# IWC Pilot Chronograph - BUYER BEWARE!



## 60seconds

Hello, 

Please allow me to introduce myself. I have been an avid fan of IWC for a number of years and always wanted to own one of their timepieces. I was fortunate enough to accomplish this goal at the end of 2010 and purchased a new IWC Pilot Chronograph from an Authorized Dealer. 

The watch was great until the end of October when the chronograph function stopped working. I sent the watch to my dealer who then sent the watch to IWC. IWC has since stated that my watch suffered "shock damage" and will not be covered under warranty. They want to charge $700 for repairs. They also have stated that my warranty will be voided due to the supposed damage. This is a new watch, has only been worn to work in an office, and most certainly has never been dropped or experienced anything outside of normal wear. The watch functions fine other than the chronograph. I am shocked by their accusation and can't believe their response. 

I am very disappointed with IWC and want to make other potential purchasers aware of this situation. IWC does not stand behind their product and actually goes to lengths to blame their customers for what is clearly a faulty watch. It is unfortunate because I enjoyed my watch and was planning on buying another in the future. I expect more from IWC and this certainly has changed my opinion of them as a brand.


----------



## Anatoly

Point taken, will keep in mind. I am planning to by an Aquatimer in the not so distant future (not sure yet whether it will be new or preowned), its good to know about this issue, thanks.
Anatoly


----------



## ReXTless

60seconds said:


> Hello,
> 
> Please allow me to introduce myself. I have been an avid fan of IWC for a number of years and always wanted to own one of their timepieces. I was fortunate enough to accomplish this goal at the end of 2010 and purchased a new IWC Pilot Chronograph from an Authorized Dealer.
> 
> The watch was great until the end of October when the chronograph function stopped working. I sent the watch to my dealer who then sent the watch to IWC. IWC has since stated that my watch suffered "shock damage" and will not be covered under warranty. They want to charge $700 for repairs. They also have stated that my warranty will be voided due to the supposed damage. This is a new watch, has only been worn to work in an office, and most certainly has never been dropped or experienced anything outside of normal wear. The watch functions fine other than the chronograph. I am shocked by their accusation and can't believe their response.
> 
> I am very disappointed with IWC and want to make other potential purchasers aware of this situation. IWC does not stand behind their product and actually goes to lengths to blame their customers for what is clearly a faulty watch. It is unfortunate because I enjoyed my watch and was planning on buying another in the future. I expect more from IWC and this certainly has changed my opinion of them as a brand.


Have you asked for additional detail from IWC in support of their claim? They must have uncovered something specific to generate such a response. I'm not suggesting you did anything wrong or aren't being truthful. I just think you should have them explain further regarding the basis/rationale.

Let us know what you find out.


----------



## 60seconds

ReXTless said:


> Have you asked for additional detail from IWC in support of their claim? They must have uncovered something specific to generate such a response. I'm not suggesting you did anything wrong or aren't being truthful. I just think you should have them explain further regarding the basis/rationale.
> 
> Let us know what you find out.


I asked my AD for the IWC contact information and will be giving them a call. This needs to be explained. I don't understand how the watch requires a repair and servicing after 10 months of ownership. It would be one thing if it was covered under warranty but they aren't giving that option.


----------



## 60seconds

The Aquatimer is a nice watch but the durability concerns me. I'm not sure these watches can be worn as expected.


----------



## jnelson3097

I've had my Aquatimer for over a year now, and while it hasn't been worn in too extreme of conditions, it has survived with flying colors. It did run fast but a quick trip to IWC got that fixed.


----------



## t1026

I certainly understand your frustration. I don't either blame you for gearing away from IWC and if I were you, I would probably do the same. This watch equips with IWC modified Valjoux movement and the chronograph function malfunction is not a difficult fix. Any experienced local watch maker will be able to fix this watch. Since IWC neglects their after sale service and your warranty is void, and not an educated mind will spend $700 to let them fix your watch, then maybe you can have your local watchmaker to take a look at your watch. They will definitely not charging that much for a fix. This certainly damages IWC's images! I have said this many times and will say it again: nothing, NOTHING, is more important than after sale/service! And it is crucial to a watch company's reputation. Four years ago, my 6 years old TAG chronograph needed some service and I sent it to LMVH and they fixed it in a flash. Now, they still have that particular record and reminded me my next service is quite soon due. If IWC can take care of your issue, then we wouldn't have this post then their reputation may not be damaged. This is just a simple thing that IWC can fix without even has to worry now about their reputation - which I think is more than $700 worth. Some owners of this watch claim they were lucky and have an accuracy of 1 second/day (or 2, 3, 4, etc.) and that is another thing of IWC quality control - why let some owners feel lucky after spending thousands of dollar for a chronograph and not make it all under 1, 2,3, or 4 seconds/day?? Do you feel lucky when you owned your watch? I hope folks at IWC read this post. 

Cheers.


----------



## Redemption

It's unfortunate when this type of problem occurs and the manufacturer doesn't handle it the right way, especially these days when there are forums such as this for the client to express their bad experience which may in turn cost IWC more than $700 in a lost sale.

I hope this gets resolved for you mate and good luck.


----------



## Sean779

No doubt IWC saw a ding/dent somewhere, and they went from connection to conclusion. What's bothersome about that is sometimes the connection might be there, but sometimes not, resulting in customers thrown under the bus. Imagine if our court system ran like that. Oh wait it does...bonk o| :-d


----------



## Sean779

Redemption said:


> It's unfortunate when this type of problem occurs and the manufacturer doesn't handle it the right way, especially these days when there are forums such as this for the client to express their bad experience which may in turn cost IWC more than $700 in a lost sale.


in fact I guarantee it will. It's an arrogance they'll pay for especially as you say in these days with forums such as this.


----------



## FlyPenFly

The 7750 is the most widely used auto chrono movement out. IWC's version is the finest made by ETA. Either you dropped it or shocked it or the dealer did. IT sucks that you have to deal with it but I seriously doubt it was IWC's fault.

Either way, everyone should get insurance on their luxury watches. Its cheap and covers everything.


----------



## 60seconds

My experience is you can't wear this movement without the chronograph failing. IWC claims shock / physical impact. That is easy to say for any watch that has been worn for 10 months. They could have simply fixed the watch under warranty and stood behind their product. There is something to be said about customer service and I will not be purchasing another watch from IWC.

My AD has offered to fix the watch free of charge. I guess they understand good business practices and want to make money in the future.


----------



## m80sarecool

The last thing you should do would be to let them charge you 700 bucks to fix a valjoux 7750! Ridiculous. 

As a last resort a new 7750 can be bought on eBay for around 350 I think. And that is the top grade movement too. Just swap the hands (and the day date disc if it is a different color) and push it back in the case 

Chances are none of this is necessary and the fix may be easier than you think. It is a very popular movement and any watchmaker in town worth it's salt will know how to deal with it. The whole idea of putting a 7750 inside a watch is that it's cheap and probably not too hard to repair. The chronograph is a only a module which means that the chrono function is not integrated to the movement. That is why your watch still keeps track of time. 

Maybe IWC is not that bad a brand (and I have an AT chrono 7750 too) but it seems they are a little overpriced and from the response you got, not so great in the customer support department.


----------



## 60seconds

m80sarecool said:


> The last thing you should do would be to let them charge you 700 bucks to fix a valjoux 7750! Ridiculous.
> 
> As a last resort a new 7750 can be bought on eBay for around 350 I think. And that is the top grade movement too. Just swap the hands (and the day date disc if it is a different color) and push it back in the case
> 
> Chances are none of this is necessary and the fix may be easier than you think. It is a very popular movement and any watchmaker in town worth it's salt will know how to deal with it. The whole idea of putting a 7750 inside a watch is that it's cheap and probably not too hard to repair. The chronograph is a only a module which means that the chrono function is not integrated to the movement. That is why your watch still keeps track of time.
> 
> Maybe IWC is not that bad a brand (and I have an AT chrono 7750 too) but it seems they are a little overpriced and from the response you got, not so great in the customer support department.


