Is Evil the problem here, Silverfish, or a combination of the two??

From reading the thread, Silverfish have been overruled by Evil.

The Following and the new Insurgent are being made by the same factory that makes all of the Santa Cruz carbon frames now (and I suspect a lot of others), so we expect the quality to be better.

Brilliant, however, that doesn’t actually mean anything, as the factory will just do as the are told, if the QC doesn’t exist from the first stage, then it’s meaningless. Their previous frame builders also managed to make straight frames for other brands that didn’t crack, yet they couldn’t manage that with Evil. see a trend appearing here?

minds about posting, as it’s my frame in question and one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR. I’ll therefore keep it factual rather than expressing any opinion, because it is still being discussed.

If that’s actual fact, and I’m assuming it is, being that it’s you who this involves, that’s is literally, bloody genius.

Regardless of the outcome, you must be bloody mental to be considering another bike from them after that stunning little gem.

I cannot believe people buy these things. I also cannot believe Evils ability to fail, at every single hurdle, every single time.

People considering anything made by Evil need their heads checked. It’s like jumping in a shark pool and then being upset when you get your leg ripped off.

How many more times?

LOL at those saying a certain percentage of frames should be expected to fail! No they shouldn’t, especially at the prices paid. Surely you pay the money to buy a superior product that has been tested over and over again before coming to market?

With Evil’s previous problems they should be 100% on top of this as the market will only accept so much. I had been thinking about carbon but to be honest it seems like the mtb world has not properly got to grips with it yet. It reminds me of the early 90’s when lighter was better… The end. That was until the parts started failing on regular occasions and the penny dropped.

I know SOGA gets waved about all over the place as soon as something goes wrong, but I’m going to do it anyway.

Surely this part of it…..

If your claim is about a problem that arises within six months of buying the product, it’s up to the retailer to prove that the goods were of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, or as described when it sold them.

For example, by showing that the problem was caused by an external factor such as accidental damage.
Means that on a frame this new, it is up to Evil to prove that it was caused by crash damage, not up to you to prove it was not. If it was me (and as a Following owner, I hope it never is), I wouldn’t even be entertaining the idea that I might have to pay for a replacement, if I was as adamant as you are that it was not caused through fault of my own.

one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR.

what a load of horseshit

if you signed a disclaimer upon purchase saying the warranty was only valid if you kept quiet about any frame failures id maybe have that, otherwise thats very poor from the distributors

LOL at those saying a certain percentage of frames should be expected to fail! No they shouldn’t, especially at the prices paid. Surely you pay the money to buy a superior product that has been tested over and over again before coming to market?

Customer came into my shop the other day, driving a 14 plate Volvo C30 1.6D. Said he’d just got it back from the dealer after the injectors had failed for the 4th time!!! On a car that’s only 18 months old… Despite all this he’s got nothing bad to say about Volvo (it’s a Ford underneath remember!) and would happily buy another one…

There’s always going to be some kind of failure rate on a product… Even planes fall out of the sky once in a while (fortunately there’s a lot more procedures put in place to minimise the chances of this happening, including engine redundancy etc.) for christ’s sakes! The level of care taken to make a £2.5k MTB frame isn’t going to be quite as high as that of a £10m Airbus, for which I’m quite grateful!

At this stage, Evil are refusing to replace the rear triangle under warranty, claiming that this has been caused by crash or impact damage. They have opined on this based just on photos, as the frame has been returned to Silverfish, rather than Evil themselves. I don’t believe this to be the case – I haven’t crashed the bike where a big impact to the rear triangle would have occurred, and it’s been ridden almost exclusively around the Surrey Hills where rocks are non-existent. My LBS concur with this, knowing both where and how I ride. I’m now waiting on Silverfish / Evil to come back with a price on a replacement rear triangle.

Fingers crossed for you that it’s positive news…

If it was me (and as a Following owner, I hope it never is), I wouldn’t even be entertaining the idea that I might have to pay for a replacement

Also would be my position. I’ve argued over less.

what a load of horseshit

if you signed a disclaimer upon purchase saying the warranty was only valid if you kept quiet about any frame failures id maybe have that, otherwise thats very poor from the distributors

Entirely true, you’re not being slanderous (which would be a court case, but wouldn’t invalidate a warranty claim in any case) – you’re being totally and entirely factual. Great customer service is viral, as is poor customer service. I know which one I’d rather be as a brand, be it manufacturer or distributor.

mboy – Member

There’s always going to be some kind of failure rate on a product… Even planes fall out of the sky once in a while (fortunately there’s a lot more procedures put in place to minimise the chances of this happening, including engine redundancy etc.) for christ’s sakes! The level of care taken to make a £2.5k MTB frame isn’t going to be quite as high as that of a £10m Airbus, for which I’m quite grateful!

Evil are the only company I know of who got close to 100% failures.

