The company, whose discolored screen on the phone is considered ‘defective merchandise,’ will give the consumer a new phone

Seeing that the screen of the mobile he uses is paler and yellower than that of other mobiles of the same brand and model, the request made by the consumer to replace the device was justified by the Consumer Arbitration Committee.

Lawyer Mehmet Akyüz bought on behalf of his father, Selahattin Akyüz, a mobile phone belonging to one of the leading brands in the industry, an American technology company.

Akyüz, who used the device for a while, noticed that the color of the mobile phone screen was paler and yellower.

WE COMPARE THE DIFFERENCE AND APPLY IT TO THE COMPANY

Comparing his own phone with another phone of the same make and model, Akyüz found that there was a noticeable difference between the two devices and that the screen on the phone he was comparing was whiter and more vivid.

Akyüz took the phone to the company where he bought it and explained the situation.

As a result of the examination on the phone, the company stated that the illumination of the device was paler than that of other devices and changed the camera.

After the problem continued, Akyüz returned his phone to the company. Akyüz asked the company to replace the phone, as the problem persisted with the phone, which was replaced this time.

Akyüz, who did not accept this request, appealed to the Consumer Arbitration Committee.

COUNTED DEFECTIVE GOODS, IT HAS BEEN DECIDED TO CHANGE

The Malatya Yeşilyurt District Consumer Arbitration Committee, which examined the application, appointed an expert to the file.

According to the expert report, it was stated that the difference in the tone of the mobile phone did not cause any negative effect on the use of touch sensitivity or other functions while using the product.

However, it was emphasized in the report that the phone may not meet the expectations of the consumer, who is in the end-user condition, due to the fact that the phone looks different from promotional movies and advertisements, and It was pointed out that this difference was caused by the display production service received by the manufacturer from different companies.

The report states that it does not state which device the display has been mounted on, and there are no warnings or explanatory information on the product packaging for the end user to choose from.

In line with this opinion of the expert, the Consumer Arbitration Committee concluded that the consumer’s claim was justified.

For this reason, the arbitral tribunal accepted the claimant’s request and decided that the mobile phone in question should be withdrawn from the consumer and replaced with one in perfect condition.

‘THEY SAID THE COMPANY USES 3 DIFFERENT DISPLAY INFRASTRUCTURES’

Lawyer Mehmet Akyüz told Anadolu Agency (AA) that he noticed a difference in the photos they took at the same time with the people around them with the phone he bought from a world-famous American brand, and that he noticed that The image on the screen of his own mobile phone looked paler.

Stating that he applied to the company he bought the phone from, Akyüz said: “The tech support person told me that this brand or other tech companies use 3 different screen infrastructures like yellow, white and blue, the consumer doesn’t know about them. luckily it can come in yellow, it can come in white, it can also come in blue,” he said.

Noting that he asked if a device change could be made in this situation, Akyüz said, “They told me ‘we can change the screen.’ So will we carry a white screen when there is a screen change? I said, ‘No, it’s not clear. It can come in yellow, it can come in white, it can come in blue. We don’t know either. They said, ‘It depends on your luck.’ he said.

‘I LEARNED THAT THE CONSUMER HAS NO CHOICE’

Akyüz stated that he did research on the internet and found complaints about this issue on some sites, adding: “When I did research on this issue, I realized that when this company advertised this device on TV, in the press, on billboards, it was marketing such a white, lively, attractive display and product, but I learned that when it comes to the consumer who has last choice, the consumer has no choice, they can randomly come in white, yellow or blue.” he used his statements.

After knowing this, Akyüz affirmed that his claim before the Consumer Arbitration Committee was also justified.

Pointing out that the consumer is misled by such advertisements, Akyüz said:

“When this tech company produces a product, they produce it in the form of normal, pro, pro max. It produces them in the form of larger, higher-quality screens. Set these features on your billboards. As consumers, we can choose them. We can choose to be bigger or smaller. However, we are not notified in any way like a screen. Since there is no such notification and we do not have the right to choose, here as a consumer, a defective product is sold to us. Because I chose that device being tricked and trusting the white screen there. The prices of these devices are really high.”

‘THIS DECISION COULD BE A PRIDE’

Akyüz stated that in this decision, people who bought the same device, brand, model could protect their rights by turning to the Consumer Arbitration Committee due to the difference that arose when they compared their phones, saying: “They show us white on the screens. yellow sold. So what is this? It is a defective item. In that sense, I think this decision can be a precedent. I strongly recommend that all consumers, that is, those who have the last option, stand up for their rights.” saying.

Noting that the decision of the Consumer Arbitration Committee can be appealed within 15 days, Akyüz said: “However, no objection has been received from the other party so far. Therefore, the decision of the Consumer Arbitration Committee has acquired a firm character”. he used his statements.

Akyüz stressed that the company had to implement the decision of the Consumer Arbitration Committee. (AA)