My Lawsuit Against CompUSA

The short

I bought a computer from CompUSA on January 13, 2003, along with a three-year insurance plan. They failed to honor the insurance plan and, while the computer was in their care, they broke it. They claimed I damaged the computer, they refused to return my phone calls, and they made no effort to rectify the situation. I deemed the plan a scam, and we went to small-claims court on October 11, 2005. The Hon. Matthew F. Cooper issued a judgment in my favor for $1,660.21, agreeing that the "defendant breached the service warranty by failing to repair the computer and causing it to become inoperable."

The long

I filed suit against CompUSA, in conjunction with its Technology Assurance Plan, for the amount of $4,143.72, for negligence, willful deception, and breach of contract.

I purchased a Sony Vaio laptop computer from CompUSA Store 707 on January 13, 2003. Along with the computer, I purchased CompUSA's three-year Technology Assurance Plan ("TAP"), which I was led to believe would cover all damage to the computer up through January 13, 2006. The employee selling me the plan even used these words: "You can take the computer home, smash the screen tonight, and bring it back tomorrow, and we have to fix it. Obviously, we'd prefer you didn't." While I did not believe absolutely every kind of damage would be covered, I believed malfunctions due to normal use would be repaired at no cost to me within a reasonable time frame. The employee also stated that the TAP would provide for a replacement battery once per year for the duration of the TAP, although this is not mentioned in the TAP booklet.

In late June 2005, I noticed that the computer would shut down while ripping a CD (i.e., transferring sound files from a commercial CD into the computer) or performing a spyware scan. Through some Internet research I diagnosed the problem as hardware-related. Furthermore, a few days after this problem began, I accidentally fractured the CD tray. The CD drive still worked, as long as the tray was handled very carefully.

On July 13, 2005, I brought the computer in to Store 707 for repairs, citing the above issues along with two other minor CD-related matters, and asking for a replacement battery under the terms of the TAP. Except for the problems I described, the computer was functioning normally. The CompUSA representative who assisted me stated that the repaired computer would be ready for pick-up in approximately two weeks. I offered to leave the computer's power supply, but he said that was not necessary. He did not accept my list of problems; rather, he had me transfer my list to a form and entered the information into the store's computer system, giving me a print-out of the service order.

On Tuesday, July 26, I went into the store to check on the status of the computer. The store employee said he had no information on when it would be ready; he said I could check in a day or two, and that I would receive a phone call when the computer was ready. I called the store on Thursday, July 28, and was told the computer would probably be ready on Friday, July 29.

On the afternoon of July 29, I received a phone call from Romaine Humphrees at the store: The computer was back from the repair shop. When I arrived at the store, I was assisted by Romaine and a store employee named Adam. Romaine said that the TAP had refused to cover repairs to the computer because I had allegedly opened the bottom of the computer and tampered with it. In fact, I have never opened the bottom of the computer, and neither has anyone else.

I agreed to take the computer back, intending to seek recourse later; the computer was still - I assumed - in a mostly useful state, and I am in a position of self-employment (a music transcriptionist and part-time Web designer) that renders the computer necessary.

When Adam brought the computer out, however, it would not turn on at all, even with the power cord attached, and a screw was missing from the case that had not been missing when I brought the computer in for repairs. According to Romaine, the third party that diagnoses TAP claims and repairs computers - a company called Pre-Owned - had determined that a power cable inside the computer had been shredded, and that's why the computer wouldn't turn on. Furthermore, Romaine said the damage to the cable had been determined to be my fault, because Pre-Owned thought I had tampered with the computer's inner parts. Romaine said that there would be a $90 charge to me to have the cable replaced, and that the store's technical-services manager, Diana Boccio, had called me on July 26 to inform me of the charge. When I didn't respond, Pre-Owned had sent the computer back to CompUSA unrepaired. However, I had never received such a call, and no one I spoke with on July 26 (when I inquired at the store) or on July 28 (when I called the store) had mentioned the charge when they checked on the service status. Romaine said the computer hadn't turned on even before it had been sent to Pre-Owned, but that could have been due to a dead battery, and he faulted me for not having left the power supply so he could test the computer. I explained that I had offered to leave the power supply and been told it was not necessary.

Romaine said only Diana or CompUSA Corporate could override Pre-Owned's decision. I called Corporate and spoke with representatives in two different departments, both of whom refused to help me and passed me off to another department. When no one answered at the third department, I gave up.

