Looks like the consumer has to take Samsung back to class

[Prodigy_Smit]

Summary

A class action lawsuit is incurred by Samsung over defective camera glass on the Galaxy S20 series.

Phones affected are:

S20

S20+

S20 Ultra

The Fan editions of the phones are also affected.

 

The issue is that the camera glass on the back of the phone shatters unexpectedly. There are also unconfirmed reports of injury due to the glass shattering while being held by a user.

 

EDIT: The issue was first reported 4 days after the launch of the device by a user complaint on the Samsung forum, however the issue was ignored by Samsung representatives and the user was denied warranty coverage.

 

Quotes

XDA Developers:

Quote

According to consumers, Samsung has refused to cover the issue under warranty and is asking $400 to send the phone back to Samsung to investigate the issue or $100 under purchased Samsung care device insurance to repair the shattered glass. Even after complying with the costs, certain consumers are repeatedly facing the issue, while others have paid hundreds of dollars at third-party repair shops.

Techspot: 

Quote

"Samsung sold its Galaxy S20 as a high-end option for consumers, with a 'professional' grade camera, charging upwards of $1,600 per device, only to have them suddenly lose a major aspect of their functionality. During a time of social-distancing and increased use of online access, consumers are especially in need of a reliable mobile device, yet Samsung has refused to deliver the reliability it promised its customers," said Steve Berman, attorney for consumers in the class action.

 

My thoughts

Well deserved. This will probably end with Samsung paying a hefty fine compared to the cost of just repairing the glass. 

 

Sources

https://www.techspot.com/news/89506-samsung-faces-lawsuit-over-defective-rear-camera-glass.html

https://www.xda-developers.com/samsung-galaxy-s20-camera-glass-lawsuit/

Edited May 4, 2021 by Prodigy_Smit
Added info under summary section

[Prodigy_Smit]

3 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Uneven chemical hardening? 

Unknown at the time. I suspect Samsung would further investigate the issue as the lawsuit progresses.

[dizmo]

I'd seriously question how many people this actually happened to before saying anything about Samsung being hit hard by this. I imagine it's another case of the vocal minority. Did they handle it wrong? Sure, but in the end, as with most class action lawsuits, the individual won't receive a whole lot, and it'll probably be cheaper for Samsung than if they'd repaired each device. The reasoning put forth by the lawyer is even a bit absurd...it's not like having cracked glass on the camera prevents you from using the phone in every other way.

[Kisai]

21 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I'd seriously question how many people this actually happened to before saying anything about Samsung being hit hard by this. I imagine it's another case of the vocal minority. Did they handle it wrong? Sure, but in the end, as with most class action lawsuits, the individual won't receive a whole lot, and it'll probably be cheaper for Samsung than if they'd repaired each device. The reasoning put forth by the lawyer is even a bit absurd...it's not like having cracked glass on the camera prevents you from using the phone in every other way.

I would put this in the same category as the Samsung fold and the exploding battery in the Samsung Galaxy Note 7. Some kind of engineering oversight.

 

At least in this case, the phone can probably just be repaired, where as in the previous cases, it resulted in a recall of the entire product.

[Mark Kaine]

lol how is this not a warranty case ,does samsung think people do this, like how...

 

Also why is samsung so popular (i get korea, because patriotism) i mean their products are terrible.

 

~Sent from my a41, with seemingly the same camera thing ...

[TheWutofWat]

huh now I see why this sells very well, I run an online shop with these items there and they do sell lots

interesting indeed

[Jtalk4456]

4 hours ago, dizmo said:

I'd seriously question how many people this actually happened to before saying anything about Samsung being hit hard by this. I imagine it's another case of the vocal minority. Did they handle it wrong? Sure, but in the end, as with most class action lawsuits, the individual won't receive a whole lot, and it'll probably be cheaper for Samsung than if they'd repaired each device. The reasoning put forth by the lawyer is even a bit absurd...it's not like having cracked glass on the camera prevents you from using the phone in every other way.

It's unclear how widespread the issue is, but the lawsuit claims there are "hundreds of online reports." A Samsung Care Ambassador acknowledged the problems, claiming it resulted from "pressure buildup underneath the glass and not customers banging it against something," though the company continued charging owners for repairs.
hundreds out of supposedly millions of sales, not sure how significant that is for cell phones, but given someone in the company admitted it wasn't the user's fault, I'd expect a far better response that would quickly address the issue and create positive pr for quick response. I think companies tend to forget the value of pr when it's not convenient to them...

43 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

lol how is this not a warranty case ,does samsung think people do this, like how...

Also why is samsung so popular (i get korea, because patriotism) i mean their products are terrible.

~Sent from my a41, with seemingly the same camera thing ...

As reported at the time of the original incidents, Samsung classed them as cosmetic damage, meaning it wasn't covered under standard warranties.

in other words, legal loopholes

[Moonzy]

u know how they say that the mirror shatters when you're too ugly?

 

probably just unstable tempered glass, it happens

[Kisai]

33 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

 A Samsung Care Ambassador acknowledged the problems, claiming it resulted from "pressure buildup underneath the glass and not customers banging it against something," though the company continued charging owners for repairs.

That screams engineering oversight. 

