Ambulance Chasing on the Samsung Case

A class action lawsuit that was filed in South Korea, in 2016 by a group on the Note 7 has been ruled in favor of Samsung which has saved them at least 820,000 dollars.  The group behind the mass action call originally wanted to get $267 per person for the issues caused by the recall of Samsungs infamous Note 7. Since the filing of the suit, the number of clients with complaints has grown to 1,900 and the revenue had increased to at least $433 per individual.


The court based in Seoul, South Korea denied the case filed by the phone owners claiming that the firm did what was in its power to reduce the inconveniences that occurred when the phones were recalled and even allowed clients to keep promotional accessories sold as part of the Note 7 package and this was served as a form of compensation. A similar suit was filed against the company in America but the proceedings are still ongoing for that one.

Note 7 Issues

The Note 7 had a battery that Samsung was required to possess unusually high energy density. The trouble is, they placed it in a designed space which had no breathing room resulting in too much heat generated in the enclosed space especially when it was charging. Different instances of spontaneous ignition leading to damage in property in separate and random places deemed the object a danger and thus prime for recall. Even airlines refused to have them onboard. This was, of course, detrimental to the reputation of the tech firm as several individuals resorted to meme teasing on several platforms. At home in South Korea, the mess inflamed the passions for the device buyers who fired of numerous lawsuits for the inconveniences concerned with the handling of these dangerous devices for new and noncombustible Samsung machines.

Ambulance Chasing on the Samsung Case


These 1871 applicants had also wanted compensation for having to fire up new handsets and reinstall the apps that were lost on their former phones. This brings into question the limits of corporate compensation and its bearing on customer service. Truth be told, Samsung was in the wrong when they designed, produced and fed the market, a product which could potentially harm them. They are thus obligated to cater to the claims and compensation requests of the markets that it holds dear as a tech firm. That means payments and promotions or discounts on other products until the debt is implicitly paid. However, the customer care business is quite dangerous in this day and age where insurance fraud is rampant. People will do anything for a settlement even if it is not justified. There are clients that lost property and contacts because of malfunctioning and combusting devices bought and these are the real victims of the issue. Those who are filing claims on the basis of calling turning on devices and reinstalling applications a chore are clearly reaching. There is a difference between seeking justifiable redress and plain taking advantage. The courts ruled right on this one.