Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hi all,

After 2 months, just received a watch back from Tag service UK. Sent in for a new battery but was told after it'd been inspected that it needed a full quartz movement overhaul. This included a 'Case and bracelet cleaning in ultrasonic vibration'. Full details - http://customer-service.tagheuer.com/en-gb/service/complete-quartz-overhaul-0

Whilst its an older model and had some case/glass scratching from wear and tear when I sent it off, unfortunately it's been returned and now the black bezel (think this is the right term) now has what looks like 'pitting' or something all over - one quarter looks really bad. Basically the black finish looks like its been partially removed. Quite shocked that it was just returned in this condition without any advance warning. Looks a right mess. Also, if the cleaning has caused this, I was not given any indication of there being any risk that it could have this affect.

They have asked me to return it, which I will, but I'd be interested to hear views on this i.e. could the ultrasonic cleaning have caused this or something else?

Thoughts? Thanks.....

 

IMG_3056.jpg

Posted

Could have been the ultrasonic cleaning, almost looks like someone took some solvent to it! They certainly owe you a new bezel insert.

Good luck!

Posted

agree with dadistic, it is a shame how it was returned to you like this. I hope you made some photos before you send it to Tag. A normal battery swap would have cost around 20 dollar max at a local watchmaker, a full service at Tag is a different story, who can garantee the full service was necessary....Due to some experiences I lost my faith in these inspections as 9 out of 10 they come out advicing a full service.....

Posted
50 minutes ago, dadistic said:

Could have been the ultrasonic cleaning, almost looks like someone took some solvent to it! They certainly owe you a new bezel insert.

Good luck!

Thanks! 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Watchtime said:

agree with dadistic, it is a shame how it was returned to you like this. I hope you made some photos before you send it to Tag. A normal battery swap would have cost around 20 dollar max at a local watchmaker, a full service at Tag is a different story, who can garantee the full service was necessary....Due to some experiences I lost my faith in these inspections as 9 out of 10 they come out advicing a full service.....

It's given good service for many years, so I thought I'd treat it to a full overhaul after talking to TAG. It went for a battery but after inspection they told me there was excessive battery drain so they recommended the full overhaul. No mention at the time that them cleaning it as part of the overhaul could damage it (if this indeed was the cause). Now wished I hadn't bothered!

Posted

Really surprised that they sent it back like that, usually I'd remove the bracelet to be cleaned in the ultrasonic tank and clean around the bezel with some swabs, mild cleaning solvent and some brushing. I know that the bezels (have done it on my Tag before) can be removed but I think this proves an unnecessary risk to the bezel clip/spring when just for cleaning purposes as parts aren't readily available or cost a fortune!

 

I'd definitely write to Tag demanding a new bezel, I'm sure they've got a fair few lying about...

 

Regards,

Chris

Posted

To me, it is beyond belief that Tag would ever send a watch back in this condition.  That they would even damage a watch like this is unfathomable.  I could see this from a novice watchmaker with little or no experience in watch cleaning procedures, but wasn't this a professional Tag service center?  Shameful...

  • Like 1
Posted

Ultrasonic cleaning for sure. THEY will have to replace the bezel or bezel insert. Another very poor service indeed.
My nephew put his Rotary in for a battery 
change. Unfortunately who ever did the change did not appreciate it had a screw down crown & stripped the thread of the crown. Lucky for him uncle Del fixed it. 

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, ChrisWheeler said:

Really surprised that they sent it back like that, usually I'd remove the bracelet to be cleaned in the ultrasonic tank and clean around the bezel with some swabs, mild cleaning solvent and some brushing. I know that the bezels (have done it on my Tag before) can be removed but I think this proves an unnecessary risk to the bezel clip/spring when just for cleaning purposes as parts aren't readily available or cost a fortune!

 

I'd definitely write to Tag demanding a new bezel, I'm sure they've got a fair few lying about...

 

Regards,

Chris

Thanks Chris. I'll be in touch next time the battery needs replacing! To be fair, when I phoned TAG I just got the call handler and they just asked for it to be returned. I'll see what they say once they've looked at it.

I was just trying to get a sense of whether the cleaning could have caused this and whether the bezel/case/bracelet would routinely go into whatever is involved in ultrasonic cleaning. 

