Terrible service

I recently sent in an IWC Deep One for servicing, and it was highlighted to me that the dial feet were broken, which necessitated a replacement dial.

Some months later, I get the watch back, only to find that the replacement dial is significantly different from the original, with the IWC signature being far smaller than before. The photos attached above show the before and after state.

I highlighted this to my local dealer and they forwarded my complaint to the service centre. This is their response.

"The design of the new dial might be very little to the old dial. The watch has now approximately 15 years, therefore, it might be understandable that dials get very slight differences or updates in production over years."

I think this is an entirely unacceptable response, and it smacks of dismissiveness. Firstly, the differences between the original and the dial that was replaced is not "very slight", to say nothing of how I believe IWC prides itself on restoring older or out of production watches to their original state. In keeping with that, I believe the only correct answer is to replace it with a dial that's identical to the one used in the watch's original year of manufacture.

To date, I have not been presented with any options or restitution, only excuses. I find this is very unbecoming, especially of a brand that prides itself so highly on quality and heritage.

I think the dial of the watch in the top picture (the new one, I presume) looks quite great. The lettering is a bit smaller than at the old one, but that is all, and it looks quite tastefully done. I would try to live with it, being glad that the watch is in great working order again.

Kind regards,
Paul

I don't have any problems with the way the new dial looks, and if I'm honest, I always thought the original was a little brash for my liking. And yes, I am glad to have the watch back with me again. It holds great sentimental value for me, which brings me to why I'm so upset with IWC's service.

My issue is in how at no point was I told that the replacement would look different from the original. I was operating under the assumption that I would be getting a replacement dial exactly like the original.

My second issue is in the lackadaisical attitude shown by the people at the service centre. Instead of giving me options on how I can proceed to restore my watch to its original state, the message I'm getting from them, unless I'm very much mistaken, is to "deal with it".

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this particular reference received any running updates to its dial design during its very brief production life. Their argument that it's 15 years old suggests that it's been produced continuously throughout this time (therefore receiving updates in the interim), which it most certainly hasn't.

I wouldn't want to speculate on how something this glaring managed to slip their QC. I mean, did they not compare the original with the new one and notice something was amiss?

I've been reading stories about the magic the people at Schaffhausen do, and this "too bad, nothing I can do about it" attitude doesn't quite gel with that image at all.

Tonny, that is not an acceptable explanation in my opinion. I feel many brands today do not offer a real service to their customers anymore, that is the overall problem.

Sourcing dials has often been the case within swiss horology industry, and I won't throw the stone at them for doing that. But ordering a new batch, and accepting even the slightest difference in size, as for the Deep One in this case, should not happen, given they wanted to keep the overall look as close as the original one.

In my feeling the header "Terrible Service" and the word "unacceptable" are a little bit too strong.

IWC and all other manufacturers do not produce together with the respective watches spares in quantities sufficient to service this type of watch for a hundred years. So from time to time there will be the need for further production of specific spares. The re-produced spares will be identical only, if the manufacturer has kept the model forms/templates plushis old machinery. Otherwise new models/templates have to be produced and they normally will differ somehow or other from the original production batch. To keep costs down in normal service there will be no call back, simply to keep up the workflow. Otherwise the service would be even more expensive as it already is.

If you are more sensitive than the average customer with respect to the look of your watch I recommend to simply state in your repair order that you up-front (!) want to be informed about the exact look of any spares used for the service/repair. To my experiences the service follows such wishes and will contact you. I once for example sent a Große Fliegeruhr from 1940 to Schaffhausen, but explicitly asked not to touch the case (thus it still shows proudly the traces of military use)

I myself normally take watches I want to keep in an all original state to my local watchmaker and have a close eye on what he is doing (and ask him that in case spares are used the old parts are returned to me).

It makes no sense to blame other people for having done something in case I don't know according to which rules they work and how tight these rules are observed: Murphy's law applies to the repair and service of a watch as well. So it is MY task to assure, that nothing can go wrong, because it is MY watch and it's ME, who suffers if the watch is spoiled. So it makes much more sense to simply express your expectations up-front, than to complain afterwards.

Just my two cents!

