Rappahannock IT, LLC

Hi,In regard to Revdex.com Case # [redacted], we have already issued a public response to this customer but they continue to stretch the truth and obscure facts in regards to the case.The customer in question brought us an [redacted] for a screen replacement. We advised them when they first brought it in...

that the phone was noticeably bent, and that the issue their screen was experiencing looks like a software issue such as damage to the main internal logic board on the device causing a display malfunction. Considering the phone was bent in the upper right corner, which happens to be where all the internal connectors for the screen, earpiece, camera, and digitizer are located, it was evident their was stress on these components and their connectors at the location of the bend. The customer acknowledged this, and we performed a successful screen replacement on their phone. Upon completion, the screen was able to work and function correctly.After completion, the customer noted that their earpiece and camera did not work. This can happen due to damage to the internal ribbon cable that connects these parts to the main logic board, so to help resolve the issue in the chance that it was an installation error, we replaced these components at no cost to the customer. After performing replacements on all those parts, the earpiece successfully worked, but the ribbon cable for the front camera still no longer worked. After testing these components in another phone, we deemed that the components themselves were not damaged or faulty, but that it was the internal logic board to the phone instead. This is evidently caused by the amount of stress all 3 connectors in the upper right area of the phone internally are under, due to the fact that the phone was bent before it was brought to us. An iPhone is not meant to bend, and although the metal casing on the outside is able to bend under stress, the internal circuits do not bend, therefore they are damaged internally by the aluminum casing putting that stress on them.We denied a refund to the customer because the service that was requested, a screen replacement, was performed successfully. The pre-existing damage to the phone was determined to be the cause of the earpiece and front camera not working. We resolved the earpiece issue at no cost to the customer to hopefully help satisfy them, but upon them hearing the news that there's nothing we could do about the pre-existing internal damage, something that only Apple can perform a repair or replacement on, the customer's husband got very hostile and disrespectful.Our owner who was corresponding with the customer, Cody, was very professional and remained calm and attempted to advise the customer on the best course of action, but the customer insisted angrily that the pre-existing damage was our company's fault. The husband repeatedly yelled "This [redacted] was fine before I brought it here", which is clearly an inaccurate statement because nobody would have a reason to bring a phone in to a repair shop if it was "fine". While it is unfortunate that the pre-existing damage to the phone made some features not work, that was much of the same issue that they were having when they brought it in. When they first brought it in, their screen was malfunctioning and encountering intermittent glitches, due to a bad connection to the main logic board having damaged the screen assembly. The customer requested we replace the screen, and that's the service we provided. Rather than us causing any damage to the phone, the issue with the main logic board just began to affect the earpiece and camera assembly rather than the screen assembly. The two connectors are right next to each other internally, so this assessment makes complete sense that the same stress that the screen was under and was damaged by then effected the front camera/earpiece ribbon assembly.When we informed the customer of this information, the husband got very hostile and aggressive. He proceeded to shove Cody, who was holding the customer's phone out to them, snatching it out of Cody's hand. This action was witnessed by two employees, and was caught in a recording. The customer walked around our entire office space, including employee-only areas without permission, disrupting our workplace. We insisted the customer leave, and they began to yell "Call the cops! I ain't scared of no cops!". No employee called the cops while the customer and their husband was in our business, because everyone was focused on trying to calm the customer and have them leave the premises, and ensure that no further physical altercation were to happen against our employees. As the customer left, they threw open both of our doors, damaging our hallway wall in one location. After they were left and we watched them drive away from the premises, we contacted [redacted] City Police Department's non-emergency line to formally file a police report about the situation. We shared the evidence with the responding officer, and the case is still being followed up on. Once the officer called the customer for their side of the story, the customer proceeded to post defamatory remarks about our business and our employees on their social media, calling them such things as "[redacted]" and "sorry a** people", and denying the assault charges.In conclusion, while it's unfortunate that the customer had pre-existing damage to their device that we weren't able to fix, and that the symptoms of the internal damage went from affecting the screen to affecting the camera and earpiece ribbon assembly, the customer's claims that we damaged those components is simply not factual. The connections for both of those parts are adjacent to each other internally, so the stress created by the bend in the phone is the root cause of the customer's issues. In short, while the customer wanted a screen replacement and that's the service that we provided them, the same underlying problem with their device from before they brought it to us is still there, causing their issues and frustration. As such, considering we performed the service that was requested, we do not deem a refund is in question for this situation.In addition, for the complaint's Disputed Amount, the total price that the customer paid was $[redacted], not $[redacted]. Our standard rate for [redacted] screen replacements is $[redacted], but as the customer paid cash for the service, we deducted the $[redacted] for them.With kind regards,George B[redacted]Managing Director, Rappahannock IT[redacted]|www.rappahannockit.com