I think it would be hard for the magazine to get involved. Running stories about the progress of individual warranty claims could very quickly burn through all your advertisers.
Part of the problem is that most manufacturers don’t want a reputation for being “always being great with claims”. Santa Cruz et al would be the exception. But 4k for an aluminium hard tail with gx I’m sure they can afford to be generous
I've had 4 Giants, still got one. I don't think I'll be getting another one.
If anyone on this thread actually works at a Giant store, maybe you could forward this thread to your Giant Grand Poobah's and show them how much negative press they're getting for failing to do the right thing... these things stay on the Tinternets for some time as free consumer advice...
So only a Giant dealer is allowed to touch your bike with tools, that is beyond unreasonable, unrealistic and pathetic, it should be illegal to cop out of a valid warranty claim like that.
Does any other brand have disgusting unscrupulous terms like that I wonder.
Except the OP was told that they were sending only the frame for inspection.
The approved dealer would still see the full bike, and while stripping it note anything odd for the manufacturer.
Check with whoever your warranty is with before stripping your bike.
He attempted to check with the dealer by telling them this was what he intended to do. They should have replied telling him that anyone else touching it would mean it had 'no warranty', but they didn't respond.
I would say he has been more than diligent, and reasonable, in his approach to the situation.
Dealer could have said they need to look at the assembled bike if that's what they meant, rather than "it'll cost you for us to dismantle it"
So they're shit, in addition to Giant
I've worked in the trade for 20 years and I've never heard of a bike brand denying warranty on cracked frame based on the fact the customer stripped the frame down rather than the bike shop.
So hypothetically, if giant had received the bike back in one piece, how would they have known the op had not been running the seatpost above min insertion and not just pushed it back into the frame by a few cm’s before sending it on? Clearly giant will know that anyone capable of splitting a bike would most likely push the seatpost as far in as it’ll go on basis that A- It’ll fit easier in the box they send it in than if it had an extra 8 inches of seatpost showing and B-They’d (the op)know that a warranty would be rejected if it was clear that they had been running the post past the upper limit.
So clearly giant know fine well that the only way to establish the issue is to examine the bike, whether or not the bike has a post in when they received it or not
Definitely on my list of brands to ignore. I use a local mechanic for anything I can't be bothered to do myself (anything involving running cables because I can't be asked), and a full strip/rebuild every other year (again because I can't be asked/nor do I have the time). They're not an authorised anything dealer. They're a few guys who service bikes and sell tools, consumables, accessories, etc. But they're all qualified mechanics, do excellent work, and you can hire workbench time from them if you like to tinker, but don't have space (as well as hire their cleaning station) and even book time in with them to show you how to do things on your bike (from changing a tube to building your own bike). So if I had a giant, my warranty would be void...
This is a common place for Giant's to crack. Various models over the last 15 years or so involved. The first gen Anthem 29 was notorious for it around 2011-ish and needed a running change to the design. Top tube join wasn't much bigger than a cross section of jaffa cake.
In slight defence of Giant, many years ago, with a different username, I bought a second hand Trance frame on here from the classifieds. It turned out to be cracked in the same place. The seller must have sold it knowing this and vanished. I mentioned the cracked frame while browsing a new Giant store and the guy said he would speak to Giant. I didn't hold much hope, but to my disbelief a new frame was sent out. Their viewpoint then was that their product had failed so they would help even though it was second hand. Personnel change. Whoever is making decisions on warranty claims now is fastidiously upholding rules and looking for a get-out. Maybe the OP needs to find a way of speaking to Giant publicly or someone higher up.
Years later I had exactly the frame the OP has broken. It was bought as a frameset online from a dealer and I did all the building and servicing myself. Unsure how a warranty policy like that could be applied then. Wouldn't have bought it if I couldn't work on it myself.
I would ask to make an official complaint with Giant uk and state you will refer the case to the financial ombudsman, this usually works for me when company's are trying to rip people off
why financial ombudsman? I'd say this would be a trading standards matter, for unfair contracts. Definitely involve them.
Just to add that anyone who uses the phrase "Sorry this isn't the outcome you may have hoped for." is perfectly aware they're (bleep)ing you over.
Op- Id be posting that screen shot on all giant social media and every single giant owners group on fb
This feels like a Giant PR fail.
how would they have known the op had not been running the seatpost above min insertion and not just pushed it back into the frame by a few cm’s before sending it on?
there’d probably be a line worn on the post there it had been clamped.
Personnel change. Whoever is making decisions on warranty claims now is fastidiously upholding rules and looking for a get-out.
giant in taiwan can’t afford to pay their suppliers at the moment.
it is possible that a lot of the generous warrantee settlements across a lot of companies come to an end. at least until the oversupply situation settles down.
this is not to say that i think that the OP has been treated fairly. based on what’s been said here, he certainly hasn’t.
I had this with Trek. They will use any excuse to get out of warranty - even on a 10k+ bike.
frankly, its better to stick to small brands or direct. the most important thing is a small, independent shop who will go into bat for you
the branded trek/giant/specialized stores are just cash machines and don't offer a service.
I've changed the bars, rear mech (snapped it) and chain on my 6 month old giant e bike. Does that mean I've no warranty?
I'd not buy another anyway. Quality is poor.
They will use any excuse to get out of warranty – even on a 10k+ bike.
As you mentioned Specialised in your post, I 'll chip in and say that the shop I bought my quite expensive Enduro (£6K), identified and manged to get replaced a cracked carbon real wheel - almost certainly my fault; for free from Spesh.
I think the issue for me at least is that is the lottery nature of claiming from warranty. Some manufacturers will out of their way to help, SC, Specialized to name two that I've had really great help from, others seems to wiggle and squirm over the smallest issues.
Never bought a Giant, probably never will after this.
I’ve changed the bars, rear mech (snapped it) and chain on my 6 month old giant e bike. Does that mean I’ve no warranty?
That does seem to be the implication here.
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">cracked carbon real wheel</span>
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"> </span>
Not a frame though.
Further to above I also had a conversation regarding what they would do as the Trance is now fully 29″ would they replace the frame and say whistle, replace frame, forks, wheels?
When my frame cracked the model had been discontinued and the closest current bike had longer travel forks. They replaced the frame and chucked in a brand new pair of correct length Fox 34's. This made me happy.
Also, the warranty procedure was to send back via the shop it was bought from but since it was mail order and the manufacture wasn't too far from where I live I asked if it was okay to strip it and deliver the frame myself, direct to the HQ. They were perfectly happy with this once proof of purchase from the shop had been established and once sorted I collected my new frame directly.
This is the reason I have bought plenty of bikes from them and also the reason Giant will be off my list.
Always wanted an Anthem but not anymore or any giant bike
I would say good luck OP but, from the screengrab, its looking like there's not much chance of them budging now
Given you have a frame that cannot be used and as you have in my opinion (and it seem a lot of others) unfairly been denied the warranty that came with the bike when you purchased, I would simply focus on following to the letter, the small claims court procedure and once its in motion I would be absolutely amazed if the dealer or Giant did not miraculously have a change of heart.
FWIW I have been on both sides of a small claims court process although it was many years ago. In the first instance the online retailer I had a hand in was taken to court by some loon. Because he submitted the claim I had to travel from Manchester to Scarborough (the claimant's nearest small claims court). The claimant and I sat side by side at one side of a big desk and some old chap sat the other side. The old chap read out the claim and then asked the claimant if there was anything he wished to add, he spouted some lies, the old boy asked if he had any proof of what he said/claimed and the loon said he had forgotten to bring it with him. I was then asked if there was anything I wanted to say, yes I have few questions which I was then told to put to clamant sat right next to me. He muttered some nonsense, the old boy asked a few more questions and then said he was rejecting the claim and told the claimant he had to pay my travel expenses which he never did. The whole thing was a complete waste of a full day plus a good few hours of prep.