Thank you for sharing this information. My AD doesn't think it is a difficult fix and was shocked by IWC's response as well.


----------



## Jez4

60seconds said:


> The Aquatimer is a nice watch but the durability concerns me. I'm not sure these watches can be worn as expected.


What is it about the durability of the Aquatimer that concerns you? Why do you think they cannot be worn as expected?


----------



## 60seconds

Jez4 said:


> What is it about the durability of the Aquatimer that concerns you? Why do you think they cannot be worn as expected?


I am uncertain about durability because my chronograph stopped working after 10 months of normal wear. This may be an isolated incident but you don't expect problems with a new watch.


----------



## FlyPenFly

There's a chance that something slipped past ETA QA but it would have manifested itself very early on. More likely than not, you did something to it unintentionally or didn't realize or someone in your household was playing with it and dropped it.

The 7750 is literally in tens of thousands of watches and has a reputation for being one of the most if not the most reliable movements out.

If you think the 7750 is not reliable, you should not get a mechanical watch. These aren't G-Shocks but they're good enough to fight wars in.


----------



## anonymousmoose

Here are you and which IWC centre told you this?



60seconds said:


> Hello,
> 
> Please allow me to introduce myself. I have been an avid fan of IWC for a number of years and always wanted to own one of their timepieces. I was fortunate enough to accomplish this goal at the end of 2010 and purchased a new IWC Pilot Chronograph from an Authorized Dealer.
> 
> The watch was great until the end of October when the chronograph function stopped working. I sent the watch to my dealer who then sent the watch to IWC. IWC has since stated that my watch suffered "shock damage" and will not be covered under warranty. They want to charge $700 for repairs. They also have stated that my warranty will be voided due to the supposed damage. This is a new watch, has only been worn to work in an office, and most certainly has never been dropped or experienced anything outside of normal wear. The watch functions fine other than the chronograph. I am shocked by their accusation and can't believe their response.
> 
> I am very disappointed with IWC and want to make other potential purchasers aware of this situation. IWC does not stand behind their product and actually goes to lengths to blame their customers for what is clearly a faulty watch. It is unfortunate because I enjoyed my watch and was planning on buying another in the future. I expect more from IWC and this certainly has changed my opinion of them as a brand.


----------



## anonymousmoose

60seconds said:


> My AD has offered to fix the watch free of charge. I guess they understand good business practices and want to make money in the future.


Will it void the warranty? I'd still try to get an explanation from IWC. From what I hear, they are usually good customer service. But the service can only be as good as the service centre staff who are running it. Tell me where you are or at least which service centre gave you these news.


----------



## anonymousmoose

Anatoly said:


> Point taken, will keep in mind. I am planning to by an Aquatimer in the not so distant future (not sure yet whether it will be new or preowned), its good to know about this issue, thanks.
> Anatoly


Lets not get carried away just because someone experienced a problem with IWC. Omega has appalling service in Australia but I still enjoy the watches. The after sales service is unfortunately only as good as the service centre in the area.

BUT; the real service or lack of service comes apparent when IWC head office is contacted to see if they can rectify the situation. I find IWC head office to be a good bunch, from what I hear and from the people I've conversed with online. Just because a service centre is giving bad advice does not mean IWC as a whole should be avoided. Heck, if I relied on local service to pre-define my purchases, I wouldnt be driving a Mercedes.


----------



## 60seconds

anonymousmoose said:


> Will it void the warranty? I'd still try to get an explanation from IWC. From what I hear, they are usually good customer service. But the service can only be as good as the service centre staff who are running it. Tell me where you are or at least which service centre gave you these news.


I'm pretty sure that if the AD performs the service then the warranty will be voided. That is part of my dilemma. I am in the process of discussing the issue with IWC but have seen the response from the service center. I am located in the southeast U.S. and the watch was sent to the service center in Fort Worth, TX.


----------



## anonymousmoose

60seconds said:


> I'm pretty sure that if the AD performs the service then the warranty will be voided. That is part of my dilemma. I am in the process of discussing the issue with IWC but have seen the response from the service center. I am located in the southeast U.S. and the watch was sent to the service center in Fort Worth, TX.


Try emailing IWC headquarters through their website. Explain your situation and how this has put you off their brand. PM what they say...


----------



## jnelson3097

If the AD even opens the case, the warranty is voided. It happened with my Aquatimer when it was running fast, I asked my AD to just adjust it but their watchmaker said he can't since it would void the warranty. I had no idea and it was nice knowing that my AD was looking out for me.


----------



## Cabaiguan

An unfortunate situation, but to say the 7750 is flawed is rubbish. As has already been mentioned, this is a bulletproof movement that has been around decades and used by many brands over the years. Companies have their hiccups and these things do happen. However, considering all the 7750's around, you're in the minority with your issues.


----------



## pod818

I am also going through a similar situation. I purchased my IWC Aquatimer 11 months ago from an AD in Hong Kong. The watch suddenly stopped functioning after a reset of the stopwatch function. The watch was sent in to the local IWC technician in Canada. I received a call from the dealer that they will not honor the warranty as the watch stopped functioning due to a physical shock/impact. I was appalled that IWC would not stand behind their product and that they have put the blame squarely on me. 

They have made their conclusion based on the fact that the "case at lug 7 is dented". The cost to repair is 1950$. I am really angry, if this doesn't get covered under warranty, I will never buy an IWC again, and will make sure that my voice is heard on every forum I can join as well. Does anyone have suggestions about recourse. I have also submitted a query through the IWC website..but not sure if that will generate a response. Where can I find contacts to the head office?


----------



## anonymousmoose

Did any of you do what I suggested? Contact IWC headquarters? For repairs, I think your dealing with Richmond, the parent company. Why not ask IWC direct? I had an extremely bad experience with Omega...
I still like Omega watches.


----------



## pod818

anonymousmoose said:


> Did any of you do what I suggested? Contact IWC headquarters? For repairs, I think your dealing with Richmond, the parent company. Why not ask IWC direct? I had an extremely bad experience with Omega...
> I still like Omega watches.


Not sure what the best way to contact IWC headquarters is..but to update, I had submitted a query on the website. I have received a response from the NYC headquarters that they are redirecting to the appropriate person and will get back to me. Will update if anything happens


----------



## 60seconds

anonymousmoose said:


> Did any of you do what I suggested? Contact IWC headquarters? For repairs, I think your dealing with Richmond, the parent company. Why not ask IWC direct? I had an extremely bad experience with Omega...
> I still like Omega watches.


I spoke to a representative at the service center and was told a supervisor would contact me. That has not happened yet. I have also contacted IWC through their web site.


----------



## anonymousmoose

Lets see what happens. If you guys get stuck, PM me and I'll shoot a message to someone I know (not personally but online) who works for IWC in Schaffhausen. I can tell him your problems. I don't really feel comfortable giving our his contact details.

I certainly hope IWC comes through fro you guys, if what your saying is true and you didn't damage the watches (I think your both honest). I'm going through something simular with a MontBlanc pen which has some minor breakage. Having trouble contacting someone there, even though its out of warranty. Also, my Omega Planet Ocean was gone for about 3 months all together and had to go back 3 times to get repaired. I think customer service is getting worse everywhere. I don't blame the manufacture too much because most of the companies are owned my parent companies and it seems the repair centres we deal with are run by the parents. But if the headquarters does not sort out the problem, then by all means I'd be disappointed too.


----------



## fasthandssam

FlyPenFly said:


> The 7750 is the most widely used auto chrono movement out. IWC's version is the finest made by ETA. Either you dropped it or shocked it or the dealer did. IT sucks that you have to deal with it but I seriously doubt it was IWC's fault.
> 
> Either way, everyone should get insurance on their luxury watches. Its cheap and covers everything.


There is a problem with this reasoning. You are basically saying that it's impossible that there is any kind of defect in the movement whatsoever that would stop the chronograph from functioning. I am not a watchmaker, and neither is OP. Any watch company can just say "it is shock damage and your fault, you must pay for it" for basically any kind of movement malfunction- how would I know? I'm just a layperson who enjoys watches. It's like if you took your watch underwater and there were faulty crown tube/ gaskets and water got in. They could just say "there is water in here you must not have screwed in the crown" and how could the inexperienced watchbuyer say anything otherwise, besides simply saying "I never put it under water without screwing in the crown" or, in this case, "I never dropped the watch or hit it hard against anything." In these cases, we as the watch-buying public must have faith in the watch company to stand behind its product and provide after-sales service. I mean, we aren't talking about a Casio Gshock here it is an expensive watch and its customers must be respected or else take their business elsewhere.

I certainly do not want to buy a watch with the nagging feeling that if something goes wrong, I could easily be blamed because after all it's SUPPOSED to be a very solid movement and nothing SHOULD go wrong, so it must be my fault. And if I had to pay out of pocket because the chronograph stops functioning without ever dropping it, I would be pissed.

I am not saying this to be critical but to encourage ALL watch companies to step up the after-sales service. Take care of your customer and your customer will return the favor, in all manner of business.


----------



## FlyPenFly

If the movement was defective, it would have exhibited its failure at the start of ownership.


----------



## RonD.

FlyPenFly said:


> If the movement was defective, it would have exhibited its failure at the start of ownership.


Not necessarily. No one here knows what the problem that was stopping the watch from running correctly was. I work on my own watches and had an Omega Railmaster just die on me. When I opened it up to see what the problem was, there was what looked like a tiny piece of dander that was blocking part of the gear train. I never opened up the watch up before so it had to be in there when the watch was made and it took a year for it to start acting up.

The problem I have with this situation is that the 7750 is a work horse. Even if there is a small dent in the case, it shouldn't make the watch die or the chrono stop working. Usually these watches are designed to take a bit of shock. I would like to know what the damage is. I don't think there are many things that can go wrong with a 7750 that would require fixes in the dollar amounts you two are being asked to pay.


----------



## Sean779

fasthandssam said:


> There is a problem with this reasoning. You are basically saying that it's impossible that there is any kind of defect in the movement whatsoever that would stop the chronograph from functioning. I am not a watchmaker, and neither is OP. Any watch company can just say "it is shock damage and your fault, you must pay for it" for basically any kind of movement malfunction- how would I know? I'm just a layperson who enjoys watches. It's like if you took your watch underwater and there were faulty crown tube/ gaskets and water got in. They could just say "there is water in here you must not have screwed in the crown" and how could the inexperienced watchbuyer say anything otherwise, besides simply saying "I never put it under water without screwing in the crown" or, in this case, "I never dropped the watch or hit it hard against anything." In these cases, we as the watch-buying public must have faith in the watch company to stand behind its product and provide after-sales service. I mean, we aren't talking about a Casio Gshock here it is an expensive watch and its customers must be respected or else take their business elsewhere.
> 
> I certainly do not want to buy a watch with the nagging feeling that if something goes wrong, I could easily be blamed because after all it's SUPPOSED to be a very solid movement and nothing SHOULD go wrong, so it must be my fault. And if I had to pay out of pocket because the chronograph stops functioning without ever dropping it, I would be pissed.
> 
> I am not saying this to be critical but to encourage ALL watch companies to step up the after-sales service. Take care of your customer and your customer will return the favor, in all manner of business.


I agree with this, and it bothered me when I first read the OP's post. I find it arrogant almost beyond belief that IWC would be judge jury and hangman guilty verdict on the reason for his IWC chrono to have developed problems. IWC is not god enough--though god knows they're greedy enough--to hang a 
$5000 blame on one of their buyers. IWC is playing footloose with their supposed factual knowledge of cause and effect. Shame on them.

It also points out the wisdom of anonymousmoose urging the OP to make it personal and contact IWC and fight for your rights. The only way one can disrupt such a summary judgement is to scream your case all the way to the top. That's the only way to convince IWC or any other watch manufacturer that you are not a liar and they are not god.


----------



## FlyPenFly

Is your railmaster running a co-ax momvement?

The 7750 is about as good it gets right now for a robust and extremely proven chrono movement. The Lemania 5100 which is no longer produced was the only hardier chrono movement. 

Its extremely unlikely a 7750 that functioned fine and passed IWC QA would fail months into ownership randomly. Possible? Yes. But anything is possible, like I can walk through walls.


----------



## anonymousmoose

Sean779 said:


> IWC is playing footloose with their supposed factual knowledge of cause and effect. Shame on them.


Just to clarify what I've been saying... I don't _think_ IWC are the ones who are telling our friends its shock damage, its the Service Centres run by the parent company who owns IWC (again, I think. Certainly SWATCH runs Omega repair and its awful in Australia). Hence why I keep singing, contact IWC head office, at least you get someone from IWC.


----------



## RonD.

Hi Fly, if you were asking me about the Railmaster, yes it is a co-axial (I made sure I printed out an exploded-view of the movement before taking it apart.  ). I was really just making an "anything is possible" comment.

Here is another one. I sent my Rolex in for a general cleaning a number of years ago (probably 10 years before I started working on watches myself). I got the watch back and a week later the mainspring broke! I sent it back and they replaced the mainspring without charging me since it had just passed inspection a week earlier. I thought that was nice customer service.

But in response to the folks posting about how some bad customer service like this is going to hurt IWCs reputation, you are 100% right. I usually stick to Omega's, but thought about buying an IWC, so here I am, reading posts, trying to get a feel for the company. Not getting a warm-and-fuzzy.


----------



## fasthandssam

anonymousmoose said:


> Just to clarify what I've been saying... I don't _think_ IWC are the ones who are telling our friends its shock damage, its the Service Centres run by the parent company who owns IWC (again, I think. Certainly SWATCH runs Omega repair and its awful in Australia). Hence why I keep singing, contact IWC head office, at least you get someone from IWC.


Well for all intents and purposes, does it matter who is giving OP the shaft? It's not like he can decide to buy a watch from IWC and _without _the baggage of the parent company. But I agree that he should contact IWC directly and see how far this goes.


----------



## Sean779

fasthandssam said:


> Well for all intents and purposes, does it matter who is giving OP the shaft? It's not like he can decide to buy a watch from IWC and _without _the baggage of the parent company. But I agree that he should contact IWC directly and see how far this goes.


just one more frustrating thing the buyer has very unluxuriously to unravel. These manufacturers should be doing dances in the street every day their customers somehow keep the faith. We love watches, not them.


----------



## FlyPenFly

There are legitimate reasons to be mad at IWC (the problems with the in house 7 day movements) etc, I really don't think this one isolated experience is one of them.


----------



## anonymousmoose

fasthandssam said:


> Well for all intents and purposes, does it matter who is giving OP the shaft?


Yes, I believe it does. Yes IWC should be reining in the service centres working on their behalf, yet as they may not be IWC employee's, I can still give IWC chance to make it right. I guess this is what happens when a company is bought by a giant like Richemont. Like OMEGA is bought by SWATCH. I respect ROLEX being owned by a foundation and not an entity which is controlling multiple watch companies.

_Upon the death of his wife in 1944, Wilsdorf established the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation in which he left all of his Rolex shares, making sure that some of the company's income would go to charity. The company is still owned by a private trust and shares are not traded on any stock exchange._​ Rolex - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​


----------



## fasthandssam

FlyPenFly said:


> There are legitimate reasons to be mad at IWC (the problems with the in house 7 day movements) etc, I really don't think this one isolated experience is one of them.


