D&M Holdings US Inc.

I am rejecting this response because: I did not request for my receiver to be shipped to be evaluated, Denon did I was not notified that I would be responsible for the return shipment back to meOtherwise I would not have spent the money to have it in the same broken condition it is still inI cannot see how a company leads a customer into worse situation then they were in and call it a favor

We have set up a product exchange with the customerA prepaid Fedex shipping label was sent via email on 12/8/Once he drops off the defective receiver at a Fedex location, we will ship him a replacementThe warehouse is in the same state as the customer, turnaround time will take 1-business
days onlyThis is our standard exchange policy, we offered this same solution back in March and customer failed to use the prepaid shipping label prior to it expiringIf customer wants us to ship the replacement in advance, then we would need a credit card # just to put a hold for the amount of the replacementA shipping label would be provided for this as well, and no charge will remain as long as the defective unit is returned within days

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
---------------------------------------------------------7/16/@Revdex.com Many thanks for supporting this issue, and I am Okay to close this caseI've been a big fun of excellent sounds which Denon (Japanese Based Company) generates, for more than 20+ yrs, even before the merger by D&M Holdings Inc., but the fact was the Denon headphones (AH-C& AH-C400) that I owned broke times in years, and no warrantyIt seems that their insincere response does not change. Let's finish thisI would accept the full refund.Thanks again Revdex.com.Kind regards,

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your
acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID *** and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Regards,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: While the AVR-Emet the 4k standard at the time of engineering/design, those standards have evolved and consumers of your '4k compliant product' are unable to use it for all 4k content, particularly the newer HDCP standardYour product continues to be advertised on your website today as supporting 4k even though your own response admits it does not meet today's standards for 4kThere is no language stating that HDCP is not supported and as a result consumers of your product are falsely led to believe that by purchasing your product they will be able to use it for all of today's 4k content.While I agree it is difficult to 'future proof' your products, it is irresponsible and misleading to not update your advertised performance specifications for your products as these standards evolveWhen a loyal customer brings this to your attention, you not only refuse to replace with a model compliant to today's standards, but you continue to falsely advertise your product as having this capability
Regards,
*** ***

We contacted Mr*** via email on July 1, and informed him that his claims are not valid as they could not be reproduced from both our Engineering Deptand in our testing facility here at the corporate officesWe also provided the option of having the unit in question (AV8801) evaluated under warranty by an authorized service facility if he feels the unit is not performing to his expectationsWe have yet to receive a response from Mr*** after sending the email on July 1,

I agree to proceed with the company's offer for a replacement, but I want to verify that the unit will be replaced before we close the compliant.

Customer's unit was shipped in to our service center and was received damaged. Notes in the customers profile indicated he didn't want any repairs done and to return the unit as is. Unit was shipped back to the customer and according to UPS the package was delivered to the customer. Customer complained that the unit was not left at his front door as per the UPS notes. We are going to have a refurbished AVR-X2100W shipped to the customer.

Customer purchased headphones from Amazon in January and unfortunately broke within 5 months. Under the terms of our warranty we would exchange them for the same pair of one of equivalent paid price value. The customer was offered another model, which was an upgrade for the model he had trouble...

with. Customer refused, so we are going ahead and offering a full refund based on the price the customer paid for the headphones which is $130. Customer also states that the history of correspondence was deleted from our service portal, which is a false accusation. The history of the correspondence does indeed show. Starting with his email sent on 7/6/15 right through to our response back to the customer on 7/9/15 stating the following: We've offered a full refund which shows that we are standing by our warranty. The AHC400 is no longer available and we do not have an equivalent pair of headphones available. The refund process will begin.

