cwa wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:40 am

NeWard wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 8:27 pm Or how about I put it this way, if you were the owner of this watch would you spend the $500 for CW to fix it?

Put simply - yes.

To be a little more detailed though, I’d absolutely push the point regarding the service being a recommendation at the time this watch was originally sold rather than a firm requirement - as others have suggested.

If you absolutely can’t get them to budge, I’d hold on to it until you can fund the repair without any financial stress.

A really out there idea that most will probably hate would be to see a local watchmaker and have a basic movement fitted to the case. That will absolutely devalue the watch, but it’ll get it on your wrist and is likely always reversible when funds allow the fixing the in-house movement.

I'm currently speaking with the head of the customer service team and hoping that my case will get pushed thru all of this . Thank you for the kind words.

Mikkei4 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:26 am

NeWard wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 8:24 pm
I believe it's between MK1 and MK2 transition and CW made this batch of 32 watches to clear up their stock inventory in order to push out the new logos, therefore the unofficial limited edition of this watch is born with only 32 ever made. The customer representative informed me that the watch is indeed still under warranty from the serial number lookup, but will unable to honor it since the watch did not get serviced at the 3-4 yr mark.

I've tried to find this watch in the CW Archives to check dates of production and release but couldn't see it in the C60 Trident area. I would have thought that this was released towards the end of the Mk2 life (2018?).

IIRC the hoo-ha about the 60months warranty began around 2019 (? - anybody - please correct me if I'm way out here) so I would think yours was sold before CW changed their stance on how the warranty was applied. So, as others have suggested I'd start an escalation of your communications within CW. I didn't listen to all of the MF interview on the recent thread but did I hear him say that the SH21 is turning out to be a very reliable movement?

I've always been wary of buying a CW SH21 watch despite how good the movement is considered to be by many. The comparative costs of servicing and fixing faults have so far prevented me buying 1. (but that's probably been discussed on other threads so I don't want to hijack this thread). However given that you already have this watch I'd hold onto it until you have the funds to get it fixed if CW don't change their mind after further discussions.

Best of luck.

Thank you for the comment! According to our mod Bahnstormer_vRS, the time piece production happened in late 2016 for the first batch then again another second batch produced in the early 2017 I believe, so It's indeed fell both under the 60/60 warranty as well as the recommended service interval of 3-4 yrs instead of required, so fingers crossed to get this resolved with the customer service team.

Bahnstormer_vRS wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 10:38 am

NeWard wrote: Thank you!! I just sent a follow up email to customer support team, hope they will honor the 60/60 warranty....

Did you contact Vallen Hardy as suggested to you in your topic of last week?

How to get in touch with higher management in CW

Guy


Sent from my XPERIA 5 III using Tapatalk

Hi mod thank you for all the helpful information you have provided for me. I did reached out to the head of customer support team: Ms.Hardy in regards to my timepiece. She was able to confirm the fact that the watch is indeed manufactured and sold around the late 2016 era. I'm still in negotiation with her for the recommended or required service for the 3-4 yrs interval, that seems to be the main hurdle in getting my watch serviced under the 60/60 warranty. I will update my progress accordingly on the forum.

Update:

Even after speaking with the head of the customer representative team my watch would not be covered under the 60/60 warranty due to not having the recommended service at 3-4 years interval by Christopher Ward, despite the fact that the watch came out in late 2016 which at the time according to my service manual directly from CW https://www.christopherward.com/on/dema ... manual.pdf , the service at the 3-4 yrs interval was recommended and not explicitly stated as needed per the May 2019 changes.

Sadly I will be getting my watch back to either keep it or sell it as a result, to be honest I was really hoping to get the movement resolved under the 60/60 warranty but because I did not have the service performed I'm unable to receive the last year's warranty claim. Please let this be a heads up to our fellow forum members as I did not know this rule was in effect until other members have mentioned it on my thread. If you want the remaining 5th year's 60/60 guarantee you have to send in your watch to CW for service at the 3-4 mark, otherwise your remaining warranty will be voided, even if you bought the watch before the May 2019 60/60 guarantee change, you still would be affected. My warranty claim for the movement service is explicitly denied because of the missing service between the 3-4 yrs interval.