I am not trying to rag on IWC. I just find it hard to believe that it is _IMPOSSIBLE_ that a movement may have a defect that doesn't manifest itself immediately, and therefore OP _must _have damaged it himself. But as I said, I am not a watchmaker so that may be the case. If it is then what an incredible movement.


----------



## fasthandssam

Furthermore FlyPenFly- What exactly does the IWC factory warranty cover? If a watch makes it past QC and into a customer's hands, then it isn't defective. If a defect arises, then it's obviously the customer's fault so the warranty doesn't cover it. So what are those warranties for? Seems suspect to me.


----------



## HR F1

Kind of interesting, but lately on some areas of the IWC website comments section, there's been posts worded in almost exactly the same manner as the OP here (almost word for word, with slight differences in their professions, which each poster makes a big deal of noting for some reason) and then it goes on to state that IWC service blamed them for a "shock" to the watch, quotes a large amount to repair, stating it's not covered by warranty which results in the poster concluding that IWC doesn't stand by its products and only blames the customer so they will never buy IWC again and warning future buyers from the brand. 

The thing that's even more strange is these similarly worded posts were for other IWC models from the Aquatimer to the Portuguese and on to the Pilots as is the case here. It's really hard for me to believe that there are that many instances of IWC blaming its customers for subjecting their watches to drops and shocks and that this many people are complaining about it all at similar timeframes, with the same scenarios and identical responses from IWC for a whole range of its watches. 

I'm not saying the OP along with the other poster here with the faulty Aquatimer don't have legitimate problems with their IWCs because if they truly do and it's not some random trolling going on, I hope it gets resolved and I'd certainly be interested to see how IWC resolves it. That being said, if it is user error or fault in damaging the watch/movement, it's not just IWC, but no manufacturer would cover that under warranty aside from maybe a good will repair on a case-by-case basis. If not, and it's a defect, then of course IWC should honor its warranty.


----------



## 60seconds

HR F1 said:


> Kind of interesting, but lately on some areas of the IWC website comments section, there's been posts worded in almost exactly the same manner as the OP here (almost word for word, with slight differences in their professions, which each poster makes a big deal of noting for some reason) and then it goes on to state that IWC service blamed them for a "shock" to the watch, quotes a large amount to repair, stating it's not covered by warranty which results in the poster concluding that IWC doesn't stand by its products and only blames the customer so they will never buy IWC again and warning future buyers from the brand.
> 
> The thing that's even more strange is these similarly worded posts were for other IWC models from the Aquatimer to the Portuguese and on to the Pilots as is the case here. It's really hard for me to believe that there are that many instances of IWC blaming its customers for subjecting their watches to drops and shocks and that this many people are complaining about it all at similar timeframes, with the same scenarios and identical responses from IWC for a whole range of its watches.
> 
> I'm not saying the OP along with the other poster here with the faulty Aquatimer don't have legitimate problems with their IWCs because if they truly do and it's not some random trolling going on, I hope it gets resolved and I'd certainly be interested to see how IWC resolves it. That being said, if it is user error or fault in damaging the watch/movement, it's not just IWC, but no manufacturer would cover that under warranty aside from maybe a good will repair on a case-by-case basis. If not, and it's a defect, then of course IWC should honor its warranty.


I can assure you that my only posts have been in this forum. I cannot control if others have a similar experience and voice their opinions. Do not turn this into a conspiracy. This thread was created to make others aware of IWC's post sale service.

I contacted the IWC service center and still have not heard from the supervisor that was supposed to call me. Additionally, IWC has not responded to my web query. I am disappointed with this experience but have no control over the outcome. It is my word against theirs. It is an unfortunate situation and has certainly changed my opinion of IWC.

It is a fact that my chronograph function stopped working after 10 months of normal wear. The watch was never dropped so it is impossible to pin point when or why it stopped working. I thought IWC would stand by their product but that is not the case. They just want me to pay them to service the watch and move down the road. It is a poor business decision on their part because my next purchase would more than make up for the cost of servicing the Pilot Chronograph. I like IWC watches but won't buy another due to their customer service.


----------



## 60seconds

fasthandssam said:


> Furthermore FlyPenFly- What exactly does the IWC factory warranty cover? If a watch makes it past QC and into a customer's hands, then it isn't defective. If a defect arises, then it's obviously the customer's fault so the warranty doesn't cover it. So what are those warranties for? Seems suspect to me.


Excellent comment regarding warranties. I don't know what the warranty is for but appreciate your logic.


----------



## HR F1

60seconds said:


> I can assure you that my only posts have been in this forum. I cannot control if others have a similar experience and voice their opinions. Do not turn this into a conspiracy. This thread was created to make others aware of IWC's post sale service.
> 
> I contacted the IWC service center and still have not heard from the supervisor that was supposed to call me. Additionally, IWC has not responded to my web query. I am disappointed with this experience but have no control over the outcome. It is my word against theirs. It is an unfortunate situation and has certainly changed my opinion of IWC.
> 
> It is a fact that my chronograph function stopped working after 10 months of normal wear. The watch was never dropped so it is impossible to pin point when or why it stopped working. I thought IWC would stand by their product but that is not the case. They just want me to pay them to service the watch and move down the road. It is a poor business decision on their part because my next purchase would more than make up for the cost of servicing the Pilot Chronograph. I like IWC watches but won't buy another due to their customer service.


No insinuation of conspiracy from me; just simple observation of posts that seem peculiarily worded across various forums.

Maybe you should PM user "badwatch" from the IWC warranty thread below as his experience with his Pilot chrono mirrors yours to an exact tee and see if his issues have been resolved ;-):

https://www.watchuseek.com/f350/pls-vote-your-experience-iwc-warranty-service-497380.html


----------



## 60seconds

HR F1 said:


> No insinuation of conspiracy from me; just simple observation of posts that seem peculiarily worded across various forums.
> 
> Maybe you should PM user "badwatch" from the IWC warranty thread below as his experience with his Pilot chrono mirrors yours to an exact tee and see if his issues have been resolved ;-):
> 
> https://www.watchuseek.com/f350/pls-vote-your-experience-iwc-warranty-service-497380.html


It appears that is exactly what you are insinuating. Do not attempt to diminish my credibility and the information available in this thread. I have absolutely no connection to badwatch but do find it interesting that he/she has experienced a similar issue.

Do you work for IWC? Maybe you can get my watch fixed.


----------



## HR F1

60seconds said:


> Do you work for IWC? Maybe you can get my watch fixed.


Nope, I don't. One can't help but view the multitude of similarly phrased posts from newly registered users with some level of incredulity because many come and allege these sorts of claims and are never heard from again.

As I stated earlier, if your claim is valid and there is truly an inherent defect in your Pilot chrono that is not a result of user inflicted damage, IWC should adequately address the issue under warranty.


----------



## 60seconds

HR F1 said:


> Nope, I don't. One can't help but view the multitude of similarly phrased posts from newly registered users with some level of incredulity because many come and allege these sorts of claims and are never heard from again.
> 
> As I stated earlier, if your claim is valid and there is truly an inherent defect in your Pilot chrono that is not a result of user inflicted damage, IWC should adequately address the issue under warranty.


I used this forum as a resource to make my purchase. That is why I am sharing this information with other users.

I'm not sure if it is an inherent defect in the watch. The chronograph stopped functioning even though the watch was never abused and was well taken care of. That is my point and the reason for this thread. It is easy for IWC to say any watch that has been worn has experienced user inflicted damage. I wear my watches and expect them to work longer than 10 months.