Th. Koenig

I agree with Mr. Koenig about the responsibility and the exact specifications. But only now that I know about it: I guess I will not be told so by the AD, and that this is not based on ill will by the AD, as he might not know it either. I guess what happened here is that IWC tried to do more than just a decent job, and they performed well within these non-specified circumstances. But the client is not satisfied, and angry after the fact. I wonder whether "unacceptable" is just strong talk, or that it will be taken literally, and that a formal complaint and demand for change will be issued by the client. I would count to ten, and accept the current watch for what it is: a great looking well functioning watch with a repair issue on the looks of some letters. Maybe I'm growing old and so, but there are better battles to fight, and bigger problems in the world.

Kind regards,
Paul

The IWC logo wouldn't be that bad if the "Schaffhausen" was in the correct font. "Schaffhausen" is totally different to what it should look. Yes they should have called you before raplacing...

I first asked them if there was any way they could salvage the old dial and make repairs to the dial feet, because that was the part that was damaged, but they said it was not possible. Plus, it's stated in the repair terms and conditions somewhere that damaged parts cannot be returned.

Unfortunately, due to the complexity of the watch, there was no way I could send it to a local watchmaker, not to mention how I didn't have much confidence in anyone but the factory servicing this.

And yes, I do blame myself for not ensuring that they would keep the watch as original as possible. I assumed this was implicit, but I should have made my wishes explicit instead. Also, not replacing the dial was not an option. I was forced to accept a replacement.

Lastly, I don't consider myself a very picky customer. I understand that it's difficult to make a 100% faithful reproduction. I would have been happy with 80%, but this falls rather short of 80%, in my opinion.

To be clear, I'm not asking for a New Old Stock dial, I would be happy with one made in more recent times, but one that looks more or less like the original. In any case, I've learned a very painful lesson. Always check what spares the service centre will use before approving repairs.

First world problems :)

Looking at it again, I feel for you. Definitely devalues the watch value if you decide to part with it. Deep Ones are worth quite a fair bit in the used market, the wrong logo type will definitely lower demand.

Seems like a supplier f*** up if you ask me. Done it, too late, let's just get the client to accept it.

The summary of the previous discussions is this :
If you are an experienced collector , you have learned how IWC does the restoring job and a service and you have learned to communicate with the responsible people in Schaffhausen how to direct the job according to your expectations.
If you are unexperienced 2 things may happen : you may not even notice the difference between an original dial and an aftermade one or you don't mind it. But it is also possible that you become very disappointed as here is the case.
A possible hint for IWC might be to warn the customer and/or the AD upfront, once an aftermade part which is clearly visible : dial, hands, crown significantly differ from the original part, even if the customer has not asked for it.
Kind regards,
Adrian,
(alwaysiwc).

There was a thread posted recently here with high end fake IWC Portuguese. Incredible dial reproduction. If fake can get so close to the real thing it's unacceptable for this monstrosity to leave IWC service and be passed to a customer without any explanation. It's the attention to detail that I value most specifically in this industry.

I agree. If we would compare the 2 pictures without comment or in the fake thread we had here last week, we would state that the new dial is a fake which is coming scaringly close to the original.
It would have been good habit if somebody told you before about the difference. But then in the end: Would there have been another repair option? If the answer is no (I guess) then you have to live with it anyway.
Of course this is a 1st world problem, but it's a first world (top end) watch too! Like every IWC watch.

The new dial does not show a "wrong" signature, it shows the current logo with Schaffhausen in a sans serif font. The change to this new logo took place in 2015. More details can be found here.

Nevertheless it is not very logical to implement a dial with a new logo into a watch that never looked liked this in its living years. It should not be some kind of a problem to instruct the external supplier of the dial to use the proper and historically correct font.

IMO the watch looks fake with the new dial... The font is completely off and is nothing like any other IWC watch from that era. I'm amazed IWC would put this dial on this watch.

So, there are four possibilities:
- It looks original and it is original: the normal, preferred situation;
- It looks fake and it is fake: totally unintereting;
- It looks original and it is fake: highly scary;
- It looks fake and it is original: an extremely limited edition!

So, we have here a watch that at the moment is a bit like a formal stamp with a misprint, that is worth quite a bit after about 100 years. I wonder what is going to happen next.

Kind regards,
Paul

I think it was a faux pas on the part of IWC to order replacement dials with the new signature. Having said that, you have a unique watch. That can't be too bad, provided IWC doesn't make the same mistake again.

Maybe the grandchildren of my grandchildren will auction it off in several hundred years time and it'll be worth a fortune!

Precisely my point. How was it allowed to happen in the first place? Just heard back from the regional customer service rep and the message I got was "deal with it". Ugh.