In the above situation, I wouldn't expect them to fix it because they would have already done their part by fixing my defective device. The terms of agreement spell out everything quite clearly, and they are liable for any defective device. If they didn't have any liability I would have been written off by Samsung immediately, but since my claim is actually valid if the product was defective before the water damage occurred, it's in Samsung's best interest to analyze my phone and officially declare water damage was the culprit of all of my phone's issues. After reading the warranty, the importance of establishing a timeline as well as what or who is culpable for all of the phone's problems becomes very evident. Also, it wouldn't be too difficult to tell whether or not the issue with the phone was caused by water without only looking at the water damage indicators. In this case, One would be able to see if the device was defective because of a faulty part or actual damage from water. That is just another reason why Samsung's procedure is flawed. It not only violates the rights of the consumer, but it disregards the important timeline in order to save time. Just imagine you spilled a little water on your phone-not enough to do any damage but just enough to set off an indicator. Then, imagine after 5 more months of use your headphone jack stops working properly. According to Samsung, your warranty is void even though the water was in no way responsible for the defect in your product. The terms are very clear in stating that water damage does not void the warranty, but rather damage from water is not covered. I am basically certain that Samsung will do nothing to fix my device, but I am certain that what they are doing is illegal.