----------



## Sean779

HR F1 said:


> Nope, I don't. One can't help but view the multitude of similarly phrased posts from newly registered users with some level of incredulity because many come and allege these sorts of claims and are never heard from again.
> 
> As I stated earlier, if your claim is valid and there is truly an inherent defect in your Pilot chrono that is not a result of user inflicted damage, IWC should adequately address the issue under warranty.


the thing is here, you made accusations/insinuations against the op without providing proof to us here. You made the emails sound like they were alike, but how much so you expect us to trust you? We're not that stupid.


----------



## HR F1

Sean779 said:


> the thing is here, you made accusations against the op without providing proof to us here. You made the emails sound like they were alike, but how much so you expect us to trust you? We're not that stupid.


Emails? What are you talking about?

As you can see from the link I provided to the IWC warranty thread above, I'm not the only one that finds the exact wording of two different new posters peculiar.


----------



## 60seconds

HR F1 said:


> Emails? What are you talking about?
> 
> As you can see from the link I provided to the IWC warranty thread above, I'm not the only one that finds the exact wording of two different new posters peculiar.


You came to this conclusion based on a single post? Stop derailing my thread and stay on topic.

Still waiting for IWC to actually contact me...


----------



## Sean779

HR F1 said:


> Emails? What are you talking about?
> 
> As you can see from the link I provided to the IWC warranty thread above, I'm not the only one that finds the exact wording of two different new posters peculiar.


whatever it was in whatever form you said...your link was of no help...zero in for us on how it relates to your post.


----------



## Sean779

HR F1 said:


> Emails? What are you talking about?
> 
> As you can see from the link I provided to the IWC warranty thread above, I'm not the only one that finds the exact wording of two different new posters peculiar.


it would help your argument and by this time your credibility to provide us the documentation on which you base this judgement.


----------



## HR F1

60seconds said:


> You came to this conclusion based on a single post? Stop derailing my thread and stay on topic.
> 
> Still waiting for IWC to actually contact me...


No, I didn't base it on that single post as I already stated above in detail. If I'm wrong in my assumptions, as I also stated earlier, I would hope IWC will take care of the issue and sort it to your satisfaction.



Sean779 said:


> the thing is here, you made accusations against the op without providing proof to us here. You made the emails sound like they were alike, but how much so you expect us to trust you? We're not that stupid.





Sean779 said:


> whatever it was in whatever form you said...your link was of no help...zero in for us on how it relates to your post.





Sean779 said:


> it would help your argument and by this time your credibility to provide us the documentation on which you base this judgement.


Based on the tone of your above posts towards me, my experience with various personalities already indicates that nothing I can state would affect your sentiment, so I'm not going to waste my time and spoon feed you information that is there to interpret whether it's the posts in the link or on the IWC website, which are easy enough to find.

Oh, and by the way, my trustworthiness and credibility on this and numerous other forums, watch-related or not, is just fine, thanks.


----------



## Sean779

HR F1 said:


> Based on the tone of your above posts towards me, my experience with various personalities already indicates...


what are you, from outer space?


----------



## fasthandssam

HR F1 said:


> Kind of interesting, but lately on some areas of the IWC website comments section, there's been posts worded in almost exactly the same manner as the OP here (almost word for word, with slight differences in their professions, which each poster makes a big deal of noting for some reason) and then it goes on to state that IWC service blamed them for a "shock" to the watch, quotes a large amount to repair, stating it's not covered by warranty which results in the poster concluding that IWC doesn't stand by its products and only blames the customer so they will never buy IWC again and warning future buyers from the brand.
> 
> The thing that's even more strange is these similarly worded posts were for other IWC models from the Aquatimer to the Portuguese and on to the Pilots as is the case here. It's really hard for me to believe that there are that many instances of IWC blaming its customers for subjecting their watches to drops and shocks and that this many people are complaining about it all at similar timeframes, with the same scenarios and identical responses from IWC for a whole range of its watches.
> 
> I'm not saying the OP along with the other poster here with the faulty Aquatimer don't have legitimate problems with their IWCs because if they truly do and it's not some random trolling going on, I hope it gets resolved and I'd certainly be interested to see how IWC resolves it. That being said, if it is user error or fault in damaging the watch/movement, it's not just IWC, but no manufacturer would cover that under warranty aside from maybe a good will repair on a case-by-case basis. If not, and it's a defect, then of course IWC should honor its warranty.


The plot thickens! Thank you for bringing this to light, I will need to take it under observation. I think that what happened to OP is still wrong and should be dealt with- but if there is indeed something fishy afoot then some people have been doing MUCH WORSE than what they are accusing IWC of doing. In either case, I would like some more details.


----------



## 60seconds

fasthandssam said:


> The plot thickens! Thank you for bringing this to light, I will need to take it under observation. I think that what happened to OP is still wrong and should be dealt with- but if there is indeed something fishy afoot then some people have been doing MUCH WORSE than what they are accusing IWC of doing. In either case, I would like some more details.


No conspiracy here - just a broken watch. It is possible that someone else is dissatisfied with IWC. I can't control what others do on the Internet but my comments in this forum are authentic.

How long does it typically take for IWC to respond? It has been a week since contacting them through their site and over a week for the service center. I am starting to think that they don't care.


----------



## FlyPenFly

fasthandssam said:


> Furthermore FlyPenFly- What exactly does the IWC factory warranty cover? If a watch makes it past QC and into a customer's hands, then it isn't defective. If a defect arises, then it's obviously the customer's fault so the warranty doesn't cover it. So what are those warranties for? Seems suspect to me.


Sure lots of stuff. De-laminating dials, hands falling off, improperly applied lume, premature aging of lume, falling off of markers, reset to zero not precise, etc.

Stuff that is usually user abuse/errors:

Crown tubes stripping
Date/Day malfunction from change at the wrong time
etc


----------



## FlyPenFly

HR F1 said:


> Kind of interesting, but lately on some areas of the IWC website comments section, there's been posts worded in almost exactly the same manner as the OP here (almost word for word, with slight differences in their professions, which each poster makes a big deal of noting for some reason) and then it goes on to state that IWC service blamed them for a "shock" to the watch, quotes a large amount to repair, stating it's not covered by warranty which results in the poster concluding that IWC doesn't stand by its products and only blames the customer so they will never buy IWC again and warning future buyers from the brand.
> 
> The thing that's even more strange is these similarly worded posts were for other IWC models from the Aquatimer to the Portuguese and on to the Pilots as is the case here. It's really hard for me to believe that there are that many instances of IWC blaming its customers for subjecting their watches to drops and shocks and that this many people are complaining about it all at similar timeframes, with the same scenarios and identical responses from IWC for a whole range of its watches.
> 
> I'm not saying the OP along with the other poster here with the faulty Aquatimer don't have legitimate problems with their IWCs because if they truly do and it's not some random trolling going on, I hope it gets resolved and I'd certainly be interested to see how IWC resolves it. That being said, if it is user error or fault in damaging the watch/movement, it's not just IWC, but no manufacturer would cover that under warranty aside from maybe a good will repair on a case-by-case basis. If not, and it's a defect, then of course IWC should honor its warranty.


Links?

Its common practice in some industries to hire online marketing agencies to post in online forums devaluing competitive brands and complaining about this or that. It's actually fairly cheap to hire these firms as they've contacted companies I've worked for in the past offering their services.


----------



## craniotes

Well, it's pretty clear to me from the OP's experience that IWCs -- and I do mean _all_ IWCs -- cannot be trusted to operate properly, and I for one will be steering clear of them. Seriously, out of the tens of thousands of watches that they produce each year, the fact that even one exhibits a flaw is entirely unacceptable.

Thanks for the warning! |>

Regards,
Adam

PS - Oh, and just in case anyone was confused by a previous post in this thread, the 7750 is an integrated chonograph, not modular.


