Precor Inc

PRECOR is confusing a simple issuePRECOR and its employees are handling this matter in very bad faith. When I called two additional authorized PRECOR dealers, I was told that I was supposed to get to years out of the belt! I got nowhere near thatWhen I asked one authorized PRECOR dealer, for instance, about whether it was at 2,miles for a belt to fail, the PRECOR specialist at the authorized dealership was shocked by this failure at such low mileage and indicated that this was most certainly not at allI called *** *** *** at *** and was told that I was supposed to get years and at least 10,miles out of the beltI also called *** *** at *** and was told that I should have gotten to years out of that beltAnd yes, both stores were aware that I was referring to the PRECOR 9.31, not the newer models. Even the local and authorized repair-person at *** *** in Avon, Connecticut agrees with me that the first replacement belt did indeed have a manufacturing defectThe split at the seam, per the repair-person, was not due to wear. In fact, here is the exact exchange in audio between the two of us.***: About this replacement one, is that how it's supposed to typically wear after 2,miles, along the seam?Repair-person: NoNot really.***: NoSo, you've never seen it before?Repair-person: I mean, yeah, I've seen it.***: But that's like poor manufacturing?Repair-person: Yeah.***: That's what....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVYvvdhOoSYPRECOR never explained all the conditions under which a belt could failBut to address what PRECOR failed to asked me, I will do so hereThe unit was stored appropriatelyIt was kept in its original position as installed when it first arrived at my residence in It was stored in a temperature and humidity controlled and partially finished basementBut, the key part here is that my complaint is about the replacement belt from 2013, not the belt from And nothing was ever stored on the replacement beltThe replacement belt was used regularly from about to inclusivelyAlso, the belts from 2003, 2013, and 2017, that is to say, all belts the treadmill ever used, were all installed by an authorized PRECOR dealer and installer, *** *** PRECOR was aware that the treadmill had not been used for about years, i.e., from about or so through 2012, due to my illnessMoreover, the local dealer, *** ***, claimed that one should get tens of thousands of miles from this treadmillAlso, PRECOR described the treadmill on par with tires, and tires have a warranty that is according to miles, not yearsRobin, a PRECOR Customer Support Supervisor, on March 29th writes, " Running belts on treadmills are wear items and just like the tires on a car do eventually wear and need to be replaced." Consider: "Many car tires come with a prorated mileage warranty, also called a tread-life warranty, that is often used as a selling pointThink of that mileage limit, generally somewhere between 30,and 100,miles, as a figure highly influenced by a marketing department."The date of discovery of the defect in the belt was not until just recently in late Moreover, per the photograph which I had sent to PRECOR after the defective belt was replaced, the tear in the seam was most noticeable on the underside. The difference in manufacturing between the belt from and the belt from appears to take into account my complaints about the seam because that is where the belt is clearly manufactured differently in than in Also, keep in mind how the repair-person had explained and confirmed that my belt from had a manufacturing defect at the seam where it failedI even provided photos and videos to PRECOR of thisAlso, don't forget how *** *** *** and *** *** both indicated that PRECOR had cheated meIt just wasn't *** *** who felt PRECOR scammed meWe're talking about THREE different PRECOR authorized dealers here who all agree with me.Please issue a full refund for this replacement belt from and a refund for the labor in the amount of $by check

