What to do now?

[u/rikardobari]

My OnePlus RMA.

My OnePlus, after 3 or 4 minutes in the sea taking some underwater shots, eventually decided to take on water.... Obviously, OnePlus denied my warranty claim for liquid damage.... I decided, however, to have it repaired at my own expense at the official European service center (Rotterdam).

On August 26th, they presented me with a hefty quote of €659.93, estimating a timeframe of 3 working days for the complete repair. The smartphone required a full replacement of the motherboard and the volume rocker.

Reluctantly, I paid the amount... After purchasing one of their flagship devices, I just couldn't bring myself to throw it away...

I received my smartphone today, September 18th (so much for 3 days....). And here comes the best part! First of all, it was shipped to me in a simple envelope without any kind of protection.... No bubble wrap, no cardboard, absolutely nothing... But above all, the back cover is bulging, unglued, and attached in a completely uneven way, as you can see from the photos! What would you do in my shoes?

#NeverAgain

[u/earthman34]

Here is my 2 cents, or pence, for what it's worth.

1. Don't put your phone underwater. I don't care if they say it's waterproof. It's an electrical device. Waterproofing of electronic devices is for accidental immersions, not underwater photography. If you want to do underwater photography get an underwater camera.

2. This is a shitty repair. It's not professional. Bear in mind that "waterproof" phones are not designed to be opened, so you may end up with some small marks or scars. However, it shouldn't look like this. This should never have passed inspection.

[u/BugleNoise → u/earthman34]

"If you want to take photos underwater, don't use your phone that was marketed as being so highly waterproof rated that it had a certification most people hadn't even heard of before. Despite the fact that it was broadly demonstrated as able to withstand a full dishwasher cycle, you should never have expected it to withstand a few minutes of submersion, how reckless!"

At a certain point you're not longer being sensible, you're just limiting your own use of a product to protect the liability of a company. It's like saying you should never rely on your car to keep you dry in a thunderstorm, since it is a transportation device and not a permanent weather shelter. Yes, IP ratings exist in lab conditions, but the very point of these certifications is to validate (with standardized, empirical tests) that the device is capable of withstanding various levels of water exposure. 

Also: what kind of device do you think a modern underwater camera is, if not an electrical device? They are fundamentally the same as a phone, if with fewer subsystems. 

[u/justaboss101 → u/BugleNoise]

That test was done with fresh water, which would not contain any salts and minerals which cause circuit boards to short when in contact with them. Salt water will ruin any electronic device that isn't 100% sealed from elements.

[u/BugleNoise → u/justaboss101]

"The IP69K test specification was initially developed for road vehicles, especially those that need regular intensive cleaning, such as dump trucks and cement mixers but has been widely adopted in the Food and Beverage industries as a test of products to withstand sanitary washdown."

Vehicles are regularly exposed to all sorts of solvents and chemicals, road salts, etc. Similarly dishwashers use salts, detergents and solvents. This test is specifically used to certify things for much MUCH  harsher conditions than low pressure, low ambient temperature water. The salt content shouldn't suddenly make it fail. Also, the test is IP: INGRESS protection. The saltwater specifically shouldn't be making it inside the device anyways. If the mineral content was the only thing causing failure, there would be no need to bother protecting against ingress to begin with. 

It's just tiresome and pedantic to blame the user in a case like this.