Either way, how you deal with failures define your customer service. And this isn’t the first story on here of then being crap to deal with. And when you consider they’re a pretty small volume brand in the scheme of things, that ain’t good.

Means that on a frame this new, it is up to Evil to prove that it was caused by crash damage, not up to you to prove it was not.

The important point here is that your contract is with the retailer – under SOGA, it’s them you should be pursuing and asking for replacement or refund. The warranty is neither here nor there.

Maybe they’ve xrayed it

Yes, yes of course they did. 😆

Customer came into my shop the other day, driving a 14 plate Volvo C30 1.6D.

WTF has that got to do with the OP?

Looks like a company that has bad rep for reliability and looking after it’s customers is still trying to get out of a genuine warranty claims.

Just another smallish brand reckoning they’re something by designing these bikes and selling them for big bucks to coincide with other big brand name prices only to realise or not as the case may be that they’re way behind on design and cba to put in the leg work on cs.

And breath… Long winded right there, phew.

To mention that the rear triangle is made in a different factory does bear some relevance I think as tolerances may be altered between both triangles and when fitted together, the weakest link and all that jazz.

I’m also pretty sure all brands rush their new products to the market before carefully assessing whether or not they are safe, I mean chucks, just add more specifically woven carbon to the rear end ffs. That’ll surely solve it! 😉

Still doesn’t stop me from wanting one but I know I wouldn’t go ahead with one and yes actually still, my head needs testing. 😆

WTF has that got to do with the OP?

Read what I wrote and you’ll see I wasn’t aiming it at the OP… The response I was replying to suggested that “at the price we’re paying, no level of returns should be accepted”. I was attempting to highlight that money really has little to do with it, and that hige companies that make millions of products each year have a failure rate too.

Are you choosing to be ignorant, or are you just being your usual internet trolling self?

I’m also pretty sure all brands rush their new products to the market before carefully assessing whether or not they are safe

Or fit for purpose… Long time Apple fan here, up until fairly recently… Seems like these days all they’re concerned with is making anything more than 12 months old obsolete and useless as quickly as they can, so that they can sell you their latest product!

Read what I wrote and you’ll see I wasn’t aiming it at the OP… The response I was replying to suggested that “at the price we’re paying, no level of returns should be accepted”. I was attempting to highlight that money really has little to do with it, and that hige companies that make millions of products each year have a failure rate too trying to give some credit to a brand I sell/Divert the blame by pointing at another company

I hope you will give some good support to anyone that’s bought an Evil frame from you should they have problems.
If you were to stand up and refund in the situation the OP’s in fair play to you…

Hmmm – am in two minds about posting, as it’s my frame in question and one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR.

Wow, that is utterly **** up. Having read that post I can only conclude that it was factual and information seeking. Much like the posts on here it was reasonable and for saying the service you are receiving you are not slating the company.

Evil need to grow the **** up

If I was the manufacturer, I’d be a little peeved about it being in public before I’d had a chance to look at the frame too.

You seem like a reasonable man though Ben, I’m sure you wouldn’t let it colour any subsequent treatment of your customer.

If I was the manufacturer, I’d be a little peeved about it being in public before I’d had a chance to look at the frame too.

Why? Should replacements only be available for those who keep their mouths shut? Surely they only have something to fear if this is a common problem

I don’t know, it’s never happened – but if I felt that someone was damaging my reputation before I’d had a chance to put something right, I might be less inclined to go over and above what SOGA requires.

What’s important to remember here is that the retailer hasn’t been mentioned at all in this. It’s the retailer’s responsibility to sort this out especially as it’s so new. They have to prove that it was not faulty when sold.

It’s especially difficult because it’s carbon – looking at the pics I can’t tell if it’s a manufacturing fault or a rock hit it.

As a comparable example, if a random stranger bought something off you on eBay which you sold in good faith, and then the first you heard about a problem was a forum post complaining that what you’d sent them was faulty and defective, I bet you’d be a bit peeved too.

If I was at fault I’d still offer a refund, I’d also post on said forum and post my reasons for refunding or not, coz I wouldn’t want anyone to think I was a conman, and I’m not a bike retailer, who relies on my reputaion

Oh absolutely. That goes without saying.

But I still wonder why the retailer is being let off so easily here.

but if I felt that someone was damaging my reputation

This is Evil though, this absolutely ties in with their reputation. You would think they would want to do everything in their power to reverse that

I’m not defending the manufacturer here, by the way – I’d never head of them until this thread. Just pointing out that we’re all human, there’s reasons they might be peeved at a cracked frame of theirs appearing in public before they’ve had a chance to look at it.

As a comparable example, if a random stranger bought something off you on eBay which you sold in good faith, and then the first you heard about a problem was a forum post complaining that what you’d sent them was faulty and defective, I bet you’d be a bit peeved too.