On July 30, Diana and I spoke at length. I asserted that there was no way the damage to the power cable could have been my fault, for the simple reason that neither my list of problems nor the store's service order stated that the computer wasn't working at all. If there had been a complete power failure before I brought the computer in for repairs, I would have noted that on the service order. She acknowledged that the cable is a very fragile piece and that it could have been damaged simply by the bottom of the computer's being opened during Pre-Owned's diagnostic testing. She also suggested that I call Corporate, and I explained that my experience with Corporate had been futile. She tried to call Corporate for me, and after ten minutes, she came back, embarrassed, and said, "Actually, I couldn't reach anyone there, either." She offered to explain my rebuttal to CompUSA and TAP management during the first week of August, but when 
no progress was made, I prepared a letter for her, which I also sent by overnight mail to the office of the Plan Administrator of the TAP on August 7. I have not received a reply from the Plan Administrator.

After trying for a week, on August 8 Diana finally made contact with someone at TAP management, who had been on vacation for a week with no backup. The managment person agreed to let Pre-Owned take another look at the computer, with my and Diana's supporting documentation and comments. Diana apologized for not sending the computer back to Pre-Owned on August 8, but she promised to send it on August 9. In fact, she did not send it until August 10, citing the holdup as due to some sort of approval she needed to get from Corporate.

On August 16, Diana received word that the TAP would cover the shredded power cable - i.e., the damage that occurred while the computer was in the care of CompUSA and Pre-Owned - but not the loose CD tray. She gave me this news on the morning of August 18. The next step, she said, would be to find a replacement power cable.

When I went into the store on August 23, Diana said that the replacement power cable had been found, and that it had been ordered from Sony. She said she would try to get a tracking number for the order by the end of the day, so as to garner an estimated arrival date, and she promised to call me with an update, regardless of the status, by the end of the day. She never did.

On August 25, Diana was unavailable, so Adam assisted me at the store. He was absolutely certain the cable would be in the store by the end of the week. "How do you know?" I asked. "Do you have a tracking number? Did Diana tell you? Was a note made in your computer system?"

"It doesn't matter how I know. I'm just telling you, I know," he replied.

"But how is it that you know and Diana didn't tell me? I need to know where your information came from."

"I don't have to tell you how I know. I'm just saying I am sure the part will be in by the end of the week. Now do you have any more questions, or may I help the next customer?" And with that, he brushed me aside brusquely.

I left messages for Diana and for the store manager, Scott Rosenthal, about two hours after my conversation with Adam, saying that if the computer was not fixed by Monday morning, August 29, at 10:00, I would file suit in small-claims court. Neither returned my call. In fact, I have tried to call Diana 24 times on 10 separate days since August 2, and not once has she answered her phone. Of the six messages I left for her, and the two I left for Scott, none resulted in a return call.

I saw Diana two days later, on Saturday, August 27. She didn't have a tracking number, and she didn't have any idea when the part would be in - so Adam's statement was clearly a speculative stock response given merely to placate me and avoid dealing with the issue. Diana said her only dealings with Sony had been through e-mail - she had ordered the part on August 22 but had never spoken with a Sony representative to impart the urgency of the situation. She didn't even know whether the part was in stock or whether it was back-ordered. She begged me to give her until noon on August 29 to handle the problem.

At 12:15 p.m. on August 29, I entered the store. Diana had not attempted to make any progress. She asked me to give her "a minute," at which point I believe she went back to her office and called Sony. After a half-hour, she had not returned, and I left a note for her stating I was filing suit first thing the following morning. I never got a response.

I computed my damages as follows:

Part One: $541.24, the full amount I paid for the TAP, including tax. I had never attempted to utilize its benefits until this incident, and I believe it to be a scam frought with needless delays. If I had not purchased the TAP, my repairs would have cost only about $250, and I would have had my computer back within two weeks.

Part Two: $2,520 for loss of income due to my not having a computer, based on three hours of business use per day and my normal rate of $35 per hour. Until I filed suit, I went without my computer for 48 days. I will allow 24 of these days for the estimated two-week repair period, plus 10 days for any replacement parts. I believe that the statement in the TAP booklet that loss of use is not covered should apply only to a normal time frame for repair, and I have waited an unreasonable length of time to have fixed a problem that was CompUSA's (or Pre-Owned's) fault to begin with. This is analogous to medical malpractice, for which compensation would be compulsory.

Part Three: $1,082.48 for the value of the computer (50% of the original cost of the computer). I submitted a mostly working computer and, nearly seven weeks later, became the owner of a computer that stopped working and lost a screw while in CompUSA's and Pre-Owned's care. On September 1, I bought a new computer at Best Buy, along with a new printer, because my old Xerox printer will not work with my new computer. In the unlikely event I am denied justice in New York and am forced into a civil suit in Dallas, the new amount for which I am suing will incorporate the cost of the new computer, the new printer, and additional loss of income.