 

How much you want to bet that every single person who had this happen, had it happen after bringing their phone into something that has a pressure change, like a tunnel on a subway or car. Western Canada/US, Japan, Korea and several other pacific-rim countries have some fairly steep mountains, so that is enough to cause a pressure change (such that it makes your ears pop.)  

 

At any rate, I would not put this at scale of problem with the battery issue on the Note 7, This is something that can be repaired, and Samsung should be replacing the parts with better engineered ones, or at least repairing them if it happens within 3 years of new purchase.

 

[Bombastinator]

1 hour ago, Mark Kaine said:

lol how is this not a warranty case ,does samsung think people do this, like how...

 

Also why is samsung so popular (i get korea, because patriotism) i mean their products are terrible.

 

~Sent from my a41, with seemingly the same camera thing ...

it wouldn’t be a warranty issue if people are deliberately damaging the device.  The holes are odd.  Directly over the lenses.  Makes things look suspicious, but it may be actual causality.  the holes are quite unusual.  One standard for window glass is that if the broken bits of glass are on the inside the glass was broken from the outside, but if the glass is on the outside, the glass was broken from the inside, implying shenanigans.  In this case if particles are on the inside it implies outside force, but if there was for example a vacuum created particles would be sucked inside.  An implosion.  I could see a company refusing liability if they found particles inside the cavity.  Doesn’t mean it is automatically correct though.
 

Glass is a weird material.  Even small amounts of uneven heat can cause it to shatter for one thing.  Also it has a propogating crack issue.  A tiny crack will eventually run across the entire glass, but it can be stopped by drilling a circular hole.  This is going to be an odd new glass formulation with odd new coatings on it. 
 

One possibility for example could be the shape of the outer lens creating a focal effect where sunlight is concentrated at a point causing uneven heating of the glass causing a breakage.  Leave the thing face down in the sun for a while and “bang”.  It’s wildly unlikely though. 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Bombastinator

[ouroesa]

2 hours ago, Thefireofwar11 said:

huh now I see why this sells very well, I run an online shop with these items there and they do sell lots

interesting indeed

What!?

[Bombastinator]

6 hours ago, Moonzy said:

u know how they say that the mirror shatters when you're too ugly?

 

probably just unstable tempered glass, it happens

All tempered glass eventually explodes.  It generally takes years though, and it does it in a very particular pattern.  If the entire panel of glass exploded evenly over the surface and made sort of cube shapes when it did it that would be a tempered glass issue.  It didn’t though.  It shattered only over the lenses in a radial pattern, implying the glass wasn’t tempered at all.  If it WAS tempered glass though that would be very interesting.

[RejZoR]

13 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

All tempered glass eventually explodes.  It generally takes years though, and it does it in a very particular pattern.  If the entire panel of glass exploded evenly over the surface and made sort of cube shapes when it did it that would be a tempered glass issue.  It didn’t though.  It shattered only over the lenses in a radial pattern, implying the glass wasn’t tempered at all.  If it WAS tempered glass though that would be very interesting.

It seems everyone is pulling weird shenanigans with protective camera glass. Apple was advertising sapphire even though it wasn't, Samsung's glass shatters only on top of the lenses etc

 

Though to me it seems more like there is issue with the glass, it didn't shatter far out because it's probably glued to the phone except the part where lens is underneath and it's not. So it shattered only there.

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

It seems everyone is pulling weird shenanigans with protective camera glass. Apple was advertising sapphire even though it wasn't, Samsung's glass shatters only on top of the lenses etc

 

Though to me it seems more like there is issue with the glass, it didn't shatter far out because it's probably glued to the phone except the part where lens is underneath and it's not. So it shattered only there.

Advertising sapphire is foolish if it’s fake.  It’s too easy to check.  Using synthetic sapphire instead of glass (sapphire is not glass.  It’s sort of transparent aluminum) is old tech, and hardness scratch tests are even older.  It’s more or less a foregone conclusion that Someone will do a Rockwell hardness test.  They sell the things in fricken hardware stores. It’s a part of materials physics so basic that it was being taught 40 years ago in junior high science classes.  The question seems to be are folks doing this with something like a hammer and a philips head screwdriver (which is what is is implied by warranty refusal) or is this a result of design.  If it’s design (which can happen) Samsung is going to have to replace a lot of phone backs.

[Kisai]

2 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

 Using synthetic sapphire instead of glass (sapphire is not glass.  It’s sort of transparent aluminum) is old tech, and hardness scratch tests are even older.  

It had never particularly dawned on me that Sapphire was Aluminum Oxide. I know diamonds are just plain Carbon. Apparently Synthetic Spinel (Moh scale 7) can also be used in the same application Sapphire/Ruby (Moh Scale 9) and Diamond (Moh Scale 10) are (Eg bullet-proof glass.)

 

Though clearly certain materials are easier to make than others.

 

[da na]

15 hours ago, dizmo said:

I'd seriously question how many people this actually happened to before saying anything about Samsung being hit hard by this. I imagine it's another case of the vocal minority. Did they handle it wrong? Sure, but in the end, as with most class action lawsuits, the individual won't receive a whole lot, and it'll probably be cheaper for Samsung than if they'd repaired each device. The reasoning put forth by the lawyer is even a bit absurd...it's not like having cracked glass on the camera prevents you from using the phone in every other way.

Yeah. I would assume that less than 150 people would so far be affected by this issue. 

 

[StDragon]

I'm going to guess this wasn't Corning Gorilla Glass....