Complaint Review: Circuit Ctiy - San Jose California

I am having similar problems with my "laptop" as other purchasers I see in your "rip-off report".

When my family purchased a "top of the line" Toshiba laptop a few years ago, it was done under the impression that when we purchased the full "City Advaqntage" packaqe, that if anything went wrong that could not be reapired, we would receive full replacement value at the "original cost". They have been doing everything they can to avoid the "full replacement value".

We took it into the store on 7/7/08. They immediately remarked that we were not to do this. They proceded to explain that we were to "call" the number on the plan and a suitable shipping carton would be sent to us to ship the laptop to the repair center directly.

At the time of purchase when we inquired about that item, we were told it was for "our" convienence so that we would not need to make the extra trip to the store. Since I am quite familiar with the "U.P.S." freight claims procedure, I was not willing to take the risk on "damage or loss in transit", I felt that it should be "Circuit City's" risk since I did purchase the "City Advantage" plan to protect the product and it didn't mention anything about the possibility of "loss or damage in transit".

They responded that it would take longer for them to ship the unit. I was fine with that after all I wanted the laptop back in "one piece". They gave me a receipt that it would be back in 10 days.

After waiting for a full 25 days, I called the store to find out what the progress was. After being run through the phone system without success several times I did get in touch with who I was told was the "service department manager". Several hours later, he returned my call to tell me that it had been there for the past 4 days and was informed that there was "nothing wrong with it".

Of course the problems I was having with it were not resolved. In otherwords, it had not been repaired.

At that point, the "service manager" proceded to offer me a "replacement unit of the same capabilities" which was quite a bit cheaper than the original unit purchased, not the same "cash value". Of course I immediately questioned this due to the type of "replacement value" plan I purchased.

After getting "burned" on electronic purchases I had made in the past, I knew better. The "extended warranty" plans I purchase are always for the "entire vaue" of what I purchase and not of a "depreciated" nature. I have had to collect on a few items in the past years with no problems. After all, I wasn't buying "tires" now was I.

For a matter of fact, last year I had a $3,000.00 40" HD television replaced due to a "non-fixable" problem. of I ended up replacing it with a $2,700.00 unit with a $300.00 store credit that I used since there wasn't any other "set" at the same value. This was done in the same Circuit City store we bought the laptop in.

I was under the impression that this type of action was illeagel in the state of California under the insurance laws. If the "item insured" was to be "depreciated" for any reason, it is to be written in the contract.

Frank

San jose, California

U.S.A.