When I submitted a claim I made sure it was crystal clear backed by evidence. Within a week I had been given a full refund without having to go to the trouble of a court hearing.
I had this with Trek
I had similar with Raleigh years ago. The titanium frame cracked, dealer wanted to charge to strip the bike so I stripped it. Dealer sent the frame off, Raleigh sent back a steel frame pointing out the small print in the frame warranty that said they didn't have to replace like with like. (Also had to get a new seat post and front mech to fit the new frame).
I wouldn't put much faith in any frame warranty............
I'd agree it's probably Letter Before Action time, depending on whether the frame at whatever age it is still has enough value to make small claims a worthwhile use of your time and money.
They will point to the phrasing of the warranty which you should have read, you can point to the vagueness of those words, plus the failure of their representative (the dealer) to say 'we need the whole bike, or no warranty', and warn you that what you were proposing would constitute 'servicing' in the eyes of Giant Megacorp Bike Company.
(BTW it doesn't IMO, a service is the process of disassembly, replacing broken bits, cleaning, fixing, putting back together correctly.)
Raleigh sent back a steel frame pointing out the small print in the frame warranty that said they didn’t have to replace like with like
Is that because they'd stopped making your frame, or indeed any Titanium frames?
Is that because they’d stopped making your frame, or indeed any Titanium frames?
Yes.
Place i worked for was a Raleigh dealer, we had a few steel frames (usually 853 IIRC) to replace cracked Ti.
Even while Sheffield Cycles were punting out the (by then discontinued) Raleigh branded Ti frames for about half price.
Though i *think* the ones Sheffield Cycles had were originally destined for Sampson Cycles in the US.
OP, send them a link to this thread so they can see how many potential customers they've alienated with their laughable terms.
I’m just waiting to see if my place of purchase has any more luck after they asked me to send details.
I’ve spoken to various shops, Rutland for example who were a huge giant dealer who have said it’s ridiculous. The person at Giant used to work there funnily enough.
Is that because they’d stopped making your frame, or indeed any Titanium frames?
They'd stopped making that particular frame but were still selling other titanium framed bikes, just that they were more expensive than the steel frames......
If they made/sold/had titanium frames in your size designed for the same kind of use as your frame... then that's a bit shit that they replaced with steel. That's a big if though.
+1 on this being enough to put me off considering a Giant in the future. "Servicing" to me covering routine maintenance and replacement of worn parts, rather than removing components as they only want the bare frame back. Quite apart from the last thing I want being bikes moving towards needing "the stamps in the book" to preserve their value; surely most enthusiasts maintain their own equipment.
Also, "competition" seems to be a separate exclusion, so they sell you an XC race bike, but the warranty is void if you use it in an XC race? How hard will they try and weasel out there? Would they try and stretch "competition" to include recording a ride on Strava? A ride with your mates where someone may have tried to be first to the top of a hill...?
It does seem a bit sad that one of the legitimate reasons for buying from one of the big manufacturers is the generous and easy warranty, "Just take it into any dealer anywhere" doesn't seem to ring true once they've made the sale, and suddenly they look very expensive compared to Planet-X or building your own...
I would go to the Giant importer direct. I would even find the CEO (Linked-In?) and contact direct. This is madness.
I don't understand why anyone thinks there is a legal claim here. The provisions of the guarantee are clear and were available before purchase and have been applied.
On what basis would you make a legal claim?
If they made/sold/had titanium frames in your size designed for the same kind of use as your frame…
They did (this was a road bike) but they were considerably more expensive than a steel frame..........
Also, “competition” seems to be a separate exclusion, so they sell you an XC race bike, but the warranty is void if you use it in an XC race? How hard will they try and weasel out there? Would they try and stretch “competition” to include recording a ride on Strava? A ride with your mates where someone may have tried to be first to the top of a hill…?
My Reign came with this sticker stuck to the underside of the handlebars 🤣
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/Jh4Hm70J/IMG-20190819-181627581-01.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/Jh4Hm70J/IMG-20190819-181627581-01.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
And to the OP, pretty shitty treatment IMO, hope you get a good outcome.
