Frsky 2.4 Ghz Conversion Warranty

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Simon B]

Appalling. Buy this and you're on your own effectively. Pay a bit more and go for a Spektrum or Futaba. At least then the distributor won't abandon you.

[Frank Skilbeck]

GS aren't a distributor Frsky don't have any distributors, so buy it from one of the other UK suppliers if you don't like GS's T's & C's. You'll find lots of happy FrSky users and the hack modules are easy to install.

[WolstonFlyer]

The problem is that the GS T's & C's are quite often at odds with actual distance selling & retail law.

[Jon Laughton]

I have two Frsky futaba compatible 2.4 receivers - both work fine

[Garbo]

Andrew, is your Multiplex still under or out of warrenty. If its out of warranty you won't be at any disadvantage. The quality and relibility of the FrySky units have been proven at my flying field .

 

Edited By Garbo on 27/09/2012 08:08:49

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Kevin Fairgrieve]

The Frsky unit is simple and easy to fit. When you do decide to go 2.4GHz it is a course well worth persuing.

I have done a few conversions and regularly fly with my converted Sanwa RD6000 Super`s.

See here for a How To.

Kev

[Hamish]

I find the T&C GS make quite incredible as they appear to go against all that is expected from a retailer. Their, "if you are not happy with these terms - BUY THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE! " suggests very little customer care.

I have converted 3 Tx to Frsky including one updated to telemetry and have had no problems.

[Braddock, VC]

Andrew, it's not a car, if you bought a new car the terms and conditions oblige you to follow the servicing procedures which may or may not be at the makers' dealership. Either way the car would be serviced by employees over whom there was some control. If you don't follow the service you void the warranty, end of; ie if you do the servicing yourself, immaterial if you're the best qualified mechanic in the UK, where's the difference.

I'd suggest it's just your attitude.

Your comparing a complex object with a piece of chinese tat probably worth 0.001 x the cost of a car that is being installed by a person over which the supplier, giant shark, has no control. I suppose you'd like GS to drop that and accept liability for your skills like installing the unit in a non CE compliant tranny then also accept the liability when your model crashes into someone or something that is damaged - I think not.

I for one think GS T&C is refreshing you know up front the level of their support and, if you don't like it, go elsewhere but please don't whinge on here about something that you say you have no intention of buying anyway.

Giant cod had the same T&C and they, more than anyone else, cut the cost of modelling for modellers and have forced the likes of r****x and wee m********r etc to moderate their costs. They, and their successors, deserve our support not snidey character destruction.

As for being fit for purpose, it is, it's a kit that you play with in your hobby and, like any other kit the user's skills are paramount.

Caveat emptor.

GS's T&C seem to have protected them from some aggro that would, if they didn't have those T&Cs, put their costs up in time invested dealing with a dis-satisfied customer.

[Bob Cotsford]

First, the FrSky gear isn't 'chinese tat' any more than your Futaba, Hitec, JR etc gear. It's a relatively new outfit producing some excellent gear that may lack a little in documentation quality but that's all (I'm just a very satisfied customer, no other connections btw).

The rest of Braddock's coments are spot on. These T&C have been discussed endlessly on previous threads, what it comes down to is - if you want the retailer to hold your hand then pay full price for branded goods elsewhere. If you are want to pay lower prices accept that those lower prices mean less backup from the retailer. They can't absorb the cost of 'warranty' returns caused by ham fisted operator error in the same way that more expensive retailers can, that's how they keep prices so low in the first place.

[Hamish]

Hopefully not going to open up previous posting, but find strange that it is found acceptible for a company to concock its own T&Cs which may be contrary to Sales of Goods Act. etc but then everybody has their own views.

[Martyn K]

I am not actually sure that it is against the sale of goods act. The FrSky Tx module is a 3 wire plus aerial hack unit to convert an existing 35 (or 27)Mhz PPM Tx unit to 2.4Ghz . It clearly states that the user is responsible for fitment and for working out HOW to fit it. There are no instructions with it and this is stated clearly. Because of the number and different types of transmitter and it would not be realistic to provide them. Be realistic - it is a £10.00 module. If the user gets the connections wrong and blows it to bits then surely the supplier cannot be held responsible. Ditto, the user may well wire it to (say) a +15V supply and the unit functions OK for a number of hours and then it dies - again the supplier cannot be held responsible. I have spent far more on semiconductors in the past (and blown them) - I would not expect the supplier to replace under warranty due to my stupidity or carelessness.

