BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SteveClifton" data-source="post: 1899701" data-attributes="member: 48420">Don, I agree, perhaps that came across as harsh, and if it did then I apologise. Not my business to cast judgement on the state of your bins.There does however seem to be a discrepancy between what you described as 'needing minor work' and 'lightly scratched', and what Swaro's technicians described as 'heavily scratched' to the extent that all 4 exposed lenses needed replacing.I suppose when you post your experiences on public forums you have to expect some reponses that you agree with and others that you don't. Sorry if my response was the first of the latter, but I'm sure others were thinking it too based on the info available from yourself and Dale.I do take your point about service appearing to vary somewhat, and I haven't read all posts right back to the beginning of this thread, but the technicians must work to a set of criteria that dictates whether charges are made or not (perhaps Dale can comment on this?).Whether we agree to call it 'exceptional' or 'very good' service, I still think you got a good deal, and presumably you could have opted not to have the glass replaced at cost to yourself if you felt it unnecessary?Best of luck with getting your bins back safely,Steveedit: I have now read back to the beginning of this thread and can only find one case (David Blake's) where it seemed Swaro tried to charge for anything other than repair/replacement due to faulty workmanship/materials, and none where free work was carried out due to obvious misuse or carelessness on the part of the owner. In David's case he said he hadn't dropped his bins, and it could be that Swaro made a judgement call on his bins that was wrong (human error?), or alternatively David could have dropped or bumped his bins (or someone else did) without him realizing? If they weren't damaged obviously (even internally) I'm not sure why they would try to charge him?Either way I think there is consistency in their service as far as I can see, and to their credit when they do get it wrong (they do appear to have a slight communication issue in some cases-nothing unusual about that) or are clearly responsible they do give exceptional service in almost every case I've heard of.</blockquote>

Verification