They’d stopped making that particular frame but were still selling other titanium framed bikes, just that they were more expensive than the steel frames……
Was it one of the bonded Ti's you cracked. And you wanted the plasma welded one to replace it?
I get on well with the manager of the local Giant store and have a 2015 carbon Defy. Had been considering a new one as decent discount to be had but another one now on the "nope" list
Ah… good memory Mert… lugged 853 for lugged seamed Ti seems quite a close match. I had one of the 853 ones… were quite close in price to the Ti ones IIRC.
I don’t understand why anyone thinks there is a legal claim here. The provisions of the guarantee are clear and were available before purchase and have been applied.
Not many people are saying that. They're talking about the ludicrousness of promising a warranty, then removing it by adding a set of caveats that are contradictory, unclear, unfair and anti-competitive.
Therefore the chances of the customer being able to adhere to the terms of the warranty are almost nil.
A fair expectation of the ultimate outcome would be that Giant settles this on account of the bad publicity it's in the process of generating.
A fair outcome would be that Giant rewords its warranty in line with that of its competitors.
On what basis would you make a legal claim?
I would have thought (IANAL) that the T&Cs and their application were:
A. Sufficiently altering a headline warrenty that influenced the purchasing descision that it was misleading.
B. Unreasonable - a bike which you must walk back to the car and take to a dealer to be mended rather than perfoming a trailside repair is not fit for mountain biking.
C. Anti-competitive - If BMW can't make the warrenty conditional upon your car being serviced by BMW, I don't see why Giant can do the same with a bike.
Edit typed to slow, but yes, what he said too.
The terms of the warrantee are the terms of the warrantee
BUT If as someone else has said the authorised dealer has to strip down the bike so they can pass on information about anything that looks odd, then that should be part of the warrantee process paid for by the manufacturer rather than an extra over paid for by the client.
The reason the OP has fallen foul of the terms is because an extra cost has been added into the warrantee process bay the dealer.
Also that the warranty terms are ambiguous and do not entirely correspond with the advice in the owners' handbook.
The question is what could be seen as reasonable for the owner of a new off-road bike to do in terms of care/maintenance and adjusting/altering the spec. The term 'service' is not clearly defined in the document, neither is 'modification'. The interpretation put forward by Giant's Warranty Department to save a few pennies is so extreme that it seems to me to be an unfair contract term, as no consumer who had it fully explained at purchase would go ahead with the transaction.
As it stands, they could claim you voided your warranty by moving a spacer from one side of your stem to the other, because the fork slipped down a bit during the process.
I'd also argue on the basis of unfair contract terms. Just because they are written down doesn't make them enforcable. They have to pass a reasonableness test.
You might struggle in this particular case because there is substantial 'modification' that has been done (stripping down that does involve significant spannering), but the terms AS WRITTEN suggest that any modification voids them. Saddle too high? Adjusted the seatpost yourself Sir? Sorry, warranty void. Changed the shop provided pedals to put your own on. Warranty void. Even if you are Cytech qualified, you have to take it to a Giant shop to get it done.as per the T&C's.
The issue being to me that they are written in a way that no-one would seriously think they were supposed to be interpreted as absolutely literal. Yet that is now looking like how they would be.
IDK, I'd think a small claims might have a 50/50 chance of success; but what it might force is for Giant (and others?) to rethink what they consider to be reasonable in other cases.
Do we know how much the OP 'saved' by stripping the bike down?
I don’t know. I’m guessing a standard hour at least each end so £70
Had they said bring it in and we’ll send it back I’d have taken the full bike. But I thought it was a bit rich charging labour, an admin fee and postage.
Not enough for a new frame obviously.
Ill get my coat
You would win a small claims court, in fact I will go so far as to say its a certainty.
As for Giant, they will never get another penny out of me, shabby & stupid customer service
I think you'd win too. The Giant warranty contract seems to fail the below tests...
28. ‘Good faith’ relates to the substance of terms as well as the way they are expressed. It is based on the general principle of ‘fair and open dealing’, where terms are expressed fully, clearly and legibly, and with due respect for
the consumer’s interests. Agreements with consumers should not contain concealed pitfalls or traps, and terms that might disadvantage the consumer should be given appropriate prominence.
A business should not take advantage of consumers’ vulnerability in deciding what their rights and obligations should be and should look like. Businesses need to deal fairly with consumers, taking into account their legitimate interests.
Consumers tend to have weaker bargaining power because of their lack of financial resources, their need for the service or product they are buying, their lack of experience of negotiation and their relative unfamiliarity with the subject matter of the contract.
29. When drafting contracts, it is important to take into account how consumers actually behave in practice, including for instance the fact that most consumers do not read standard written contracts thoroughly before making a purchase.
I assume this has been posted over social media? Any response from Giant? They're not getting another penny of my hard earned.
I personally have not. Giving the shop I purchased from time to contact Giant after the LBS debacle. Seemed slightly fairer as technically that’s who my contracts with.
I’ve seen it on Twitter
My biggest takes from this thread is never buy a Giant and that warranty is hard to spell.😂
Ah… good memory Mert… lugged 853 for lugged seamed Ti seems quite a close match. I had one of the 853 ones… were quite close in price to the Ti ones IIRC.
Can't remember exactly because the Bonded Ti were phased out before i worked there, but i think the best of them was about 400 quid F+F, so a similar price to the lugged 531, 853 (lugless) started at about 650-700, maybe a bit more and the Ti Plasma welded started around 900 (i got my first Ti Plasma MTB frame for 700, with a nice discount)
Just on the Raleigh Ti thread derail....
I know 3 people that had the plasma welded Raleigh Ti MTBs and they all cracked in weird places, never actually from the weld - two near the top of the seatstays and one right around the downtube (edge of HAZ presumably).
One of the last replacements was Ti but painted not raw.
And I've repaired somebody else's 853 MTB where the seatstay brace tube collected water and rotted through underneath and both ends into the stays themselves.
Bicycles serviced by a non Authorised Giant Dealer.
Terrible wording
To me that says you warranty is void if your bike is serviced by some one who is a Giant Dealer that hasn’t been authorised. Maybe a grey import Giant Dealer?
Presumably they meant
“Bicycles serviced by anyone other than an Authorised Giant Dealer”
My unqualified opinion is that this shouldn’t go any where near a court. The case might be winnable but the costs would exceed The claim.
Oh and a shout out to the OP for not going to social media yet. I hope the original retailer is more helpful
Wot Vinnyeh said.
I don't care whether there's a "legal basis for a claim", its the ridiculous response from Giant in the email that's been shared, that a customer removing parts from a frame constitutes the bike being "worked on by a non-Giant retailer" and that removing parts = servicing, that has wound me up!
I will be buying a new full sus this year. Giant will not be on the short list.
I looked for it on twitter but found another amazing warranty experience instead
https://twitter.com/mcmanus_aidan/status/1461352286236545044
Awful. Worth opening the screenshot photos in that thread to see how the poster had saved the email contact.
... and that removing parts = servicing...
It sucks when people just make up a completely irrational interpretation of something and stick to it. Reminds me of when ebuyer refused to consider sending me a replacement TV remote because 'the remote came free with the TV, so it's not covered by any warranty or rights'. I'd been going round in circles with them for weeks by then and didn't have the energy to take them to the Small Claims Court, so I guess they won.
It's OK, they took the time to add a helpful reply to the thread. I think their PR Bot needs a reboot, though.
Wow that's pretty shocking. I like the bit where they inspected the whole bike and missed the snapped frame 😆
LOL at inspected bike and recommend the following replacements including a chainset, but when ascertaining the chainset was needing replacement totally missed the ****ing massive hole in the frame right next to it.
"Because the location of the crack wasn't described on the job sheet"
Possibly Giant are toughening up on warranty claims as they are experiencing financial difficulties as seen in the news articles about them delaying supplier payments etc.
Goodness - I wonder if that chap took his bike to Marin like they offered.
“Because the location of the crack wasn’t described on the job sheet”
I especially liked how they opened with, the bike has been in a crash, obviously missing the broken frame and then moved on to wear and tear.
How does a seat tube rip out of a bb shell through wear and tear?
From the list of parts required it did initially read like it'd been run over, or Crashed heavily and the chap was trying his luck, but clearly not or that'd be an easy end to the conversation for the pretend warranty department.
Possibly Giant are toughening up on warranty claims as they are experiencing financial difficulties as seen in the news articles about them delaying supplier payments etc.
Their warranty certainly used to be decent. An ex colleague snapped a chain stay 10 years ago on a then 5 year old road frame and it was replaced without bother.
The Camden Giant store story....the worst part of that is that it appears a bike shop mechanic has been allowed to have an opinion that matters on the fabrication of a frame. Now I know there are some lovely folk that work in bike shops (including some here) and 'some' are knowledgeable people (often the ones that have done something else first and are working in a bike shop as second or third career) but they tend to be the exception. Your 'average' bike shop mechanic struggles to dribble in a straight line let alone have any sort of useful opinion to contribute on the nuances of tig weld failures.
lugged 853 for lugged seamed Ti
I certainly didn't get offered an 853 frame......
Yeah, realised that after i thought about it. Maybe 531, or even 501 depending on which of the Ti frames you cracked!
Anyone know what the deal here is if you upgrade your kit. Different wheels, fork, brakes etc, doing the fittings yourself.
Anyone know what the deal here is if you upgrade your kit. Different wheels, fork, brakes etc, doing the fittings yourself.
The warranty document says that 'modifications' will void the warranty. Giant appears to want to apply its warranty exclusions well beyond what most people would say is reasonable, so anyone with one of their bikes should work on the principle that ANY change from stock could be potentially problematic.
The handbook rather confusingly says you should seek advice from your Giant dealer before swapping parts, and that any 'servicing', which in the OP's case, appears to cover taking parts off, should be carried out at a dealer or void your warranty.
Confusing and contradictory, which is not what you want when you own or are considering buying thousands of pounds worth of equipment.
I certainly didn’t get offered an 853 frame…
Yeah, thinking about it... mine wasn't 853... no point with glue and lugs. Had steel handlebars as well.
The warranty document says that ‘modifications’ will void the warranty.
Wise catch all clause. So many parts you can change on a frame that'll push it beyond what it was designed for.
The handbook rather confusingly says you should seek advice from your Giant dealer before swapping parts
See above.
On the basis of this thread... any Giant dealer (LBS or on-line) should be highlighting to the potential customer that although the bike may be very good etc that in reality it has no warranty. That's the implication.
Wise catch all clause. So many parts you can change on a frame that’ll push it beyond what it was designed for.
Perhaps, but seeing that Giant has now clearly showed an appetite for catching all its warranty claims (and binning them), consumers should start taking them seriously.
Well if you can’t send a shock for service without invalidating your warranty you can’t fit forks yourself
So many parts you can change on a frame that’ll push it beyond what it was designed for.
Sure, but most companies list those e.g. max rotor size, max fork length. You can't claim that changing say pedals or saddle would cause a crack. That fails the 'reasonableness' test.
You can't list them all. Create any list of inappropriate component swaps and I'll give you an example of one you might not have foreseen.... "the manual didn't say I couldn't put a 275 wheel in my 26 wheel bike" (when the manual was written before 275 wheels were a thing). Catch alls are probably needed... and then you're relying on a sensible implementation... that's what's really be argued about here, isn't it? You'd expect the catch all to be useful for the manufacturer or shop to be able to turn down warranties because of any use of inappropriate components, or them being poorly fitted or maintained... the allegation here is that this one is being used to avoid warranty claims. Not sure it's a valid allegation in the OP, but I seem to be in the minority here.