----------



## fasthandssam

FlyPenFly said:


> Sure lots of stuff. De-laminating dials, hands falling off, improperly applied lume, premature aging of lume, falling off of markers, reset to zero not precise, etc.
> 
> Stuff that is usually user abuse/errors:
> 
> Crown tubes stripping
> Date/Day malfunction from change at the wrong time
> etc


Interesting. You obviously know more about watches and their movements than I do. I guess I just have less faith that there is no possibility of a defect arising after normal (non-abusive) wear. For example, you wouldn't expect a hand or marker to fall off any more than you'd expect a part of the movement to malfunction, so why is one acknowledged as being a possible failure of the watch and the other ALWAYS user-caused? But anyways, agree to disagree, but I acknowledge that you do know a lot more than I do and therefore are in a better position to make a judgement call about these things.

I guess the reason I am so adamant about all this is that I am saving up to buy a nice mechanical watch myself, and because I don't know anything about what's going on under the hood I feel like I would easily be the victim of these kinds of shady practices- for example, having a watch fail on me and being forced to take the blame and pay for it, even if it wasn't my fault. So I guess my reasoning is motivated at least partly by fear of the same happening to me, and therefore I tend to defend the customer over the manufacturer.


----------



## FlyPenFly

Just call your insurance carrier and get some insurance. Most decent companies and policies cover user damage. Ask to make sure.


----------



## Sean779

FlyPenFly said:


> Just call your insurance carrier and get some insurance. Most decent companies and policies cover user damage. Ask to make sure.


I wonder if the insurance company would accept IWC's verdict. They'd probably have to.


----------



## anonymousmoose

FlyPenFly said:


> Just call your insurance carrier and get some insurance. Most decent companies and policies cover user damage. Ask to make sure.


LOL, that might not be such a bad idea. If the company states formally that its shock damage, get it fixed under contents insurance.


----------



## anonymousmoose

And yet, none of the chaps here took me up on my offer to PM me so I can try and get someone from IWC to contact them... I would have thought that if a forum member gave this option and I really wanted my watch fixed, I'd PM the person :roll:.

I'll type it for the last time on this thread; I know someone at IWC who may be able to help... PM me and I'll pass on your contact details. Maybe PM me your name & email address.


----------



## 60seconds

craniotes said:


> Well, it's pretty clear to me from the OP's experience that IWCs -- and I do mean _all_ IWCs -- cannot be trusted to operate properly, and I for one will be steering clear of them. Seriously, out of the tens of thousands of watches that they produce each year, the fact that even one exhibits a flaw is entirely unacceptable.
> 
> Thanks for the warning! |>
> 
> Regards,
> Adam
> 
> PS - Oh, and just in case anyone was confused by a previous post in this thread, the 7750 is an integrated chonograph, not modular.


I don't sense any sarcasm in your response. Thank you for posting.


----------



## 60seconds

anonymousmoose said:


> And yet, none of the chaps here took me up on my offer to PM me so I can try and get someone from IWC to contact them... I would have thought that if a forum member gave this option and I really wanted my watch fixed, I'd PM the person :roll:.
> 
> I'll type it for the last time on this thread; I know someone at IWC who may be able to help... PM me and I'll pass on your contact details. Maybe PM me your name & email address.


PM sent.


----------



## craniotes

60seconds said:


> I don't sense any sarcasm in your response. Thank you for posting.


Not one bit. In fact, I've already donated my Top Gun Doppel and Ingenieur to an impoverished watchmaker's fund. You know, in the spirit of the holidays and all.

Now, with that out of the way, yes, I more than understand your frustration, and I do hope that you find some satisfaction here; however, to paint all IWCs with the brush of your less than stellar experience doesn't make a whole lot of sense, nor does it endear you to a forum that exists for enthusiasts of the brand. That said, I doubt there's a soul here who doesn't sympathize with your plight.

So, I wish you the best, and I do hope that you'll keep us updated. With a bit of luck, your watch will be back on your wrist and spinning like a top, and this will all be nothing more than an unpleasant memory.

Should it not work out for the best, then by all means curse IWC's name until the end of time.

Regards,
Adam


----------



## TeutonicCarFan

I have had my pilot chronograph for 10 months of 6 days a week wear. No problems at all. I am sorry to hear that you have not been as fortunate. To those who feel this scares them from buying IWC or expensive mechanicals in general, don't. I know many people with IWCs- port autos, BP/port perpetual calendars, BPs and port chronos - not one has had a problem. As helpful as online forums are, they have the tendency to over represent problems as 99% of the people who buy watches don't go on Internet forums, and many of the people who do, do so because the have a problem. Huge selection bias. 

One important thing to keep in mind is that having a high-end watch is a luxury item, so my philosophy is to treat it as I would any other luxury item. Only buy it if you have 100% cash for payment, and that discretionary cash does not affect your life in any way. Be smart. That way when you have a problem you aren't worried about depreciation (seriously - these aren't patek grande complications) or any strain that the purchase has put on your finances. In this way you can approach it more level headed, dealing with the manufacturer if it is in warranty, or having it repaired yourself if out of warranty. Just because something is luxury, it does not mean it's perfect. Just ask Ferrari 360 owners about their f1 transmissions or Mercedes sls amg owners about their headlight condensation. 

All that said, I hope OP gets this resolved. If it is truly a manufacturer problem, than the onus is on IWC to 
make it right. However, not knowing anyone here personally, and knowing human nature, if OP somehow caused this error and has now caused people to shy away from the brand, shame on you. It's like early on the cellphone days how no one ever knew how their phones were breaking (claiming device failure) and manufacturers surreptitiously put indicators inside to detect moisture damage - many fewer mysterious phone not working complaints since then. Can't wait to hear IWCs response.


----------



## anonymousmoose

TeutonicCarFan said:


> Only buy it if you have 100% cash for payment, and that discretionary cash does not affect your life in any way. Be smart. That way when you have a problem you aren't worried about depreciation (seriously - these aren't patek grande complications) or any strain that the purchase has put on your finances.


Or buy pre-owned so if you gotta sell, you break even, make a tiny loss or a small profit. Its the best way to go if your a collector... that way you can justify more watches. All mine, besides the IWC I did buy brand new, I could make a small profit on. I'm not boasting, just saying there are options out there to collect smart.


----------



## anonymousmoose

Just wondering if there are any updates on the situation with IWC?


----------



## 60seconds

anonymousmoose said:


> Just wondering if there are any updates on the situation with IWC?


IWC had me send back the watch a second time and did not agree to perform the service under warranty. It was a complete waste of time.

My AD is repairing the watch under warranty.


----------



## anonymousmoose

60seconds said:


> IWC had me send back the watch a second time and did not agree to perform the service under warranty. It was a complete waste of time.
> 
> My AD is repairing the watch under warranty.


Interesting outcome. I guess you wont be buying IWC in future


----------



## 60seconds

anonymousmoose said:


> Interesting outcome. I guess you wont be buying IWC in future


I tried my best to work out an arrangement with IWC but they are inflexible. They would rather lose a customer than repair a watch even knowing my intention was to purchase another (more expensive) IWC in the near term. I thought they would work with me considering they contacted and asked me to send in the watch a second time to resolve the issue. There was no change in the outcome and it was a complete waste of time.


----------



## ReXTless

60seconds said:


> I tried my best to work out an arrangement with IWC but they are inflexible. They would rather lose a customer than repair a watch even knowing my intention was to purchase another (more expensive) IWC in the near term. I thought they would work with me considering they contacted and asked me to send in the watch a second time to resolve the issue. There was no change in the outcome and it was a complete waste of time.


Did they give you a specific reason for the refusal of warranty service? Seems like information worth pursuing. "Shock damage" is way too vague.


----------



## MBroadus

I've been looking at a Pilot Chrono also...are you guys claiming that a rider to my home owners insurance will pay for a broken watch? I thought this only applied if your watch was stolen?


