Two claims against the same charger were handled differently, and the cause was a single clause. One agreement defined a failure as a unit that did not meet its output specification; the other referred to defective workmanship. The first claim was settled with a measurement and the second with a negotiation about what the words meant.
This guide is part of our Programme Execution & After-sales. Read the full topic guide for the decisions that come before and after this step.
Charger warranty terms: the four clauses
The period, the definition, the remedy and the exclusions.
Each is a separate negotiation, and each has a cost attached to it. A programme that treats the warranty as one sentence receives a clause that is either unusable or priced into the unit in a way nobody can see.
Two claims, two outcomes
The definition did the work.
With a measurable definition, the unit was tested and the claim was accepted or declined on the result. With a qualitative definition, both parties assembled arguments, and the settlement fell somewhere between the two positions without either being satisfied.
The period and when it starts
Three possible start points, and the difference is months.
Shipment from the factory, arrival at the buyer’s warehouse, or sale to the end user. A period measured from shipment is simple and shortens with a long transit; a period measured from sale is generous and unpredictable, because the factory cannot know when the stock moves.
What counts as a failure
It is written as a measurement rather than as an impression.
The output outside its tolerance, the protection not operating, a mechanical failure of the connector or the enclosure, or a failure to charge the profiles listed on the pack. Each is testable, which is what allows a claim to be decided from a report rather than from a conversation.
The remedy: replace, repair or credit
Three remedies, and the choice is usually made by quantity.
A single unit is replaced; a batch is credited; a repairable unit is returned to a depot where one exists. The remedy is named in the agreement, because the cost of each is very different and the default position is usually the one that suits the party who drafted the clause.
| Clause | Options | Effect on price | Watch for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Period | From shipment, arrival or sale | Longer periods cost more | The transit consuming the period |
| Definition | Measurable or qualitative | Vague definitions cost in disputes | Specification not stated |
| Remedy | Replace, repair or credit | Repair is cheapest where a depot exists | Who pays the freight |
| Exclusions | Misuse, unauthorised repair, wear | Legitimate exclusions lower the price | Exclusions that defeat the clause |
The exclusions that are legitimate
Three exclusions, and each reduces the price honestly.
Physical damage after delivery, repairs carried out by an unauthorised party, and consumable wear such as a connector that has been cycled beyond its rating. Each removes a risk the factory does not control, and a warranty without them is priced to cover the worst case.
How the warranty is priced
Three inputs, and the third is the one buyers underestimate.
The expected failure rate from the reliability testing, the cost of the remedy including the freight, and the administration of processing a claim. A programme that agrees a long period with a generous remedy has bought insurance, and the premium appears in the unit price.
What the agreement should record
Five lines, and each is testable.
The period and its start point, the specification the unit is measured against, the remedy and who pays the freight, the exclusions, and the route and the time limit for raising a claim. Those five lines turn a warranty into a process.
How the warranty interacts with the inspection report
A warranty claim is decided against the specification, and the inspection report is what shows whether the unit was within it when it left the factory. Where the report records the output and the batch code, a claim can be assessed on the records rather than on the returned unit.
The report also limits the exposure. Where the outgoing inspection covers the failure mode being claimed, the rate and the cause are already documented, and the remedy follows the agreed clause rather than a negotiation about the shipment.
Keeping the two together is what allows the failure rate to be compared across orders. A programme holding the inspection records can tell whether a rate is rising, which is the point at which the clause is worth reviewing. A rate that has been stable for a year is evidence that the terms are set at the right level.
FAQ
Should the warranty run from shipment or from sale?
From shipment is simpler to administer and from sale is closer to what the end user experiences. Many programmes use shipment for the trade and a separate arrangement for the retail channel. Write the start point and the period together, and state what happens to units that sit in a warehouse for months before sale, because that interval is where the two readings diverge most.
Is a longer warranty always better for the buyer?
It transfers more risk to the supplier and the supplier prices that risk. A measured period with a clear remedy often costs less in total than a long period with vague terms. The comparison is between the period and the remedy, since a long period with a credit-only remedy transfers less practical risk than a shorter one with replacement. A period that runs from shipment and a remedy of replacement usually transfers more practical risk than a long period with a credit.
Who pays the freight on a replacement?
It is negotiated, and the usual split is that the supplier covers the replacement unit while the return freight follows the reason for the failure. Naming it removes the argument that otherwise delays the replacement. Name the party that arranges the return as well, because a replacement that waits for a collection instruction usually waits longer than the unit takes to produce.
How is the failure rate established?
From the reliability testing and from the batch records of the units that failed in the field. Without a batch record the rate cannot be calculated, and the claim is settled on volume rather than on evidence. Ask for the record to be kept per batch rather than per order, so the rate can be attributed to a production run instead of to a shipment.
Next step
Send the product, the channel and the warranty period you need to Wecent Group through the contact page. The reply sets out the period, the definition, the remedy and the exclusions, with the effect on the unit price. Related reading: charger quality control, charger manufacturing services and OEM and ODM charger manufacturing. External references: BSI standards, IEC standards, UL solutions, Intertek testing services, EU WEEE Directive and ICC business solutions for trade.