Flaming phone complaint nets poor reception
Samsung client was looking for an explanation, not just a free phone to replace charred device
MY ears often burn. And it’s not because, according to the ancient belief, someone’s talking about me. It’s because I’ve stayed on a cellphone call way too long.
But unbroken hour-long conversations are not the only reason phones tend to overheat.
Covered in protective cases and often stuffed into pockets, these devices sometimes just need some fresh air to cool down.
And what with being switched on all day then charged (while still on) all night, along with having scores of apps constantly running, it’s little wonder our devices are sometimes a bit overwhelmed.
While some warmth from any electronic device is normal and most niggles can be easily fixed, when the glow on your phone is not the one coming from your screen, things can become dangerous. Especially if consumers use counterfeit or substandard (read cheap) batteries and chargers.
As far as Cape Town grandfather Ray Butters is concerned, the 10-year-old Samsung SGHE370 phone and accessories he inherited from his daughter were all original. But this didn’t stop the phone bursting into flames just before Christmas, while charging in his study.
“I heard a ‘woomph’ and saw a ball of flame reflected in the interleading glass door,” said Butters.
“I rushed to the scene where I encountered a ring of flames coming from some papers where my cellphone had been charging. I managed to beat the flames out, while the ceiling was filled with acrid smoke. Had this happened half an hour later, after I had gone to bed, my house could have burnt down with my wife and me with it.”
Butters alerted Samsung South Africa the next day, e-mailing it a photograph of the charred remains, inset, saying he hoped for “a serious response to this alarming event”.
Three days later, Samsung replied, apologising for the “inconvenience”, and saying it would “advise on the way forward ASAP”. It collected the remains the same day. Butters heard nothing further, until a month later, a new Samsung Galaxy A3 was couriered to his home. No letter or explanation accompanied the new phone.
Said Butters: “The ‘inconvenience’ of being without a phone for a month was a nonevent compared with the possible loss of my house — or worse. I appreciate the replacement but . . . in the circumstances, I feel that Samsung’s reaction was somewhat dismissive. I cannot believe the lack of concern.”
After I approached Samsung, Butters received a courtesy call from the company telling him the phone had been sent to Samsung headquarters in Korea for further investigation.
Samsung Electronics South Africa service director Richard Chetty, meanwhile, told me that the cause of the fire couldn’t be determined due to the extent of the damage on the battery.
“From the initial assessment it appears that the phone is close to 10 years old and as such the battery should have been replaced once or twice already,” said Chetty.
“If a nonoriginal Samsung battery, not bought through an authorised Samsung dealer, was used as a replacement, the battery could have been faulty. We were unable to establish if this was an original Samsung battery.”
Chetty said Samsung had seen “incidents like [this] before”; they were generally related to improper use and the use of counterfeit parts and accessories, or repairs done at nonapproved outlets.
I requested details on these incidents, including injuries and damage caused, but none were forthcoming.
All Samsung would disclose was that it collaborated with police and customs to address “the proliferation of counterfeit devices and accessories in the local market”. ANYBODY OUT THERE? Ray Butters with his new Samsung cellphone — sent by the company to replace one, inset, that burst into flames — which he admits he has no idea how to use yet
“Samsung has carried out an education campaign to inform the public, through traditional and social media, about the potential impact of using counterfeit accessories, especially batteries,” said Chetty.
So why wasn’t Butters given a proper explanation at the time?
“The service experience which Mr Butters received is not the norm and we apologise for the inconvenience and distress he experienced,” said Chetty. “Corrective measures” had been put in place and the com- pany had committed to providing Butters with feedback based on the Korean technical assessment, he said.
Said Butters: “I didn’t expect a new phone or any other form of compensation from Samsung. However, Samsung should have handled this event with a lot more concern and attention, and the public should be aware that it is possible for this happen.”
Tune in to Power 98.7’s “Power Breakfast” (DStv audio channel 889) tomorrow at 8.50am to hear more from Megan