Here is what stated on my manual Here are the rules on the CW website I thank you for everyone that's following my thread.

H0rati0 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 18, 2021 8:28 pm Keep it back and get it sorted, but:

The warranty on these is five years, full stop. It was not necessary in MK II days for a service (that advice came in last year IIRC) so you can argue that point with CS around to your favour. Nor is it necessary to have the documentation as I am sure others here will confirm.

Go back to CS and escalate if necessary - good luck!

I especially thank you for your comment on the 60/60 warranty claim, however it didn't really work out on my case. Maybe someone else would try it and see if they can get their watch pushed through on the 5th year's warranty claim had they not serviced their watch at CW and bought it before the May 2019 change.

I think they have probably added the service interval rules at a later stage.

especially this bit off the CW sales website

Please note that a service completed by anyone other than Christopher Ward, and/or no service being completed by Christopher Ward prior to the 5th anniversary since despatch, will invalidate this guarantee.

NeWard wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:34 pm
I especially thank you for your comment on the 60/60 warranty claim, however it didn't really work out on my case. Maybe someone else would try it and see if they can get their watch pushed through on the 5th year's warranty claim had they not serviced their watch at CW and bought it before the May 2019 change.

Write to Mike France directly. It is not on to "recommend a service" but then not honour the (transferable) 5 year guarantee offered at purchase which was not conditional on having that service. Since you acquired the watch subsequently, it is not your fault that the service has not been done, not that it is actually relevant. A contract is a contract and if it is transferable (and it is) then the original conditions hold and should be honoured.

Of course, all this may be too much trouble for you but if it were me, I'd have the argument.....

To be honest they might as well ditch the 60 month warranty and make it the somewhat vague 3-4 years warranty! The goalposts seem to have moved since your watch was made.

H0rati0 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:55 pm

NeWard wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:34 pm
I especially thank you for your comment on the 60/60 warranty claim, however it didn't really work out on my case. Maybe someone else would try it and see if they can get their watch pushed through on the 5th year's warranty claim had they not serviced their watch at CW and bought it before the May 2019 change.

Write to Mike France directly. It is not on to "recommend a service" but then not honour the (transferable) 5 year guarantee offered at purchase which was not conditional on having that service. Since you acquired the watch subsequently, it is not your fault that the service has not been done, not that it is actually relevant. A contract is a contract and if it is transferable (and it is) then the original conditions hold and should be honoured.

Of course, all this may be too much trouble for you but if it were me, I'd have the argument.....

Hi thank you again for the reply. I have personally emailed the CEO two times with my issue on the watch and received no reply at all, I will try one last time before I just accept my fate at this case. When the head of the customer support team even denied my claim I figured I don't have much of a ground to stand on, but I will press on again to see what they says.

I can’t help but wonder if it would make a difference if you had the paperwork. Regardless, this is a very frustrating thing, and I’m sorry it turned out the way it has for you.

jkbarnes wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:33 pm I can’t help but wonder if it would make a difference if you had the paperwork. Regardless, this is a very frustrating thing, and I’m sorry it turned out the way it has for you.

I don't think the paperwork would matter since the customer support representative were able to validate the production date of the watch.

Bahnstormer_vRS wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 9:12 pm I've been musing over this situation for the last 24 hours or so, indeed much longer since NeWard first raised the issue, and to me, regardless of, or perhaps as a consequence of, the reams that have been written it boils down to this;-

It is incumbent on NeWard to pay for a service, say £350 / $500 and

. .. incumbent on CW to fix whatever is broken.

End of, simples.

Guy

Sent from my XPERIA 5 III using Tapatalk

Indeed, I was dreaming with a glimpse of hope that CW would fix the issue under the 60/60 warranty. At the same time I do understand they made the change of this policy and I respect their decision.

This watch was sold with a 5 year guarantee, it’s not yet 5 years old and is kaput.

My opinion…CW should be fixing this under guarantee.