Samsung Reportedly Refusing To Compensate For Damages Caused By Note 7 Fires

Before production of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphones was finally axed, numerous reports of damages caused by the device surfaced. These include fires that destroyed a user’s vehicle and another customer’s garage. Others involve personal injuries that burned certain body parts. According to some customers, it would seem Samsung is refusing to compensate them for said damages.

At least three Samsung users have come forward to complain about how the smartphone maker had treated them when they tried to ask for reparation, The Guardian reports. One of the complainants is an Illinois man by the name of John Barwick. On September 8th, he recounted that he was startled awake when his Note 7 exploded while it was placed on a nightstand beside his bed.

“It was very startling,” Barwick said. “No one expects to be woken up at 3am with a noise that sounded like a whole bundle of sparklers being lit all at once.”

According to Barwick, the damages done by the device included the burnt nightstand and the chemicals that were sprayed on their bed, curtains, and carpet. He estimates that they will cost him $9,000 to fix or replace, which is why he contacted Samsung to see if they could help. Apparently, the company was not willing to cooperate.

After repeated calls and the smartphone maker’s refusal to address their request directly, Barwick was referred to the company’s insurance firm. The firm then told Barwick that they would only pay for the damages based on the depreciated value of the damaged goods.

Wesley Hartzog from South Carolina is facing similar difficulty in getting Samsung to compensate them after a Note 7 fire caused their home to become uninhabitable. On top of not coming through on the company’s promises of arranging a temporary living situation for Hartzog and his family, Samsung is also noncommittal on when they can move back into their house.

As Ars Technica notes, Samsung is expected to lose $17 billion on the Note 7 debacle, but it’s a cost the company can bear. By refusing to address the concerns of customers that were directly inconvenienced by its defective product, the smartphone maker has shown that it is only interested in looking after its own welfare.