I bought an overlander with a Victron setup. Have finally got it all working - no earths all sorts of weird wiring…
Anyway the last piece of the puzzle is to get the CCGX registered to me, Soni can access through the VRM etc.
The former owner is not being helpful, and I have contacted the Victron dealer who supplied the device, but have never heard back. Is there any other way of doing this?
Seems to be impossible to get in touch with Victron direct.
Yes I have tried the offficial route… the seller won’t respond, the original supplier won’t respond.
Victron won’t respond to my follow up to the official method - they sent me a questionnaire asking if I was satisfied, I said no. Have heard nothing back.
Did you try just to register it as if it was new and received a message saying to contact the admins?
The supplier has to actually contact their line of victron support. If they are on the ball a resolution can be jn a few days of not, it can take longer.
Not true. in fact from what I have seen and experienced htye have been working hard to keep backwards compatibility at least within the hardware limitations. The CCGX is a product that is over 10years old and still can be updated.
Meaning it should have been sorted out. I think one of the middle men is dropping the ball.
guystewart
(Guy Stewart (Victron Community Manager))
7
The same happened to me in the beginning with some technical things…
After the (probably) automated script sent me from time to time that satisfaction questionnaire and answered no, last time I’ve answered yes to get rid of the (obviously now) “spam”.
Seems that nobody looks over those satisfaction reports.
If a simple thing like transferring ownership stumbles like this, imagine other things… But you’ll get the picture over time.
Unfortunately, this situation is being perceived as a Victron issue, when it actually stems from the previous owner not completing a simple but important step. If the installation had at bare minimum been removed from their account, it would have made it much easier for the new owner to register the device.
It’s important to clarify where the original responsibility lies. And in this case the person didn’t fulfil that and somehow its has become wveryone elses problem. And a particularly a problem for the new owner.
OK. Fair point.
But then he followed the proper channels to get help… Does this matter or not?
For sure it’s not a singular thing…
There is a saying… If two are saying you are drunk, you go to sleep.
It seems that someone is sleeping, indeed.
I agree that someone else now dropped the ball adding to the frustration.
And it is difficult to know how much time to give to being reasonable, with the internet the way it is (24 hour access) people have forgotten time is needed as well to resolve an issue especially if you are in a queue. (Dealing with other people’s work hours and the like.)
It should have been acknowledged or done before the satisfaction survey was sent which as you mention is probably automated. So obviously there is a time limit on when a result or feedback is expected from VIctron itself.
Does blame need to be assigned? Maybe the right person wasn’t given the assignment? It was a case of someone didn’t know what to do or forgot to follow through?
There are human being on the other side of the messages.
Don’t disagree with you about the seller, but I think both sellers and buyers don’t necessarily know that they need to do this.
But the fact that Victron chooses to use a third party (the dealers) to fulfill its customer service means they end up being perceived as only being as competent as there end suppliers… which in my case has been 100% non responsive.
Anyway Victron have said in this feed that they will email me, so let’s see what happens next.
Lets admit that it’s easy like PI to implement a simple procedure - inside Cerbo or inside VRM - for verifying that a device is really in the possession of a certain person and then to transfer the account to the actual device holder/person.
Some recovery procedure, like passwords on google and/or yahoo.
A lot of pain could be avoided this way… for so much time now…
Slightly disagree. Unless they never had acces to it at all. And only the installers did.
But they would have had to register it in the beginning. And had acces to it. And known about needing to login to view it.
Its seems a little silly to not think that that would not need to be passed on.
Yeah its a bit different when ownership has to be proved in some way so an installation cant be ‘stolen’
This problem of stolen devices existed since forever for phones.
For sure you heard about “Find my phone and lock it remotely” if this is the case of a stolen device.
If it’s stolen, then for sure the stealer will not go online with it… hope he’s not so stupid.
If he sells it and the new, innocent, owner goes online with it, it will not function and they will have a starting point with the investigation.
Otherwise, if the old, ignorant owner, takes no action - which seems to be most of the cases - and doesn’t lock the device with the above procedure, the transfer process, once the new owner proves that he has the device in possession, will be done automatically.
Since when the GX devices are sold and this problem exists? Nobody though of it like a phone?
Building a system to solve an exception doesn’t make good business sense.
There is a system in place. Which is usually pretty functional. Maybe not this time. But there will still be a resolution it has just taken a bit of time. The number of devices out there vs the number of people who have issues with transfer of ownership makes this more of an edge case.
I know OP mentioned he has seen alot of mentions of this on the community but remembering also the bias of the forum is ‘people come here with problems’. So back to the oercentage vs the number of devices ratio.
{Except for maybe the section on ‘Show us your system’ usually doesn’t have a why my system isn’t working discussion.}
Then considering that the RPI image generates these unique IDs for VRM to register and this procedure is known, then maybe a script/utility to modify the ID of the GX device and therefore allowing it to (re)register to VRM is in order…
But wait… Someone will jump and say that this will help thieves and such scripts/utilities are not allowed on this forum…
See… this is why hacking and cracking start… because of unsatisfied users with the current status quo…
And progress is born.