Total amount of suit: $4,143.72

The judgment

It is astonishingly easy to file suit in small-claims court, at least in New York City. You fill out the simplest of forms, give the clerk $15 or $20, and you walk out with a court date and case number in less than five minutes.

Our court date was October 11, 2005; the session was set for 6:30 in the evening. There were about 150 people in the courtroom, representing dozens of cases all assigned the same date. The cases were read off by name; many were dismissed because the person who filed didn't show, many were postponed at the request of one of the litigants, and many resulted in a default judgment for the claimant because the defendant didn't show. That whittled down the actual case load considerably.

When my case was announced, I was surprised to learn that Kevin Irwin, one of the managers at CompUSA Store 707, had actually shown up. Owing to the store's indifference to the situation since July, I had assumed they really didn't give a damn at all, whereas in fact they actually just really didn't give a damn about me.

"CompUSA, by the court," Mr. Irwin called. Most small-claims cases are heard by arbitrators, of which there are several, rather than judges, of which there is one, the main differences being that (1) you can appeal a judge's decision but not an arbitrator's and (2) there's an official transcript of cases heard by judges but not those heard by arbitrators. In answering "by the court," Mr. Irwin requested that the case be heard by a judge.

Since the Hon. Matthew F. Cooper could hear only a limited number of cases throughout the evening, it was quite possible we would have to return to court some other time unless we could reach a settlement. To that end, we were assigned mediators, who spoke with Mr. Irwin and me both together and separately, in an attempt to determine how much either of us was willing to negotiate.

It wasn't much. Mr. Irwin, at first, simply offered to have the computer fixed! After some time, he grudgingly offered to refund my purchase price for the warranty plan ($541). I was willing to reduce my claim to somewhere around $2,000, but I wasn't going any lower than that. The mediators asked if I would be interested in negotiating some kind of store credit, but I had already purchased a new computer and printer and they were no longer returnable; furthermore, I had no interest in ever setting foot in CompUSA again. We were in negotiations for over an hour, to no avail.

Ours was the last case the judge heard that evening, around 9:00. I established - admirably, according to the judge - that I had been sold a useless plan and that my computer had been rendered inoperable while it was in CompUSA's care. Mr. Irwin attempted to show, using a series of fuzzy photographs, that there had been more than normal wear and tear on the computer and that's why the repairs shouldn't have been covered by the plan.

Two weeks later the judgment came in the mail: "Judgment in favor of claimant for $1623. The credible evidence establishes that defendant breached the service warranty by failing to repair the computer and causing it to become inoperable. The price of the service plan ($541) and the present value of the computer ($1082) are recoverable damages. Lost earnings are not recoverable or proven in this case." Interest and court fees were applied to the judgment, so the total amount awarded was $1,660.21.

That was OK by me. I hadn't expected to win much of anything, and this basically covered the cost of my new HP Pavilion zd8215us. About three weeks later I received a check along with a note from Gregory Lones, a lawyer for CompUSA, who had the gall to ask me to bring my old computer back to CompUSA and surrender it to them because CompUSA had supposedly "bought it" from me in the settlement. If I had any questions, I could direct them to Scott Rosenthal, he helpfully pointed out.

I sent the following letter back to Mr. Lones:

Dear Mr. Lones,

I am in receipt of CompUSA's check number 0001455062, in the amount of $1,660.21, as satisfaction of CompUSA's obligations in the above case. The burden of proof to the court of satisfaction of this obligation rests upon the judgment debtor in New York City; your canceled check and this letter should be sufficient proof.

In your letter of November 11 (attached), you requested that I return my nonfunctioning computer to CompUSA. Return of the computer was not part of the judgment, and I do not consider it my obligation. Furthermore, the computer's hard drive still contains a significant amount of personal and confidential data, so I am not willing to relinquish it in its current state. If CompUSA would like to send a technician to my office to erase the hard drive under my supervision, then I shall relinquish the computer upon payment of a fee of $75.00 per hour or fraction thereof, an estimate of which must be paid in advance, to compensate me for the time required to accomplish this procedure. I do not wish to contact Scott Rosenthal regarding this matter; he has never returned any of my phone calls.

In the absence of any further communication, I shall consider this matter closed.

Sincerely,
Seth Weinstein

Yeah, he considered it closed as well.