----------



## Stanford

MBroadus said:


> I've been looking at a Pilot Chrono also...are you guys claiming that a rider to my home owners insurance will pay for a broken watch? I thought this only applied if your watch was stolen?


I think you would be better off putting that question to your insurer or broker - it sounds unusual to me, but policies do vary.


----------



## Neptukker

Any news?


----------



## vbomega

craniotes said:


> Well, it's pretty clear to me from the OP's experience that IWCs -- and I do mean _all_ IWCs -- cannot be trusted to operate properly, and I for one will be steering clear of them. Seriously, out of the tens of thousands of watches that they produce each year, the fact that even one exhibits a flaw is entirely unacceptable.


This is not the issue at all. Mechanical watches do fail occasionally, even without any "abuse". What is unacceptable is IWC's customer service. A truly luxury brand would never question the buyer, but would repair the watch cheerfully.


----------



## JohnM

Interesting thread -- reads a bit like a crime novel! I'm not sure what to make of all that's been said. Thanks to Anonymousmoose for his steadying hand and various efforts to assist. I was especially fascinated by HR F1's comments on page two, but it would have been nice to see a link so we could draw our own conclusions.

I opened this thread because I'm considering buying a Pilot's Chronograph, probably the 'older' 3717, though the Mark XVI is also appealing. I don't think I'd hesistate based on what I've read here, mostly because I'm not exactly sure what conclusions to draw!

I don't blame the original poster for his frustration. To send a high end product back to the manufacturer and receive a refusal letter is very unsatisfying -- I wonder why they refused? Did they reiterate the suggestion that the watch was damaged?

John


----------



## anonymousmoose

vbomega said:


> A truly luxury brand would never question the buyer, but would repair the watch cheerfully.


I agree in theory, but if someone did damage the watch and there is evidance, I dont belive the company should be responsible. However, sometimes it is a good jesture to assist the customer. Example; I have 3 MontBlanc pens. 2 from an AD and one without papers from ebay. Guess which one broke? The one I bought off ebay. But to my pleasant surprise, MontBlanc repaired the pen even though I said I didnt have papers. And they were good about the whole thing too. But then, the pen part was just some plastic which broke and the movement to a watch would be more costly to repair.


----------



## Vinel

I wonder how much it would actually cost the company and how many of such type of repair they encounter daily? I guess it is minimal. Leaving a disgruntled customer is not the best option. They should have done it gratis after having it shipped the second time.


----------



## anonymousmoose

Vinel said:


> They should have done it gratis after having it shipped the second time.


Unfortunately we may never know IWC's side of the story.


----------



## MrHavana

Whether IWC can prove the damage was caused by shock or not is one point, but isn't $700 for a repair on an ETA movement quite expensive? Or will they only do the repair as part of a full service?


----------



## vbomega

anonymousmoose said:


> But then, the pen part was just some plastic which broke and the movement to a watch would be more costly to repair.


AM, the movement in this watch is an ubuquitous ETA Valjoux 7750, mass produced. Even if they had to replace the whole thing, I am guessing the cost to IWC would be on a magnitude of 1/10th of what they charge for the watch. And by the way, this is a very robust movement. It's hard to damage, unless you stomp on it.


----------



## anonymousmoose

MrHavana said:


> Whether IWC can prove the damage was caused by shock or not is one point, but isn't $700 for a repair on an ETA movement quite expensive? Or will they only do the repair as part of a full service?


I guess IWC is like Mercedes Benz, if the 'dealer' is repairing/servicing it, it will cost you $675 for a car battery. Take it to an independent and it will cost half that.



vbomega said:


> AM, the movement in this watch is an ubuquitous ETA Valjoux 7750, mass produced. Even if they had to replace the whole thing, I am guessing the cost to IWC would be on a magnitude of 1/10th of what they charge for the watch. And by the way, this is a very robust movement. It's hard to damage, unless you stomp on it.


It's probably more company policy not so much the cost to them. Again, if we knew IWC's side of the story we could judge, but we don't so it makes it hard.


----------



## Mark Standen

Thanks all for the comments, interesting thread... I've been looking at getting an IWC chrono and whilst I appreciate some posts balancing the otherwise negative views, I'm really unimpressed that anyone experienced problems from such a supposed luxury brand. I would expect a lot more from any company that sells such pricey goods, and they should know full well that their customers do not simply buy the watch, but they pay for the peace of mind that that things will a) hopefully not go wrong, and b) if they do, things will be courteously dealt with. 

From what I've read here, these customers (assuming they're real, of course) have had a similar experience to what I get when my phone breaks... but I can at least expect that from the disengaged populations of Birmingham and Manchester that seem to staff my phone provider's call centres... Even if my watch was being sent to a repair centre not directly operated by IWC, I would expect them to act with the professionalism that IWC themselves would expect. If they don't, surely IWC should act to correct this!? 

If people don't have an opportunity to vent online and share their experiences (positive or negative), IWC (or any company for that matter) won't have an opportunity to learn that there might be a problem (i.e. either through reading this or through sales taking a dip)! So whilst it I appreciate that it creates an apparent bias, I am grateful for having read these posts.... personally, I will think very hard and do a lot more research before joining the IWC club! Perhaps that will bring someone some solace?!


----------



## TeutonicCarFan

I find it interesting that one thread is so persuasive for you. Nowadays with everything having threads or ratings I am surprised you can buy anything. Especially steer clear of amazon, there is always one or two people putting 1/2 star ranking under customer reviews.


----------



## Will_f

IWC is hardly unique. You can find many stories of Omega and Sinn treating their customers in a high handed way, and I suspect Rolex too. Panerai famously stuck a bog standard movement in one of their watches and dumped it on the faithful as a special edition. Success breeds arrogance with some manufacturers. Is it bad business practice? Sure, but I think by the time it happens the company thinks they have the secret to never ending money.


----------



## juddss

Interesting thread: 

I can sympathize with the OP's issue - I have had similar issues trying to put in claims under warranties on many other things aside from watches, and I fully know how frustrating it is to spend significant money on an item you take pride in only to be treated poorly by its maker when it doesn't perform as it should have. However, to contrast his experiences with IWC, mine have been quite different: I have owned an aquatimer since early 2005. In 2007 while walking in a rush to work, I accidentally banged my wrist very hard against a thick metal spoke of a (unnecessarily) sturdy garbage can. At first I was surprised that there was literally no visible damage to my watch, but then about a week later the crown came off. I brought it to tourneau in NY an IWC authororized service center - the watch was still under warranty at the time, and they covered the entire thing except for an $80 fee, which I think went to the replacement crown. 

Recently however, the movement on my watch stopped working, and it is no longer under warranty. I brought it to Tourneau Boston and it is costing me $575 for full repair, plus $60 for another new crown - not sure why that is needed. I think this is standard for high end watch service/repair fees (although this is my first time having to pay it so don't have other dealings to compare). I am currently awaiting its return from the repair center.

Clearly my experiences are very different than OPs. Too bad to hear that he was treated so poorly - I am sure this leaves a very bitter taste in his mouth, and it is certainly not comforting to hear as an IWC owner.


----------



## Mark Standen

I appreciate your post - it's important to hear both sides of the story as it were, and I'll definitely continue doing research before making the leap... I wouldn't like to write them off, not when they make such nice pieces! I've also got my eye on the new Omega speedmaster co-ax though, so we'll see how it goes...


----------



## bigchrisxxxl

I had the same thing happen to me right around the same time as you. They also wanted $700.00 from me to fix the watch although I was able to talk Govberg into giving me a small discount since I had purchased another watch from them in the past. However, I was so upset that a watch that was under a year old (that was expensive) even needed more work that I sold the watch to Govberg. I love IWC style but I need something more reliable. I ended up buying Omega Planet Ocean with the 8500 movement and ceramic bezel, this thing is built like a tank. IWC let me down.


----------



## 60seconds

ReXTless said:


> Did they give you a specific reason for the refusal of warranty service? Seems like information worth pursuing. "Shock damage" is way too vague.


IWC did not provide a definitive explanation for the shock damage. The representative said it could have happened a number of ways such as playing golf, riding a bike, or getting in a car accident. Their response was very vague and disappointing. I didn't wear my IWC playing golf or riding a bike. I have a G Shock.


----------



## 60seconds

I appreciate the thoughtful comments and discussion in this thread. It is clear to me that many of you can relate. The IWC Pilot Chronograph is back on my wrist after 3 months of frustration.


----------



## EvilBendy

60seconds said:


> I appreciate the thoughtful comments and discussion in this thread. It is clear to me that many of you can relate. The IWC Pilot Chronograph is back on my wrist after 3 months of frustration.


I really sympathize. I'm disappointed in IWC and hopei never have to send in my port auto for repair

Has the experience soured you on your watch? That would be the real tragedy after lusting after your grail, saving up for it and finally getting it. IWC should realize that they wanna keep guys like you interested in watches, and in particular, their watches! If it was me, I know myself to be the sort to sell off the offending timepiece and swear off the brand altogether...

But maybe I'm just spiteful!

Current Collection:

Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore Rubberclad

A Lange Sohne Lange 1 Platinum

Jaeger LeCoultre AMVOX II DBS

Jaeger LeCoultre Master Control Chronograph

Hublot Big Bang Rose Gold & Ceramic

IWC Portuguese Automatic

BR 01-94 Phantom XXX/50


----------



## Bondtoys

like anonymousmoose pointed out, we don't know the other (=IWC) side of the story.

I am pretty sure, that all companies (maybe except Rolex) decide in favour or the customer, if in doubt.

A severe shock damage is usually visible by the fact, that the dial is off-center to the movement and then there is hardly the question, if that watch suffered a shock damage.

I haven't seen this watch, but I would assume that something like this (off-center dial) turned up after IWC checked the watch.

If something like this happened, why should IWC repair such a thing free of charge?

@op: I am not accusing you of anything, but we don't know all facts without seeing the watch in flesh.
I am simply speculating what could have happened as from my experience all good watch companies (and that includes IWC) don't easily put down such cases.


----------



## bigchrisxxxl

I know in my case they were really vague and thier was nothing wrong that you could see with your eye in terms of the outside case or face. I only wear my watch to work so I was surprised to hear IWC claim. My watch actualy worked but you could hear the movement on occasion. It really put a sour not for me into IWC.


----------



## vbomega

60seconds said:


> The representative said it could have happened a number of ways such as playing golf, riding a bike, or getting in a car accident.


That's funny. I play tennis and ride my bike without taking off my watches. They never missed a beat. Aren't they rated 5000G's for shock protection?

I find IWC's refusal to repair their watches under warranty absolutely shocking. There is no "other side story". Only customer's.


----------



## Mark Standen

vbomega said:


> That's funny. I play tennis and ride my bike without taking off my watches. They never missed a beat. Aren't they rated 5000G's for shock protection?
> 
> I find IWC's refusal to repair their watches under warranty absolutely shocking. There is no "other side story". Only customer's.


I think I agree, IWC have the opportunity to give their side of the story and are then really vague with you... seems like a weak response to me.

I also think that they are supposed to be g-rated. So to say that you could damage it playing golf seems daft; weren't they made for and worn by world war pilots who were getting into dog fights whilst rattling around inside a small aluminium tube? Surely that would require something that was a bit more robust than something that might break whilst swinging something akin to a thin stick?!


----------



## 60seconds

EvilBendy said:


> I really sympathize. I'm disappointed in IWC and hopei never have to send in my port auto for repair
> 
> Has the experience soured you on your watch? That would be the real tragedy after lusting after your grail, saving up for it and finally getting it. IWC should realize that they wanna keep guys like you interested in watches, and in particular, their watches! If it was me, I know myself to be the sort to sell off the offending timepiece and swear off the brand altogether...
> 
> But maybe I'm just spiteful!
> 
> Current Collection:
> 
> Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore Rubberclad
> 
> A Lange Sohne Lange 1 Platinum
> 
> Jaeger LeCoultre AMVOX II DBS
> 
> Jaeger LeCoultre Master Control Chronograph
> 
> Hublot Big Bang Rose Gold & Ceramic
> 
> IWC Portuguese Automatic
> 
> BR 01-94 Phantom XXX/50


The experience definitely soured me on my watch. Hopefully, this will change with time. It is nice to finally have it back in working order but the customer service experience will not be forgotten.


----------



## 60seconds

Bondtoys said:


> like anonymousmoose pointed out, we don't know the other (=IWC) side of the story.
> 
> I am pretty sure, that all companies (maybe except Rolex) decide in favour or the customer, if in doubt.
> 
> A severe shock damage is usually visible by the fact, that the dial is off-center to the movement and then there is hardly the question, if that watch suffered a shock damage.
> 
> I haven't seen this watch, but I would assume that something like this (off-center dial) turned up after IWC checked the watch.
> 
> If something like this happened, why should IWC repair such a thing free of charge?
> 
> @op: I am not accusing you of anything, but we don't know all facts without seeing the watch in flesh.
> I am simply speculating what could have happened as from my experience all good watch companies (and that includes IWC) don't easily put down such cases.


The dial was not off center and there was nothing visually wrong other than the chronograph hand being stuck. The AD gladly repaired the watch, free of charge, and did not mention any abuse.


----------



## Bondtoys

... and you read and understood my post?



Bondtoys said:


> like anonymousmoose pointed out, *we don't know the other (=IWC) side of the story*.





Bondtoys said:


> am pretty sure, *that all companies (maybe except Rolex) decide in favour or the customer, if in doubt*.





Bondtoys said:


> @op: *I am not accusing you of anything*, but we don't know all facts without seeing the watch in flesh.
> I am simply speculating what could have happened as from my experience *all good watch companies (and that includes IWC) don't easily put down such cases.*


----------



## EvilBendy

I own JLCs and an IWC

But recently I took one of my JLCs for repair to the richmont service center of the date mechanism - it had to go back to Switzerland I was told...

Anyway a few weeks later they let me know they would repair it for free  outside of warranty - gotta love that 

So anyway a tribute to a great company that stands behind their watches...an of course I love JLC even more now!


----------



## vbomega

EvilBendy said:


> I own JLCs and an IWC
> 
> But recently I took one of my JLCs for repair to the richmont service center of the date mechanism - it had to go back to Switzerland I was told...
> 
> Anyway a few weeks later they let me know they would repair it for free  outside of warranty - gotta love that
> 
> So anyway a tribute to a great company that stands behind their watches...an of course I love JLC even more now!


JLC is one of the greatest watchmaking companies, on the same level as PP, AP and VC. You should be proud to own their timepiece.


----------



## CH-dmath

Something that I think got lost in this very long thread: a big thumbs up to the OP's AD for stepping up. If I were him I might be soured on IWC but I'd likely be a faithful customer of that dealer. I wonder if their sales staff might be more likely to gently steer customers toward other brands in the future.

As for IWC, I think that they really should have tried to work with 60seconds. If they are going to refuse warranty service I think it's incumbent upon them to be more definitive than saying that something must have happened. What proof did they offer? Sounds more like a hunch to me. Many, many companies underestimate the necessity of good customer service. I assume it's because the customer service department is much more likely to be a cost center than a profit center. It's an unfortunate consequence of the continual pursuit of the quarterly bottom line. Long-term thinking (such as customer loyalty) is sacrificed on the altar of short-term profits. It's a shame really.


----------