Regards Jon

Posted
59 minutes ago, clockboy said:

Ultrasonic cleaning for sure. THEY will have to replace the bezel or bezel insert. Another very poor service indeed.
My nephew put his Rotary in for a battery 
change. Unfortunately who ever did the change did not appreciate it had a screw down crown & stripped the thread of the crown. Lucky for him uncle Del fixed it. 

Thanks. That was my gut feeling tho I've no idea what the cleaning actually involves or if the bezel would routinely be included (as well as the bracelet/case) and if so, whether anyone else has experienced this. 

Posted

Putting plastic/nylon parts in watch cleaning machines or ultra sonic machines is not recommended. The solvents can often cause issues such as what has happened to the bezel. The issue you might have is proving it was OK before the service. 

  • Like 1
Posted

I find this all very strange and find it hard to believe that an official TAG repair lab caused the damage.  Surely if anyone knows how a TAG case should be cleaned it would be them.

Posted

It's not the first time that I hear about official service centers to do unnecessary service and/or damage to watches.

In this case I suspect carelessly left the bezel face down an high power U/S cleaner and caused abrasion damage. These business are staffed by employees that do not have to repond personally for what they do, unlike an indipendent watchmaker. One would have to go through the hassle of taking pictures of watch and send these together with it. Sounds obsessive but that's how it is.

 

 

Posted

Unbelievable. Hard to tell from the photos weather it's abrasive damage or the bezel insert finish has shattered under the cleaning process. Even before and after photos would have little legal relevance unless they were taken in front of a creditable independent witness at the time of sending the watch off for service.
Problem with taking a watch to an independent watchmaker is knowing one. Most jewellers these days, once seeing an expensive brand name, will just simply send you away.
If that's the service you received it is shameful

Sent from my SM-T585 using Tapatalk

Posted
15 hours ago, clockboy said:

Ultrasonic cleaning for sure. THEY will have to replace the bezel or bezel insert. Another very poor service indeed.
My nephew put his Rotary in for a battery 
change. Unfortunately who ever did the change did not appreciate it had a screw down crown & stripped the thread of the crown. Lucky for him uncle Del fixed it. 

Now there is a nice uncle....I am sure your nephew is happy, Del.:thumbsu:

Posted

The sad thing is that these are the outfits that the likes of Swatch group et al insist know best what they are doing and are seeking to ensure that all their watches go to by closing off the supply of parts to independents.

 

  • Like 2
Posted
13 hours ago, Geo said:

I find this all very strange and find it hard to believe that an official TAG repair lab caused the damage.  Surely if anyone knows how a TAG case should be cleaned it would be them.

Absolutely agree, hence our shock on receiving it back like this. I originally posted as I just do not understand how this could have happened or what processes they use that may have caused this. 

Clearly problems can occur and they have asked for the watch back so let's see what they say.

Posted
11 hours ago, jdm said:

In this case I suspect carelessly left the bezel face down an high power U/S cleaner and caused abrasion damage. 

I totally agree with this.

11 hours ago, digginstony said:

Even before and after photos would have little legal relevance unless they were taken in front of a creditable independent witness at the time of sending the watch off for service.

Most photos are digital these days and the imbedded Exif file (Extended Image Format) hold all the information relating to the image including when and where  it was taken.

  • Like 1
Posted

Wow what a terrible job. It's as if they sent it hoping that you wouldn't notice... Please keep us up to date as to how it all moves along.

Posted
Even before and after photos would have little legal relevance unless they were taken in front of a creditable independent witness at the time of sending the watch off for service.
What I was saying was to send printed pictures with the watch. No doubts about when have been taken, and a clear signal given.
Posted
Most photos are digital these days and the imbedded Exif file (Extended Image Format) hold all the information relating to the image including when and where  it was taken.