Except the first post was nothing but “my bike is cracked, here’s a photo”. He didn’t fill the post with invective or abuse about Evil, he just said he was interested to see how they responded. He hasn’t even posted to say how shit the follow-up from Evil was. If companies are concerned about their image they should act more like Kimbers says rather than the way Evil have behaved. Their follow-up is more worrying than the cracking frame; all frames have some faulty friday specials, it’s how the maker handles it afterwards that stops me buying a bike.

I know, I’m not defending their response, just saying there might be an explanation.

(For full disclosure, I can think of two things I’ve sold in the past few years that broke. One was a recumbent trike, came in with one broken small bolt. Investigated, found some massive cracks, under questioning customer admitted he might have accidentally hit a post at 20mph. Ended up costing him £1200 for a new frame. Other one was an early Brompton rear triangle, broke at the chainstay bridge. I sorted it right away, and redesigned and improved that part so it wouldn’t happen again.)

and I’m not a bike retailer, who relies on my reputaion

Neither is Evil by the sound of it!…they seem to get sales on the basis of a weird looking suspension linkage and high retail price which seems to appeal to a certain kind of rider who thinks it gives them a (false) sense of superiority and riding ability while out on the trail….boutique I think it’s called.

It’ll be nirvana cycles, I reckon. I presume the owner considers them to have done their job to his satisfaction.

Customer came into my shop the other day, driving a 14 plate Volvo C30 1.6D. Said he’d just got it back from the dealer after the injectors had failed for the 4th time!!! On a car that’s only 18 months old… Despite all this he’s got nothing bad to say about Volvo (it’s a Ford underneath remember!) and would happily buy another one…

Not in the same league. Any product can fail or go wrong but 1 in 100,000 or similar is far removed from the failure rate this mob seem to have. You’d struggle to justify it from a ‘stack it high, sell it cheap’ outfit, let alone a company at the premium end of the market. Add the seemingly woeful customer service I’m surprised they’re still in business.

Neither is Evil by the sound of it!…they seem to get sales on the basis of a weird looking suspension linkage and high retail price which seems to appeal to a certain kind of rider who thinks it gives them a (false) sense of superiority and riding ability while out on the trail….boutique I think it’s called.

I think you’ve double hit the nail on the head as to what I was saying earlier on in this thread.

I hope you will give some good support to anyone that’s bought an Evil frame from you should they have problems.
If you were to stand up and refund in the situation the OP’s in fair play to you…

Under the SOGA it’s my duty to…

Obviously I would be applying pressure on the distributor and manufacturer to sort something out (and at least refund me too), but it’s part of why we act as a dealer for said brand, and part and parcel of the service we provide that explains why we are allowed to buy said products for X and sell them for Y…

Exactly. It’s up the the dealer to prove it wasn’t faulty when they sold it. They can pass it back up the chain for advice, but under SOGA the buck stops with the retailer, they can’t wash their hands of a broken bike three months after selling it.

But apparently Silverfish have said they consider it a warranty case and its Evil saying no?

I know it’s easy for me to say, like it’s easy for mboy to make his hypothetical promises, but I’d be supporting the customer if I was the distributor.

Still doesn’t matter – statutory rights under SOGA trump any warranty. If the manufacturer have provided an engineer’s report that shows the damage was caused by a rock, then fine, that’s good enough proof for the dealer to refuse to sort it under SOGA. Just saying “the manufacturer says no” isn’t.

We all know that.

But if the shop gave him a new frame or refund they’d seek to recoup that from the distributor, so a decent one would just do the right thing in the first place, no?

Yes, of course. Not sure what we’re arguing about here 😉

@heihei sorry to hear your troubles.

Your contract is with the shop you bought it from, not Silverfish or Evil.

If you’re dissatisfied, tell the shop what terms you will accept to close the issue. If they won’t come to terms or offer you an acceptable alternative, initiate the small claims process. That’s what its for. To the best of my knowledge there is a small cost to start the process but no risk of being saddled with big bills if you don’t win.

I’m now waiting on Silverfish / Evil to come back with a price on a replacement rear triangle.

In supplement to my comment above, if you made a small claims then you probably wouldn’t claim for the full RRP as your frame has had wear and tear that devalues the frame and has delivered value to you.

So you may feel when you get your crash replacement quote, that it’s reasonable when you consider the wear and tear already on the frame. Only you can tell.

they seem to get sales on the basis of a weird looking suspension linkage and high retail price which seems to appeal to a certain kind of rider who thinks it gives them a (false) sense of superiority and riding ability while out on the trail

have we met ? 🙂

If it’s up to the shop to prove it was not faulty how would they do this?
I suspect by asking the manufacturer who are saying (I think?) it’s crash damage.
The shop don’t really need to do anything in that case. The OP is not exactly vehemently denying it was crashed…

Or does the shop need to hire a materials specialist or something?