We are not sure who the user "Gabrics" is, but he made a few false statements that we think are important to correct. First, we did not make any statements in writing about a payment to be made to the client, if we did, please provide them to us and we will honour those payments. Secondly, this issue was addressed via email with the customer, and only after we explained our policy to them did they decide to bring this matter to bitcointalk.

ASIC Jungle has proudly sold hundreds of thousands of ASICs globally, adhering to the highest industry standards. However, we must also protect ourselves from potential bad actors, which is why our warranty process for used hardware is clear and necessary.

We appreciate everyone’s understanding and wish you all a great day.

We are a North American company with operations in Canada and the US. Nothing to do with China.

Purchasing used hardware is a common practice, and we partner exclusively with highly reputable firms with whom we’ve built years of trust. The equipment we source, whether our own or from these trusted partners, typically has low defect rates. OP can provide insight on the specific percentage of deficiencies in this batch, though we’re confident it falls well within the normal range for used machines.

Also, to address any potential confusion, we want to clarify that if a refund was mentioned, we will absolutely honor it. Although, we are confident this couldn't have been the case.

After reviewing the email thread between the customer and Alex Bodromian, we could not find any mention of a refund. The communication clearly states that we would be taking back their non-working ASICs for replacement.

As previously mentioned, our DOA process includes repairs or replacements, and at no point was the customer advised to, nor had any reason to spend personal funds on repairing the machines.

Hi,

We would like to shed light into this particular circumstance to clear anyone reading this of any confusion.

This particular client, indeed purchased a batch of used hardware from us, and we offered our standard 5-day DOA policy. We instructed the client to send us the SN's of the machines along with the reported issues, and send us back these machines for repair/replacement. Instead, the customer decided to undertake repairs on their own with a third-party repair center without seeking our prior approval, and without following our DOA procedure.

Unfortunately, we have clear steps defined for all DOA issues which often include repair, or replacement of units. In this case, said units would have been replaced upon receipt. We did not priorly discuss any unauthorized third-party repairs, and instead, we have been presented with an invoice after the fact. This being said, we had no way to verify that the repairs that have been done were performed on the hardware that was shipped out and not any other units, thus our DOA guidelines and policy.

We hope this helps clarify the situation.