I'm aware of data recorded images and how easy it is to alter that data. My company work in collation of such evidential processes where very strict protocols and procedures have to be followed. Any breaches of such, regardless of the quality of the image, will normally be thrown out of court.
The above said. I'm still hopeful for the OP that the Service Centre will, if for no other reason, will rectify the problem, to preserve their reputation. But if they're dodgy enough to send a damaged watch back to the customer i have concerns.
As for "Swatch" and if you're looking for quality expensive watch, buy Japanese or similar. Leave Swatch products alone.
If you buy for investment and looking Swiss the pre-ceramic Rolex submariner or daytona are holding their prices well and you're more likely to recover your money on resale.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Posted
"Swatch"???

My reference was to anyone considering purchase.
1. Any eta Base movement now being restricted by Swatch.
2. Purchase as investment. Everyone knows Rolex. Most of Joe public wouldn't even know Tag or Omega?
My reference wasn't direct to Tag as a brand I don't particularly like them and have no interest in them.
I adore Omega but as investment would always opt Rolex

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Posted
2 hours ago, digginstony said:


I'm aware of data recorded images and how easy it is to alter that data. My company work in collation of such evidential processes where very strict protocols and procedures have to be followed. Any breaches of such, regardless of the quality of the image, will normally be thrown out of court.

Alright, but aren't talking about law here. Not all cases go to course, and if they do, it is small claims. Just a simple practical precaution. Which service manager would have the face to claim that damage was pre-existing when pictures had accompanied the watch?

 

Posted
45 minutes ago, digginstony said:


My reference was to anyone considering a purchase.
 

I just wondered Tony, as it didn't seem to be relevant to the original post.

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • it would be nice to have the exact model of the watch the or a picture so we can see exactly what you're talking about. this is because the definition of Swiss watch could be a variety of things and it be helpful if we could see exactly the watch your dealing with then in professional watch repair at least some professionals they do pre-cleaned watches. In other words the hands and dial come off and the entire movement assembled goes through a cleaning machine sometimes I think a shorter bath perhaps so everything is nice and clean for disassembly makes it easier to look for problems. Then other professionals don't like pre-cleaning because it basically obliterates the scene of the crime. Especially when dealing with vintage watches where you're looking for metal filings and problems that may visually go away with cleaning. Then usually super sticky lubrication isn't really a problem for disassembly and typically shouldn't be a problem on a pallet fork bridge because there shouldn't be any lubrication on the bridge at all as you typically do not oil the pallet fork pivots.  
    • A few things you should find out before you can mske a decision of what to do. As Richard said, what is the crown and all of the crown components made of . Then also the stem .  The crown looks to have a steel washer that retains a gasket. So be careful with what chemicals you use to dissolve any stem adhesives or the use of heat. You might swell or melt the gasket unless you are prepared to change that also . The steel washer maybe reactive to alum. Something I've just used to dissolve a broken screw from a plate. First drilled out the centre of the screw with a 0.5mm carbide . Dipped only the section that held the broken screw in Rustins rust remover. This is 40 % phosphoric acid. 3 days and the screw remains were completely dissolved, no trace of steel in the brass threads. A black puddle left in the solution.
    • I suppose this will add to the confusion I have a roller jewel assortment. It lists out American pocket watches for Elgin 18 size and even 16 size it's a 50. But not all the various companies used 50-50 does seem to be common one company had a 51 and the smallest is 43. American parts are always interesting? Francis Elgin for mainsprings will tell you the thickness of the spring other companies will not even though the spring for the same number could come in a variety of thicknesses. But if we actually had the model number of your watch we would find it probably makes a reference that the roller jewel came in different dimensions. So overlook the parts book we find that? So it appears to be 18 and 16 size would be the same sort of the arson different catalog numbers and as I said we don't have your Mongol know which Log number were supposed to be using. Variety of materials garnered her sapphire single or double but zero mention about diameters. Then in a section of rollers in this case rollers with jewels we do get this down in the notes section Roller specifications but of course zero reference to the jewel size. I was really hoping the roller jewel assortment would give us sizes it doesn't really. But it does show a picture of how one particular roller jewel gauge is used  
    • Seems to still do it through my mobile data, I use an android phone almost exclusively, but I'll double check it. Thanks mark Strange, I'll try my laptop that utilities edge. I've been on site half hour since I got home, it hasn't done it yet. Thanks John
    • At work, I'm on MS Edge, not through chose, on my phone, chrome, no issues with either. 
×
×
  • Create New...