Complaint against Hewlett-Packard Computer Corp.

Bought any lately? Tell us, so we don't get duped!

Complaint against Hewlett-Packard Computer Corp.

Postby JUNIUS » Fri Feb 12, 2010 4:56 pm

Copy of the Complaint:

February 11, 2010

To Hewlett-Packard:

This computer, peripherals & extended service contract were purchased by one Stephen Hughes and given as a birthday present to my daughters, as he is their uncle.

In case you were wondering - Giving a computer as a gift is something that is common in American Society today.

But in this case, HP used that fact - (that purchaser & owner were not the same person) - and used it as a method of usurping it's obligations.

Since before the date of 11/20/2009, which is the last time I wrote by e-mail to HP, that my Twin Daughter's computer was having problems, we had contacted HP many times by telephone.

In fact - at the time we first attempted to contact HP to have the computer serviced - there should have been no need to prove to HP that the customer had also purchased an extended service contract as this computer was still under the manufacturers warranty because it was under ONE YEAR OLD WHEN THE PROBLEM FIRST OCCURRED AND WAS FIRST REPORTED TO HP.

The reason I used the words: we first attempted to contact HP is because Hewlett-Packard has done everything in it's power to frustrate this customer and avoid processing a repair order or sending a service technician to the home (which was an additional contract which was purchased with the machine).

In light of the aforesaid, it's fair to say we attempted to contact HP, but we did not get any favorable response.

What HP did (in order for us to receive service) was to conjure up as many prerequisites and place as many obstacles, impediments, and demands upon the customer as to frustrate the customer into silent oblivion.

We have still to receive any repair service, but we did not forget nor did we go away.

This computer now fails to operate at all and my daughters (who's education and homework depend on having a computer) is now being stifled.

I aver that Hewlett-Packard, through underhanded, dishonest stalling tactics, will-full misconduct and failure to provide services & warranty - Hewlett-Packard is directly responsible for destroying this machine.

In this instant case, Hewlett-Packard's tactics are tantamount to theft by deception for goods, services & contracts.

I know the easiest thing to do would be just to take money out of the bank and buy them a new APPLE Computer (as I am now on a lifetime boycott HP because of this problem).

But when the largest computer manufacturer in the world is not held accountable to the customer, this is a matter of principle that should not be ignored.

This is not my first complaint; but it will be my last complaint; as in order to obtain redress, I am left with no alternative but to forward this complaint (against HP) to the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Pennsylvania for prosecution.

Concerning this ongoing unresolved problem, following this e-mail, I have filed this complaint here:
File a Consumer Complaint using our online form
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/complaints.aspx?id=451#

.
.
.
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137
Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court.
[excerpts]

If an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void, does it, notwithstanding its invalidity, bind the Courts and oblige them to give it effect? Or, in other words, though it be not law, does it constitute a rule as operative as if it was a law? This would be to overthrow in fact what was established in theory, and would seem, at first view, an absurdity too gross to be insisted on. It shall, however, receive a more attentive consideration.

If, then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.

....a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/h ... 37_ZO.html
JUNIUS
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2008 3:39 am
Location: Near Pennsylvania SGL 57

Re: Complaint against Hewlett-Packard Computer Corp.

Postby JUNIUS » Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:18 am

.
.

And after they got the letter from the State Attorney General's Office - They came right out to the home and fixed the problem .

It pays to fight for what belongs to you.

.
.
.
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137
Chief Justice MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court.
[excerpts]

If an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void, does it, notwithstanding its invalidity, bind the Courts and oblige them to give it effect? Or, in other words, though it be not law, does it constitute a rule as operative as if it was a law? This would be to overthrow in fact what was established in theory, and would seem, at first view, an absurdity too gross to be insisted on. It shall, however, receive a more attentive consideration.

If, then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.

....a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/h ... 37_ZO.html
JUNIUS
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2008 3:39 am
Location: Near Pennsylvania SGL 57


Return to Inferior Products

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest