The resident of Kiryat purchased two Samsung cell phones from Pelephone at a cost of approximately NIS 9,000, and had to deal with repeated screen malfunctions. In a ruling issued this week, the judge canceled the deal between the parties.
In the statement of claim, the plaintiff claimed that in May 2020 he purchased two Samsung z flip3 cell phones from Pelephone Communications at a cost of NIS 4,529 each. A short time later, screen malfunctions were discovered in both devices, when in one device the screen was replaced by the company five times and in the other three times.
“According to the plaintiff, this serial malfunction of the screen was known to the defendant,” it said. “The plaintiff claimed that when replacing the screen each time he was required to pay a total of NIS 79 for a fast service.” In addition, he claimed that he contacted the company with a request to replace the devices, but was not answered.
On the other hand, the company claimed that it provided the plaintiff with the best service and that no damage was caused. “The defendant provided the plaintiff with impeccable service, tested his devices professionally and comprehensively, however, since we are dealing with electronic devices, it is known that electronic devices by their very nature tend to break down,” it said.
Small claims court judge, Moti Cohen, accepted the claim in part and determined that the company violated the purchase agreement with the plaintiff and did not provide him with devices of the quality expected from a new and expensive device.
In light of this, he canceled the purchase transaction between the parties and stated that the plaintiff will return the devices to the company and they will return his money minus an amount of NIS 2,500 for the period he used them and a total of NIS 7,058 including court costs.
“It is inconceivable that so many faults will be discovered in new devices that will harm the quality of use of the devices. The fact that these are two devices of the same model that required these repairs for the same fault, shows a manufacturing defect,” he wrote.