The Breitling Watch Source Forums

as i mentioned in an earlierpost, the stem pulled completley out of my steelfish when i went to adjust the time. i put the stem back in and it is working. i pulled the strap off and the case was marked 1510 B5. if i am correct, this would make the watch built the 15th week of 2010. i bought the watch pre-owned. would it still be under warranty? thanks

_________________
rolex ss sub
rolex milgauss white dial
omega speedy pro

Yes it would be under warranty IF (and only IF) you have the warranty card. I'm guessing you don't or else you wouldn't have needed to check the intra-lug numbers for the date.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

The warranty runs from the date of original purchase, not date of manufacture. That said, obviously the watch can't be sold before it is manufactured, and since we're not two years out from the time of manufacture - to say nothing of the sale date - it would theoretically be under the original warranty based purely on time considerations. However, it's only under warranty if it was originally purchased from an authorized Breitling dealer, who would have included the warranty card with the paperwork given to the original purchaser. If you don't have the warranty card (and it sounds like you don't), it's a good bet the original purchaser didn't buy it from an AD. Fortunately, if what Sharkman said in your other thread is correct, it is a simple and inexpensive repair.

Driver, is it strictly necessary for a person to be in possession of the warranty card in order to get service covered under the warranty? I imagine it is possible for people to lose their warranty cards, yet still be entitled to warranty service on watches legitimately purchased from ADs. If so, then the absence of a warranty card in the OP's case would seem to be more an indicator of the lack of warranty coverage, rather than an automatic dealbreaker, yes?

Without a warranty card Breitling is within their rights to deny warranty service. In reality, if the owner can demonstrate proof of purchase from an AD (a receipt) then they will likely cover it. As a second owner, that's not likely to apply either.

Given that the watch was produced less than 2 years ago then you might have a case if Breitling / distributor records show that the watch was sold by a reputable AD.

Wait..I've never seen a warranty card. I've bought once from Tourneau and twice from a Breitling boutique in the USVI....

I have the COSC cert, box, manual, etc...but no warranty cards?

The warranty card is in the booklet where the AD's name is stamped. It's basically just the back cover, it's not like a card or anything like that.

_________________
Justin
Please contact me via PM for the contact details for Govberg Jewelers
Govberg is an AD for over 50 fine Swiss and German watch brands.
Visit them on the web at http://www.govbergwatches.com or call 800-528-8463

Got it. That's what I always thought..but then "card" confused me. I was expecting some sort of plastic card or something of the sort.

Thanks! Sorry about the hijack!

Roff covered it I think, but possession of the correctly filled in warranty card is the only way to guarantee that Breitling will honour a warranty claim. Of course, the fact that the manufacture date is inside the two year warranty period, may (and I stress "may") mean that Breitling could be persuaded to honour a claim assuming that it could be proved that the watch was obtained from an AD in the first place. Anything's possible, just like I guess if the guy checking in the watches at the Breitling service centre was feeling particularly charitable one day, he might sign a watch in as under warranty when it clearly wasn't! Anything can happen I suppose............, but IMO the only way to guarantee a warranty claim is to own the correctly completed warranty card. Anything else is going to be down to chance.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

Just sharing my experience regarding my Navi 01 LE and it's missing warranty card, however don't take it for granted. as I'm not sure if this is a general practice or if they are nice to me as I had 3 watches fully serviced there in the last 3 months.
Breitling distributor in Taiwan who are also an autorised service centre had a record of the watch being sold in Taiwan through an AD.
Based on that plus my receipt they confirmed that they would honour a warranty claim.
They were willing to honour it even without an AD's receipt but in this case from the date they supplied it to the AD.
Not sure if this is a general practice or if they are just nice to me as I had 3 watches fully serviced there in the last 3 months.

_________________
"It is just a matter of time!"

Forgive my soapbox, but I honestly think that's a lousy policy. I know Roff said that in cases where an owner can prove a bona fide purchase from an AD, and that the watch is still within the warranty period, Breitling will "likely" honor the claim. In my opinion, though, "likely" should not enter into it. The card is just a representation of the warranty; it's not the warranty itself. What if my house burned down while I was away (while wearing my Breitling), and I had no more paperwork? I'm no less entitled to warranty coverage, and the loss of the card does not change Breitling's obligations to make good on defects in their product. I would be angry if Breitling acted like they were doing me some kind of favor by honoring the warranty under such circumstances. It seems to me the policy should be that as long as there is a way to verify the watch is under warranty (sales records, etc.), Breitling shall (not "may") honor it.

End rant.

My thought was always...every AD (that I've purchased from) records the serial numbers in their database. If you can remember where you bought it, and they're still open, I'm sure there is a way to prove that the watch was purchased from XXX on XX/XX/XXXX day @ XX:XX time. They have to keep records too. It's not like once they give you the watch they don't care about it anymore. That stuff is all recorded.

My thought, too. I can't think of a more backwards way of doing business in the electronic age than Breitling's insistence on possession of the card. Most products you buy have some statement of warranty, but it's for the purposes of informing the consumer of the policy, not for the consumer to prove existence of the warranty should he seek to invoke it. If I take my car in to the dealership for a warranty repair, I don't need to present proof of warranty. The VIN is on file in a database; they check it out, verify the warranty, and make the repairs. The warranty card is not a practical necessity anymore; it's essentially ornamentation. That Breitling would actually attach some significance to it to the extent that they say they are no longer obligated to provide warranty coverage in its absence is, frankly, stupid.

Agreed.

I don't think the question is whether Breitling is "obligated". That's a question regarding whether the contract requires the warranty booklet for warranty service, and would matter if the issue were litigated. As with many issues that aren't economically worthwhile to litigate, it comes down to who's holding the cards, and what they wish to do. One would hope that a company would be willing to follow the terms of its contract, but hopes are not always realized.

Looking at my warranty booklet, it seems that the warranty terms require this booklet for warranty service, and that the booklet must be fully completed, and signed by the AD. I'm guessing that some folks have received warranty service with booklets lacking a signature, and perhaps other details. In any case, these warranty terms may be considered binding terms of the retail contract for sale of the subject watch, though different jurisdictions may have consumer protection laws regarding contract terms. It could be an interesting question involving laws of several jurisdictions on any given contract, as long as my meter's running.

I wasn't disputing the nature of Breitling's obligation. I know that if the terms of the warranty specify that a customer must have the warranty card/booklet in order to procure warranty service, Breitling can enforce those terms, assuming they are not in violation of a given jurisdiction's consumer protection laws. My main point was about whether it was a good idea for Breitling to have that sort of policy in the first place. To me, the policy makes no sense.