So,  about 10 days ago, I was crossing a street where the crosswalk area was under construction. I was on the phone (ear height) and the uneven pavement caused me to stumble and I dropped my phone. This crash produced a crack all the way through my screen to the display underneath.

I sent pictures into Motorola who informed me that it appeared to be part of the replaceable ShatterShield. They then informed me that I could either replace the ShatterShield myself for $29.99, have them do it for $59.00 or have the entire screen replaced for $199. I replied (with a screenshot of the Motorola ShatterShield guarantee) which reads--and I am quoting verbatim here--"Moto ShatterShield is an exclusive system consisting of five layers designed to absorb shock and guaranteed not to crack or shatter." 

I spent several hours on the phone in separate conversations trying to understand what the phrase "guaranteed not to crack or shatter" meant. The answer is this: it means nothing. 

I have now been told the following things by Motorola regarding the crack on my screen:

(1) Moto Rep Maynor Guzman informed me that dropping the phone voids the warranty. Any physical damage to the phone voids the warranty. The rep I talked to said--and I am quoting him here--"that the warranty is only good if the phone is in your pocket or something." I am not making this up--according to this rep, the guarantee is voided if you drop your phone.

(2) That the top layer of the screen--the "ShatterShield"--is not part of the guarantee. The guarantee covers the deeper layer of the screen. This is somewhat unbelievable but this is what the Motorola Rep told me. I explained to her that their promotional material referred to the product as the "Moto ShatterShield" and I was being told to replace the "ShatterShield" but somehow what I was replacing wasn't part of the Moto ShatterShield? (Yes, that reads as ridiculous as it sounds).

(3) Moto Rep Maynor Guzamn accused me on 4/12/2016 of intentionally damaging my phone. This is the same rep that originally told me that dropping my phone voided the warranty. He backpedaled a bit and now says the guarantee is for "no major damage to the display." However, in the same response, he claims "it seems that the display was pinched or poked with a sharp object." He insists that the damage on my phone "cannot be caused by the phone just being dropped." So, Motorola's response to avoid a warranty is to (a) insist the phone display won't break and then (b) imply that I intentionally damaged my phone.

So, here is the takeaway from all of this:

(1) Motorola's guarantee means absolutely nothing. I will say that this is the most durable display I have ever seen. However, if you are unlucky enough to crack it like I did, then you are going to have to pay for a replacement screen just like any other phone.

(2) Motorola promotional material is false and deceptive since it does not indicate that their are so many limitations to their "guarantee"

I am pretty much done dealing with Morotola after they accused me of damaging my own phone. They simply won't back down and I don't have time to waste. If I do anything else, I will take them to court or pass all of this onto class action firm. BUT, I wanted other potential (or current) Turbo 2 owners to be aware of this before they purchase this phone.

Justin

Incident: 160409-000357

I'm not sure exactly how that warranty is supposed to work, but I will have someone look into this for you.

I obviously don't know either but what is clear is that if the screen "breaks" or "cracks", the user is expected to pay for the replacement cost. That is remarkably different from any other guarantee/warranty I have ever purchased. I think customers should be aware that the screen can break and that they will be responsible for the costs associated with the repair. I know I would NOT have purchased this phone if I had known that to the be the case.

I wish this forum would allow me to post photos (I can add videos). 

---

wrote:

I obviously don't know either but what is clear is that if the screen "breaks" or "cracks", the user is expected to pay for the replacement cost. That is remarkably different from any other guarantee/warranty I have ever purchased. I think customers should be aware that the screen can break and that they will be responsible for the costs associated with the repair. I know I would NOT have purchased this phone if I had known that to the be the case.

 

I wish this forum would allow me to post photos (I can add videos). 

 

 

 I have looked at the pictures you sent via email in your case.  Based on the pictures, the replacement options that were provided to you are correct.  The warranty is provided on our website.  

