Sig Service Policy

[Martyman]

I recently purchased a California legal (on the roster) P229 that has all the California "safety" features and is still on the roster. It (like many) is having a failure to extract issue. I called Sig to have it sent in for service and they told me it would have to ship out through and back to my local Sig dealer. When I searched for my nearest one and it turned out to be well over an hour drive away (each way) they told me that at least it would have to be returned to a FFL upon it being repaired. I explained that the gun was and still is California legal, and they insisted that the only way the gun was going to get repaired was if I played by their rules. I'm very unhappy about this situation, and consider this change of policy to be a breach of contract when they decide to change their policy without being willing to show me in writing where that policy has changed. I'm probably going to clean the gun up and sell it when it returns. (Not just because of the service issue, but because I'm not 100% certain I'll be able to trust it to go "bang" when I absolutely need it to.) I am deeply disappointed in this situation, as I had been lusting over a P229 for a long time prior to finally getting this one.

[wweigle]

Total BS Policy. Para-ordnance shipped my repaired pistol directly to my house as the law allows. I would be frustrated also If I were in your shoes.

[sigfan91]

This is Sig's new policy. It's to protect themselves from being sued by CADOJ.

Just be glad that Sig will actually ship it back to this state.

[Martyman]

Doesn't it disturb anyone that they can't cite a particular law that necessitates this, nor can they point me to anywhere in writing where they state the change in their policy? Not sure who I dislike more - the state for creating this mess, the lawyers for being overly cautious, or Sig for listening to them.

This gun is legal to own in this state, yet they are making me pick it up from a FFL that has never been involved with this transaction. I wonder what proof of ownership I'll need to present to the FFL so that they will give me my gun when it returns. (How does the FFL really know I legally own the gun?!)

[Malmon]

That's ridiculous. No other gun company does this. Making their customers jump thru hoops to get warranty service. This will discourage people from sending their problematic pistols and encourage people to just sell it a loss than deal with Sig's retarded policy. This will save Sig a lot of money.

Another problem with this is Sig paves the way for other gun companies to do the same and those companies that wants to cut the costs of honoring their warranty service will follow Sig's lead.

Somebody ought to sue Sig Sauer

[nahpungnome]

I think they did this just to make it easier on themselves by making a blanket policy for California. Sig owners with guns off roster were really screwed before the policy change. Now everyone in California with on/off roster Sigs get to go through the same FFL shipping policy.

I guess they didn't want to train their CS about what's on or off roster. In any case, at least those with off-roster Sigs can get warranty work done now... Who knows, their policy might change again.

I sent a polite email to one of their CS reps with an attachment of the CA DOJ page for on-roster Sig firearms and asked why I would have to jump through hoops if mine's on the roster, but I doubt I'll get any kind of reply.

[rareair]

I recently purchased a California legal (on the roster) P229 that has all the California "safety" features and is still on the roster. It (like many) is having a failure to extract issue.......

Is there an ongoing thread about this problem? I am getting ready to purchase a used P229 and haven't heard about this problem before. What's the fix besides shipping it back to SIG?

[Maddawg46]

I found out about Sigs Warranty policy a few months ago. I have 2 Sigs. They will be my last. Like both, but the Company is not worth dealing with.

[L-2]

This SIG-issue is disappointing & disturbing. Another option is to send it here:

http://grayguns.com/about-us/shipping-firearms/

and, perhaps, also have other custom work done to help justify the cost.

I suppose, even though a gunowner's problem may be a warranty issue, consider the total cost of driving, shipping, time, and any other associated expense.

Here's another source for parts, should that be an option:

http://www.topgunsupply.com

[Martyman]

@Rareair I learned of the failure to extract issue by doing a Google search for it. Apparently the new "long" extractor is prone to issues. I haven't gotten mine back yet, so I don't know what they did to fix it, but this is a problem with multiple ammo brands and weights, although it was vastly more pronounced with 115 grain bullets. I'll update when the gun comes back.

[G21Shooter]

That is freakin BS. Sell that POS and buy a Glock. At least you likely won't need customer service ever and if you do its top notch.

[DEPUTYBILL]

You may look into the idea of sending a copy of your bill of sale for the gun to Sig requesting a full refund of all costs since they are failing to provide warranty service to you. Or contact a FFL and find out the cost to have him send it to Sig, and any fees he will charge you to return the gun to you. Add any out of pocket cost to you, and tell Sig that you consider them responsible for these costs. It seems Sig is just giving up on California as a customer area. It seems even some law enforcement agencies are giving up on Sig for duty guns because of issues getting parts and service.

[nickel plate]

I recently purchased a California legal (on the roster) P229 that has all the California "safety" features and is still on the roster. It (like many) is having a failure to extract issue. I called Sig to have it sent in for service and they told me it would have to ship out through and back to my local Sig dealer. .

That would definitely be a hardship for me-three hour drive each way X 2. Is it possible that Sig means "from any California licensed FFL"? If so and in my case that turns into a fifteen minute drive each way X 2.
My P238 came broken right out of the box, sent it back to Exeter with their free 2-day shipping label, received it back about ten days later and seems to be running fine now. That was less than a month before sig woke up one morning and erased California present and future owners off of their warranty game plan map.
I had once considered getting a second sig, the P938. No more sigs for me, ever.

[nickel plate]

That is freakin BS. Sell that POS and buy a Glock. At least you likely won't need customer service ever and if you do its top notch.

I've been waiting for that.

[Martyman]

[QUOTE=nickel plate;13017467]That would definitely be a hardship for me-three hour drive each way X 2. Is it possible that Sig means "from any California licensed FFL"? If so and in my case that turns into a fifteen minute drive each way X 2.

The first strong suggestion was that an authorized Sig dealer needed to handle the return and take receipt of the gun upon it's being repaired. When I balked at this insane notion, the guy finally relented and let me send it out directly, but indicated that it had to go back to a FFL. The customer service rep had the nerve to ask me if I knew anyone out of state "Arizona for example" that would be able to receive the gun and then send it to me. How insane is it that they would rather send my gun to someone other than the actual owner just to keep it from shipping to California?! My Sig arrives at the FFL today, I brought all my spare magazines in (10 total) and will most likely leave it all there for them to sell.

Next question is - what to buy next?! HK is no better from what I understand as far as service goes, so what other semi-auto 9mm with decocker should I be looking at? I keep one in the chamber, and like the first pull to be a harder one, but don't necessarily want a manual safety. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks!