On September 15th I purchased a Compaq Presario 1700US laptop computer. The day I purchased my laptop I was also sold a CPS Service Plan which terms I found interesting and to my needs. I was told by your salesperson that the plan I was being convinced to purchase was to cover under all circumstances regarding my laptop. I was specifically told that this planned covered physical damage as laptop computers are subject to easy damage due to the fact they are portable (exact words used in presence of others). So at that point I decided to purchase the service plan for 369.99 and was told that for any problems to call the CPS toll free number or bring it to the Circuit City Store I purchased it from and I would be assisted.
Unfortunately, Saturday evening, January 12th, after opening my laptop which was sitting quietly and undisturbed for an entire day on my desk, I came to realize that the screen had been cracked. At that point I called CPS and then Compaq, getting a bit of a run around between the two, to then discover that my laptop was not covered. Compaq Customer Service suggested I go directly to the store since Circuit City (apparently not the first time) had promised warranty through the CPS on the laptop for physical damage. Sunday morning, I proceeded to take my laptop to the Circuit City Store 3203 in Sarasota, FL, only to be given another round about of calls and to have been insulted by the manager on site. The manager indelicately accused me of probably disliking the laptop and since I maybe no longer wanted it, I could have accidentally damaged it to get a new one in replacement.
I consider this an insult, as I am a professional with many years of experience in huge American and European corporations and have never been treated this way. Furthermore I wish to underline that my intention was exclusively to get it repaired and not replaced it with a new model.
I feel Circuit City employees have not only treated a customer in a detestable way but has induced a customer into undersigning an agreement under false terms.
0 comments