Complaint: ***I am rejecting this response because I am most certainly authorized by Mr*** *** to make decisions about the maintenance of the treadmillWe are the same family and we have lived at the same address as wellIn fact, PRECOR had already verified that I have the authority to make decisions about this treadmillI was the one who authorized the repairs for this treadmill with the local PRECOR dealer on several occassionsThe local PRECOR dealer personally know meEven the local repair-persons for PRECOR have personally known me for years as they are the same individuals who keep on returning due to PRECOR's screw-ups.Moreover, the belt was NOT years oldThat is a lieThe belt was only to years oldTherefore, I am entitled to an additional to years of life for that particular belt ACCORDING TO MULTIPLE PRECOR DEALERSI have been ripped off by PRECOR.The defect in workmanship WAS NOT VISIBLE until late It is not possible for the end-user to view the underside of the beltTherefore, it would be impossible for the defect to be reported within that one yearOnce the defect was discovered, IT WAS REPORTEDAnd the defect was VERIFIED BY MY LOCAL PRECOR DEALER as not just any defect by a MANUFACTURING DEFECT which just became apparent to me, the end-user, now. Let me repeat that MULTIPLE AUTHORIZED PRECOR DEALERS all AGREE with me that the belt was MANUFACTURED defectivelyThat DEFECT first came to my knowledge in late Otherwise, it was hidden from viewHow is any owner or care-taker of the treadmill supposed to view the UNDERSIDE of the belt? That is IMPOSSIBLEI was repeatedly told by DEALER AFTER DEALER that I should have gotten FAR GREATER than 2,miles from the belt and that the belt was MANUFACTURED DEFECTIVELY according to where it tore along the seamPRECOR's 50% "discount" was not in "good will" but rather an admission of guiltI EVEN PROVIDED PRECOR WITH AN AUDIO RECORDING OF THE EXPERT OPINION OF THE REPAIR-PERSONS that the belt in question was MANUFACTURED DEFECTIVELYThat is the one and only model of belt available which is AUTHORIZED for usage with that particular treadmillNo other brand is approved by PRECORSo, that's yet another distraction by PRECOR. Sincerely,*** ***

As previously stated, [redacted] reached out to us on March 26 stating that a replacement running belt installed on a 14 year old treadmill was defective. On March 27, he was advised replacement parts have a one-year warranty and that proof of purchase would be needed to replace the item.  He responded the part was replaced “years ago”.  It was later determined the installation of the part in question was done 4 years ago and completed for and under the registered owners name, not [redacted]. It is our position that if there was a defect in material or workmanship, as he claims, it should have been reported to us within the warranty period or within a reasonable period time. As per the warranty as described in the owner’s manual: Warranty applies to the Precor product “only while it remains in the possession of the original purchaser and proof of purchase is demonstrated”.  [redacted] is not the original/register owner of the treadmill nor was the replacement part he refers to installed under his name. In a gesture of goodwill, we extended an offer to [redacted] to purchase a replacement running belt at a substantial discount.  On April 3rd, he accepted our offer and made the purchase. The only transactional interaction we have with [redacted] is the purchase of a replacement belt on April 3rd, 2017.  We have stated on numerous occasions that if he is dissatisfied with his purchase, he may return it for a refund of the purchase price.

Our first contact regarding this issue came from [redacted] on March 26th stating “I am in need of a new belt for my treadmill and installation but at no cost to me.” Our records indicate this treadmill is 14 years old and although we believe [redacted] to be a relative, he is not the registered...

owner of the treadmill. The warranty on this treadmill was 10 parts, 1 year labor warranty therefore this unit has been out of warranty coverage for several years.    In reviewing our files, we see that the last service call was approximately 4 years ago.  The signed documents on file from 2013, acknowledges satisfactory completion of the work performed, which included installation of replacement parts.  In reaching out to us, [redacted] informed us that the treadmill was essentially unused for many years.  He offered no explanation as to how, when or under what condition the belt started to split at a seam, only that it started to split so it has to be a manufacturing defect. We explained there could be several reason, other than normal usage, that might cause a seam to start splitting.  Issues such as: how long, where and under what conditions the unit was stored, was something stored on it, how long did it sit in a stagnant position, was the belt properly tensioned, how was the belt cleaned, what was used to clean the belt, etc.  We informed [redacted] that with the information presented we could not speculate as to the exact cause, especially since the service request was 4 years ago.    As a gesture of good will, we offered to sell him a replacement belt at a substantial discount.  He accepted our offer and on April 3rd we processed an order for him for the replacement belt. On April 12th he reached out to us saying he received the replacement belt.  He indicated that since the replacement belt is not exactly the same as the one on the treadmill, he feels it indicates, “there was an inferior quality to the previously manufactured” belt. April 13th we responded explaining that a change on a part or product does not indicate inferior quality or a defect. It could simply indicate that over a period of several years there may have been a change in vendor, materials and/or technology.  (Think about your cell phone. If you had to replace it today, would it be the exact same phone, technology and service coverage you had 4 years ago?) We informed him that if he was dissatisfied with the belt he received, he could return it for a full refund. He responded that he would not be returning the belt.