 

https://www.motorola.com/us/Moto-Shattershield/moto-shattershield.html

 

† The display and embedded lens are warranted against shattering and cracking for four (4) years from the original date of purchase; scratches or other damage to the protective lens is not covered by this warranty, but should always be in place to prevent scratches and other damage to the underlying components. This phone is not shockproof or designed to withstand all damage from dropping. All other warranty exclusions, including scratches and other cosmetic damage, intentional damage or abuse, normal wear and tear and other limitations apply.

---

This is the part that folks need to understand about how misleading the warranty is: "The display and embedded lens are warranted against shattering and cracking for four (4) years from the original date of purchase; scratches or other damage to the protective lens is not covered by this warranty, but should always be in place to prevent scratches and other damage to the underlying components. This phone is not shockproof or designed to withstand all damage from dropping. All other warranty exclusions, including scratches and other cosmetic damage, intentional damage or abuse, normal wear and tear and other limitations apply."

Motorola, in short, doesn't consider what happened to my phone to be a "shatter" or a "crack." Instead, they consider it to be "cosmetic" even though the screen punctured and I have a crack all the way into my display.

In the end, as your response illustrates, Motorola will just keep alienating long time consumers like me. I was ready to buy a different device but purchased this phone ONLY because of the screen. Now I am stuck with a phone that Motorola won't warranty. Consumers should understand exactly how limited the warranty is and how deceptive the marketing is.

---

wrote:

I obviously don't know either but what is clear is that if the screen "breaks" or "cracks", the user is expected to pay for the replacement cost. That is remarkably different from any other guarantee/warranty I have ever purchased. I think customers should be aware that the screen can break and that they will be responsible for the costs associated with the repair. I know I would NOT have purchased this phone if I had known that to the be the case.

 

I wish this forum would allow me to post photos (I can add videos). 

 

 

 

---

Two things:  We don't know yet what's clear, which is why I've asked someone to look into this.  The information could be correct, or it could be an opportunity for customer support training.  Let's wait and see what happens.  Second, the issue about posting pictures is being investigated.  It was originally thought to be a "tenure" issue...that is, the ability to post pics appeared after a certain number of posts, but that didn't turn out to be right.  People behind the scenes are looking into it.

Moto T2 commercial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjKYWxcQNMg

Exactly. This is how the phone was sold to me. Their advertising reiterates this claim: "guaranteed not to crack or break." But the reality is that it can "break" in the sense of how EVERYONE in the world thinks of that word.

I agree with your statement. Their warranty is flawed and they do not honor it. My phone broke as well, and because my top screen failed (which is the "unbreakable one") the bottom screen broke as well. They will not honor my warranty because they said it is not covered through the guarantee. So, I had to pay $125.00 to get it fixed. They wanted to charge my $199.99 to process it over the phone instead of the internet which was crap also. That was a week ago. I still have not gotten my phone back or heard anything from them. I called them not too long ago and they told me I still wouldn’t have my phone for at least another week. They way they advertise it on their page; it's a "quick" process. I was talked into buying this phone by a Verizon sales associate instead of the Iphone 6 plus, because of the "awesome warranty". I should have stayed with apple, because they at least take care of their customers and don’t lie about their products and warranties! Never again will I buy a Motorola product!

Ronica,

I agree. I too was talked into this phone by a Verizon agent. I was adamant about not wanting another Motorola phone but she really sold me on the display (I am admittedly hard on screens).

The problem with Motorola's stance on all of this is that leave you NO option except to #1 pay to have your phone fixed and then either put them on blast on Social media or take them to court. I plan on blasting the pics of my phone and their warranty out on social media today. It is just frustrating that a company would rather let its customer down than deal with a $29.99 fee for a replacement ShatterShield. 

All I can suggest is to keep letting people know how ridiculously misleading this warranty is. Eventually, some plaintiffs firm will catch wind of this, certify a class of plaintiffs and cost them money.

Justin