Repositioning on Dexcom warranty

Dexcom has revised their own interpretation of their product warranty.

I have used a number of G4 and G5’s over the last 5+ years. I recently had technical problems with my G5. I received that G5 in May 2019, so I had it only 3 months when these issues started happening. I had been in touch with Dexcom tech support a couple of times. When it looked like they might have to replace my G5, the tech support person asked me for the serial number. Upon providing it, tech support told me that it was out of warranty. I was shocked to hear that. I told him that I only had the device for 3 months and the warranty is supposed to be for 1 year. He said that the Dexcom warranty for the “receiver device” states that the warranty starts when the device is shipped from Dexcom. But what if the device is shipped to an intermediary/medical supplier like Byram or McKesson and is stored in their inventory before getting sent to an end user? He said it doesn’t matter whether it was shipped to a distributor’s warehouse or directly to the end user, the 1 year warranty starts when it is shipped. And in my case, since the device was shipped to a distributor’s warehouse in 2018, my particular device happened to be out of warranty even before I received it. Sound crazy?

I made a few calls to Dexcom tech support and their sales dept on subsequent days and they all repeated what the first tech support person quoted me. I ended up speaking to a tech support supervisor and he repeated it, as well.

I then wrote a letter to Dexcom’s General Counsel with copies to all of their senior executives about this self serving interpretation of their product warranty. I received a call from a executive from their General Counsel’s office. After discussing the issue, he admitted that all of their staffs had given me mistaken information about the 1 year warranty. He told me that the 1 year warranty starts when the user receives the device. He said that their staffs were reading the warranty literally. Actually, I don’t blame their staffs. The warranty is written that way.

In the end, he apologized for the misinterpretation of what they intended
their warranty to mean. He said that his legal team would be reviewing the wording of the warranty for revisions intended to clarify what a user can expect from Dexcom. They will also review the matter with all of their staffs to clarify what the warranty is.

As a result, Dexcom shipped me a new G5 and reassured me that I would have a one year warranty from the date I received it. I would recommend that if anyone has what Dexcom believes is a defective receiver, be careful about accepting the explanation that the 1 year warranty started when it was shipped. Remember, if a distributor or intermediary medical equipment supplier was involved, the warranty doesn’t start when Dexcom ships it to them. Instead, the warranty starts when you receive the device. Hopefully, Dexcom will amend their written documentation and staff training to reflect what I was promised.

15 Likes

Things are in flux over there. Thanks for posting.

1 Like

Thank you for that @George49 I’m glad you got it straightened out. How could a warranty start when you don’t even have it yet and it’s new and unused??? That’s just ridiculous!

1 Like

Wow. Unreal.

1 Like

a) Of course they were “reading it literally.” How else were they supposed to “read” it?

b) “Read” in quotation marks, because for something like this they aren’t actually consulting the text of the warranty and interpreting it, they’re just giving out the scripted answer for this situation, and someone wrote that script. Whatever misunderstanding there was originated higher up the chain, as witnessed by the fact that the supervisor had the same answer.

Hopefully they’ve corrected this internally, and not just in the OP’s case. Might be worth calling Dex support and asking when the warranty term starts just to see if this has propagated down the tech support chain.

1 Like

I like the word “staffs.” Its almost as good as the word “maths.”

1 Like

Yes, using the word staffs would be incorrect grammar but I was trying to convey that the different support within the larger Dexcom company were all saying the say thing. However, I will be more careful going forward. I don’t want to offend purists in the forum group or distract anyone from concentrating on the actual issue at hand.

2 Likes

I plan on following up with queries to Dexcom about their warranty. I do hope that they change the wording of their warranty because that would be the only way to really ensure the accurate handling of cases involving warranty. The sad thing is that a few years ago they told me I had no warranty on a G4 that was defective. Way back when, I just accepted what they had told me about the receiver having no warranty. However, this time around I decided to escalate the matter. Based on my previous experience a few years ago, it appears that they have been saying this to all of their customers for years now. I can’t imagine how many receivers were not covered under warranty when they actually should have been.

2 Likes

Its not a real word? Thanks for telling me. I’m gonna use it anyway. I like it. Good invention. That word should exist.

1 Like

Yes, use it with your other word, maths. If enough people start dissecting the sentences that participants are using to actually discuss living with diabetes, maybe they’ll have to change the name of this forum to TuLexicon.

1 Like

“Maths” and “math” are just alternative contractions of the word “mathematics”, with “maths” being the preferred term in English speaking countries where we are just a tiny bit less lazy and chop out one less letter than you Yanks :slight_smile:

2 Likes