Pace HD problem

1356794

Comments

  • user123456789user123456789 Posts: 16,589
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    smjxm09 wrote: »
    The guy was Scottish and I could hear he was in a call centre.

    Or he had a sound effects CD on in the background :)
  • michael37michael37 Posts: 2,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    EDIT - That number was in use about three years ago as an alternative number for Sky and in particular it's Broadband team, but was closed down ages ago. I'd be surprised if they brought that number back.


    So would I. But it is possible for a company using a NGI number to set a different number in CLI. It is possible the outbound system is just using an out of date number.

    In fact some companies do use an 0800 number for automated dialling systems so that if anyone gets a silent call and calls back to find out who the caller is they do not get charged,a nd so are a little less annoyed.
    MikeMcr wrote: »
    I also bought one of the very first Pace HD boxes. Not from Sky but from SatBuyer. If this is true, how do we stand on this with consumer law?

    Can Sky really give us a second hand Thomson as a replacement? That is the reason I paid full price from elsewhere in the first place.

    If the box is more than 30 days old all you are entitled to is a repair. Sky offer refurbs as an alternative to making customers wait while the boxes are sent away for repair (they are allowed up to 28 days during which you have no box, so the refurb is arguably a better deal - of course not so much if you end up with a Thopmson, 3/3 of mine failed).

    Also your rights are only enforcable against the supplier, not Sky. If Sky are replacing boxes they did not supply directly it would be to protect their reputation (YouTube videos of exploding boxes don't look good).
  • tvsizedoesmattertvsizedoesmatter Posts: 144
    Forum Member
    So if this is true they are recalling 7000 Pace boxes & they're also putting a fix on the website for the amstrad boxes.

    :eek:

    Wow, glad I've got that unreliable old thomson !;)
  • michael37michael37 Posts: 2,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'm not sure how reliable this site is but

    http://www.tellytoad.com/post/pace-sky-hd-receiver-recall.aspx
    When I spoke to a member of the Sky Technical team earlier today, he would not divulge the details of what the fault might involve, but did assure me that it was not a matter of health and safety, and that it did not involve any issues of a hazardous nature.

    <SNIP>
    The box swap is optional, not mandatory.

    Hmmm, unless they gurantee me a (non-Thopmson) new box they can rip mine from my cold dead hands.

    I'd rather take an unidentified fault that may or may not develop in the future, over another Thompson, which based on my 3/3 Thopmson boxes failed within 9 months of getting them anyday.

    Not to mention not losing my recordings.

    EDIT: Why would Sky want to recall this lot when the Thopmsons are known to have faulty PSU's and they have never recalled them? Perhaps Pace are putting up the cash?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    less than 3 months old - new
    more than 3 months - your F***ed
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 51
    Forum Member
    My old dear has had a call from Sky about this. The person from Sky said it was due to the hard discs failing. Anyone want to bet that the Pace box is fitted with a Seagate 7200.11? :)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 479
    Forum Member
    Stuteman wrote: »

    Are you not a contributor to that site?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,533
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Hmmm, unless they gurantee me a (non-Thopmson) new box they can rip mine from my cold dead hands.

    Seconded.

    It seems to imply that the faulty boxes are from the Tesco promotion, though, or around that era. With any luck mine might not be involved, being I got it a week or so after the Pace's first appeared.

    Having said that I am still doubious as to the validity of this until Sky say it themselves.

    Also, don't you find it strange Sky would replace a box with a "potential" "Non hazardous" fault like this? On this basis they should be replacing ALL their boxes, like, ever. xD
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    no wonder they were there instead of in the vans for the box shortage, maybe sky get money from tesco
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 212
    Forum Member
    Xinam wrote: »
    Are you not a contributor to that site?
    What makes you say that:eek:
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 479
    Forum Member
    That article on that site keeps changing! It's almost as if the author is reading these posts and changing the story! One has to question the validity of this 'source'.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,533
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Xinam wrote: »
    That article on that site keeps changing! It's almost as if the author is reading these posts and changing the story!

    Yeah, that site doesn't seem like a particularly good or reliable one at all.

    I'm still holding on for offical word / proper press to say something.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 275
    Forum Member
    Crap. I just got the call of doom about my Pace, bought during the Tesco deal, its 9F3003, if that means anything. I asked the guy if I'd get another Pace and he said that it was down to what the engineer had.

    I told him that I'd think about it and call back, he said that was OK as it isn't a required replacement, so that info is correct. Last thing I want is a Thomson, I've read one too many horror stories.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 275
    Forum Member
    Xinam wrote: »
    That article on that site keeps changing! It's almost as if the author is reading these posts and changing the story!
    I think that's fair enough, including information from people like me. :cry:

    If it helps any, as per the previous message, they want to replace my box, so all the info in the thread so far seems accurate.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,533
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Anyone get the feeling Sky are trying to take the Tesco Pace boxes, probably sold at a loss, and replace them with refurbs?

    Considering the box shortage and current financial crisis, they might be getting desperate..... = /

    WTF would you issue a "non-mandatory" recall. That's just off-centre in all ways.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 212
    Forum Member
    Xinam wrote: »
    That article on that site keeps changing! It's almost as if the author is reading these posts and changing the story! One has to question the validity of this 'source'.
    And you think that is me :eek:
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 479
    Forum Member
    Stuteman wrote: »
    And you think that is me :eek:

    Not necessarily... but the author's name is Stuart, you're 'Stuteman' and you posted the link... I'm dubious is all.
  • michael37michael37 Posts: 2,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    black-cat wrote: »
    My old dear has had a call from Sky about this. The person from Sky said it was due to the hard discs failing. Anyone want to bet that the Pace box is fitted with a Seagate 7200.11? :)


    If it's the disc - I'd rather replace that myself rather than risk another Thompson refurb.
  • BatchBatch Posts: 3,344
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    how can you make a decision on whether to take the optional swap out if you don't know what the nature of the problem is in the first place!?!

    Not that I have a pace, I have a collectors item Thomson that is nearly 2 years old (and will break down tomorrow now I have said that).
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 51
    Forum Member
    michael37 wrote: »
    If it's the disc - I'd rather replace that myself rather than risk another Thompson refurb.

    Exactly. And an excuse to fit a bigger one as well ;)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,533
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    michael37 wrote: »
    If it's the disc - I'd rather replace that myself rather than risk another Thompson refurb.

    I hope to God it is, I have a spare 500GB drive sat in a NAT storage drive that isn't going to get used otherwise.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 212
    Forum Member
    Xinam wrote: »
    Not necessarily... but the author's name is Stuart, you're 'Stuteman' and you posted the link... I'm dubious is all.
    First rule of being a "spy" is to make sure that your "nom de plume" cannot be confused with your real name :D:D:D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,533
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Stuteman wrote: »
    First rule of being a "spy" is to make sure that your "nom de plume" cannot be confused with your real name :D:D:D

    Unless you're trying to double-bluff us....:p
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 51
    Forum Member
    Does anyone know the make/model of the drives used in the Pace HD box? I'm not taking mine apart just yet...
  • michael37michael37 Posts: 2,622
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    black-cat wrote: »
    Exactly. And an excuse to fit a bigger one as well ;)

    Funnily enough I have one lying spare :)
Sign In or Register to comment.