Philips 55OLED807: Misleading Service Report & Unreturned Parts

I own a Philips 55OLED807/12 television. On 26 August 2026, the TV suddenly shut down and completely stopped turning on. Since the problem occurred just one month after the end of my 3‑year extended warranty on 27 July 2026, I had to apply to the authorized service in Şanlıurfa, Türkiye for a paid, out‑of‑warranty repair. The TV was officially accepted by the authorized service on 2 September 2026 and delivered back to me on 2 October 2026. When I asked what had been done to the device, the service staff verbally stated that the Mainboard had been replaced. However, on the official service document given to me, the only recorded part is the Power Supply Unit. There is no mention of a Mainboard replacement in the written record. This creates a serious and unresolved contradiction between the verbal explanation and the official documentation. In addition to this, the faulty old part that was supposedly replaced was not returned to me. This both prevents any independent technical verification and conflicts with consumer protection standards that allow the customer to request replaced parts. Because the repair was paid and out of warranty, it is especially important for me to clearly understand which part was changed and on what basis I was charged. I have repeatedly contacted Philips customer support about this situation. Instead of examining the inconsistency or supervising their authorized service, I was told that they have no authority to intervene and that I should resolve the issue directly with the local service center. In practice, this means that Philips has left me alone with a contradictory repair record and has not provided any oversight over its own authorized service network. My TV is currently operational and turns on; my complaint is not about a current functional defect, but about the lack of financial and technical transparency in the repair process. I was charged for a repair where the verbal claim (Mainboard replacement) does not match the written service document (only Power Supply Unit), and the old part was never returned to me. I request first of all a clear, detailed and corrected official technical report that transparently explains exactly which components were replaced and resolves the contradiction between the verbal statement and the written document. I also request written verification of any replaced parts, including their exact names and, if available, their serial or part numbers. If the authorized service and Philips cannot or will not provide an accurate and consistent report that clarifies this discrepancy, I request that a formal investigation be launched into the service process and that I be compensated with either a full refund of the repair charges or a replacement television. I expect Philips to ensure transparency in its authorized service network and to correct this situation in a way that restores my trust as a customer.