meaning my intial repair request was approved, the device evaluated, deemed irrepairable, and job completed with no repair performed.

according to the warranty terms, they have done everything they can, and because it turns out replacing the phone according to them is cheaper than a repair(this is why i am wondering about DIY viability), and because the phone originates from another country(the US, i'm in Australia) the warranty can only be invoked for repair of my device, not replacement.

so now its being evaluated by a case manager liasing with higher powers to see if I can have dispensation for a special circumstance.

my argument is based on 4 things.

1. the way the care line and care centres have not kept accurate records of our communications, and the phone manner of the lower downs at the call centre, and general "customer experience"

2. the time spent dealing with them in the past 6 months. including my n97 experience.

3. the fact nokia created a situation where they had a phone that was miles ahead in terms of performance than the n97 in the n900, and that I shouldn't be punished by nokia for supporting them enough that I bought a phone that was only just officially released last week in Australia from somewhere else given that I value their products(this includes my loyalty to the phones, i have never owned a different branded phone in 10 years as a user).

4. as a general assumption, people who use smartphones obviously know they are designed to work on virtually all mobile frequencies, so how is it that they only supply warranties to the countries they are bought in when the phones can be used everywhere? my argument earlier about how if i(or a friend) rang saying i was from america on holiday in australia and my phone broke, there would have been a higher likelihood of this issue being resolved by way of a couriered out phone from the states- by my thinking they would get the call, tell me to go to the care centre, and then the care centre would send it to america after evaluating it, who would then send out another replacement. correct? so why is it not that simple in my circumstance when it could theoretically occur through me being deceptive?

the simple fact is, I have not been treated correctly for a long enough period of time that perhaps it is nokia who should be suprising me with a letter to tell me i will be receiving the new N8 when it arrives as a token of their apologies for their "customer experience" and thanks for me not wiping the floor with them.