy is below. Not their response when I inquired about recalls and class action suits. I wrote that before I found this post.
Was this reply helpful? (0) (0)