I wanted to let others know about my positive experience with Weatherflow @WFstaff customer service.
About a month ago, I installed my new Tempest with no problems. I liked the product enough to send another Tempest to a relative. Unfortunately, the radio link didn’t work properly on that unit (low signal strength between the Tempest and hub), so I emailed customer service describing the symptoms and asked for help.
I received an email reply within two business days. The rep (Claire) suggested a hub reset - the only thing we hadn’t tried yet - but ALSO said if that didn’t work, she would send a replacement unit. IMO, that last bit really showed good faith.
The hub reset didn’t resolve the problem, so I emailed customer service again and received a reply within an hour indicating a replacement would be shipped out. Within another hour, we had tracking numbers. The new unit arrived two days later and was installed with success. Thanks Claire!
I’ve worked in the electronics manufacturing industry, so I understand that electronics can fail right out of the box. While a large percentage of electronic components meet a design specification over their intended life span, there will always be a small number that do so for only a very short time and then fail. A very common way to detect these sub-standard components is to perform a “burn-in,” where the device or sub-assembly is operated under normal use conditions for some period of time. The burn-in time varies by product of course, but is often 24 to 48 hours.
My suggestion to Weatherflow is to consider the economics of a burn-in procedure at the manufacturing facility for either at-risk subassemblies or the completed device. Weatherflow may find that it is more economical to perform a burn-in than to use customer service contacts to detect initial failures in the field. Considering the value of a customer’s initial positive (or negative) experience may also influence that calculation.