Mr. [redacted] sent an email to customer support on 4/28/17 at at 2:01pm EST. Our customer service representative responded asking for more info the same day at 3:32pm EST. We have no email response from Mr. [redacted] on record, and no further attempts to contact us after this point. The reason...

we did not receive his response is unknown, but this is the cause of the delay in support. We have asked the customer service representative to call Mr. [redacted] to resume the conversation and work to resolve his issue. The customer service representative was instructed to provide a pre-paid shipping label to send his product for warranty repair if it is determined to be necessary. If Mr. [redacted]’s product is no longer in warranty as of today’s date (8/9/17), but was still under warranty on the date he contacted us about his issue (4/28/17), we will honor the warranty based on that date.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it...

before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.Denon went above and beyond in fixing the situation, not only are they exchanging the receiver for a new one, but they were willing to send it next day air from California. Thank you Denon for fixing this issue.
Regards,
[redacted]

It is correct that the AVR-E400 it supports 4k Ultra HD resolutions, and is able to upscale lower resolutions to 4k as well. This is not false or misleading advertisement. In recent years the HDMI standard has changed and the current products which output 4K require a new HDMI standard (HDMI 2.0a...

with HDCP 2.2 content protection). The newer HDCP 2.2 standard is not supported by this older model. We should emphasize that these standards did not exist when the AVR-E400 was designed / engineered and therefore are not supported in that model. This is commonplace within the consumer electronics industry. Consumer electronics technologies will advance with new features and standards being released, which older models will not support. While we do our best to “future proof” our products, it is impossible to do so indefinitely.

Our technicians have been in contact with Mr. [redacted] and at this point it appears we have identified the problem as a communication issue between the connected HDMI devices. Because this is not a problem specifically with the Denon receiver, previous attempts to repair the receiver have not...

shown positive results. As of the last communication we received from Mr. [redacted] (7/27) he confirmed that the problem goes away under specific circumstances with further help to identify a HDMI communication issue. Our technician recommended a solution but at this time it is not confirmed if this has resolved the problem. We will follow up with Mr. [redacted] to confirm. It is understood that much of the complaint is about the frustration of troubleshooting this issue, and poor communication. We have reviewed the case and have identified improvement opportunities which we will be sure to focus on, as we are always striving for excellence and continuous improvement in the customer experience.

Customer has been contacted and we have offered a replacement.

Our warranty team is currently working with Mr. [redacted] to ensure that his issue is resolved in a timely manner, and that he is completely satisfied with his Denon product.

Customer contacted us on 8/28. The notes in his case state that the turntable had been to service but deemed unrepairable. Customer is frustrated that he purchased the turntable from an unauthorized dealer via Amazon and was charged for service and now wants a replacement. As per the Denon warranty:...

Except as specified below, this Warranty covers all defects in material and workmanship in this product occurring during the above warranty periods. The following are not covered by the Warranty: (1) Any product which is not distributed in the U.S.A. by DENON ELECTRONICS (USA), LLC. (2) Any product which is not purchased in the U.S.A. from an authorized DENON dealer. The entire warranty can be viewed at the following download link: [redacted]

they credited my account last night. Can you please update therecord that I'm very satisfied with their response. Thanks again foryour help on this.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
Denon sent me a replacement device for the defective...

unit. Thank you for your help in resolving this matter.
Regards,
[redacted]

The customer's case has been escalated internally and we have reached out to offer additional troubleshooting, and trade-in options if the customer would like to upgrade to a new product. At this time the case is not yet resolved as we are waiting for his response, and hope to resolve the matter...

shortly.

The AVR-E400 is not available for sale as it has been out of production for several years, and is not currently advertised. We do keep the original product pages for most products available for reference, and these pages are not updated to reflect changing technologies. The customer purchased the AVR-E400 over 3 years ago. In this case an older product does not support current standards, which we cannot accept as a reasonable impetus for refund or direct replacement. A good faith effort to satisfy the customer has been made by our customer support team. In August 2017, our support team offered a generous discount to upgrade to a new AVR-S730H. The discount offered exceeds the value of an AVR-E400 with 3 years of use, but this offer was refused. Our customer support team will be happy to honor that upgrade offer and we invite the customer to contact us directly to re-open his support ticket and resume that discussion.