Misleading "Privacy" claim, defective product, and bad-faith customer attrition
I ordered the Nillkin Privacy Guard glass screen protector for the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra (Order NK121204). The product completely fails its advertised claims, and their customer support relies on a bad-faith attrition funnel to deny statutory refunds. 1. Defective Product & False Advertising: Nillkin advertises a "28° privacy angle" ("screen is only visible to persons directly in front of screen, and 28° vision can see") and an "anti-glare" coating. In reality: - The screen remains completely sharp and readable from wide side angles past 45 to 60 degrees. It provides zero optical privacy. - The glass produces heavy specular reflections and mirror-like glare under normal room lighting, actively degrading the phone's native low-reflectivity display. 2. Bad-Faith Support & Merchant Attrition: I formally requested a statutory refund under the UK Consumer Rights Act 2015 within 10 days of delivery. - They demanded video proof, which I provided using a basic 720p laptop webcam (which easily read the screen from the side). - Their support then tried to redefine their advertised specification, claiming 28° merely means "gradually reducing visibility" and falsely claimed camera auto-exposure altered the footage. - Instead of issuing a full refund, they deployed a classic attrition tactic: first offering a 10% partial refund, then after an 8-day delay, bumping it to 20% plus a coupon code to buy more products, while telling me to keep the item to avoid international return costs. They repeatedly refuse to honor full statutory refunds for defective goods. I have now been forced to escalate this transaction to my bank for a formal chargeback. Avoid their screen protectors if you expect real privacy or accountable customer service.