The sale of gods act states things about being 'fit for purpose'. There are many happy users of FrSky hack modules (I am one) and that would probably be sufficient testimony.

It would be a great shame if the world lost suppliers like this (who provide experimental units) through litigation from those who do not understand what is involved and then complain.

My advice is that if you can work out where the 3 wires go and can make basic electronic readings (with confidence) then have a go, if not then run away.

Martyn

[Hamish]

My posting was not about the Frsky product, which I have found very satisfactory, but about companies concocting their own T&Cs

[Pete B]

I agree with BVC (tat comment excepted!) and Bob.

I don't want to get into the guarantee policies of GS or whether they breach consumer legislation, but a little bit of the history of the company might explain the philosophy of Giantcod's early customers and its founder, Rob C.

As I understand it, a few years ago when leccy flight was becoming a realistic day-to-day option, Rob started a company to bring lower-priced kits and accessories to the growing band of leccy experimenters, by purchasing direct from the Far East and offering the material, at low profit margins, to what was a relatively small band of enthusiasts.

Many of the products were not of particularly high quality, compared to the UK market offerings, but they were so much cheaper that the customers didn't have a problem with this. At the very least, they were able to dabble with leccy at minimal cost; they accepted that they were largely experimenting in the subject and the odd failure was to be expected.

Equally, the low margins and the use to which the products were put, meant that it was unreasonable for the vendor to stand the cost of each and every return when it had been subjected to conditions beyond his control.

Inevitably, with the power of the Internet, word got around and more and more orders came in and, like Topsy, the company growed and growed......and Rob apparently spent most of his time in China, chasing down supplies to re-stock, whilst an increasing number of customers queued up to have some of it!

Things moved on from the 'club-like' concept and the wider band of customers, weaned on the 'We'll hold your hand and protect you from the nasty vendor' UK consumer legislation, expected top quality service at rock-bottom prices - which was unsustainable without some caveats.

Those caveats were understood by the early customers and were clearly necessary to keep the prices attractive to the majority of customers. Those of us who may not be quite so 'risk-averse' as others accepted the caveats - and were rarely disappointed.

Equally, I'd say that if you don't like the caveats, then feel free to shop elsewhere, enjoy the higher prices and hope that you get satisfaction if things go wrong.

Now, the business having grown and changed hands, one has to ask whether the original concept is still relevant? My opinion is that, if more and more customers demand protection to the Nth degree, then the majority of customers will have to endure the higher prices associated with providing that protection and GS will drift closer to the mainstream prices. On the other hand, if folk are prepared for an occasional disappointment to benefit from considerable savings overall, then we'll carry on enjoying their products and prices.

Don't get me wrong - I welcome and enjoy consumer protection (just wish there was some in France!) - but, as a builder once said to me, "You don't get a champagne job for lemonade money"

I've made many purchases from GC/GS, HK and many UK companies and in the overwhelming majority of cases, I've been completely satisfied with the goods and the service. Indeed, the few issues I have had have been, sadly, exclusively with mainstream UK suppliers........

Pete

[Bob Cotsford]

Hamish, unfortunately the thread title and original post do (falsely) intimate that FrSky produce tat with a dodgy warranty.....

[FlyinBrian]

At the end of the day (no matter what the company's T&Cs say) the Sale of Goods Act applies to ALL sales if you can be bothered to pursue matters for a £10 item!

My own purchases from GC and GS have been fine, I did have an issue with a motor I bought not performing correctly on a 6S Lipo and GC said return it but it was fine on 5S so I kept it.

Edited By FlyinBrian on 27/09/2012 20:54:03

[Hamish]

I have purchased very recently from GS and HK(UK) and they have both provided excellent price and service.

Back to the OP, to expect a supplier to warrant your installation is unacceptable and I can understand that T&C. However if installed correctly and failing to operate then that should be covered under warranty. Simply to refuse warranty because package has been opened and soldered in place(how else can you test) is not acceptable

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Hamish]

Andrew, the tinternet is not serious but it is a forum for different views. I dont think any of us are seriously concerned about the T&Cs in this instance because they are, to me, only minor sums of money. Had they been considerable sums then they might be relevant but it all depends on how much the individual is prepared to loose. Should put a happy face bu not sure how.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Hamish]

I totally agree with what you say. What concerns me is others seem to consider as " a product" was "bought cheap" from "any company" then the company can re-write T&Cs to suit themselves. I do not think so and as you say it is bizarre.