Reeder Refused to Repair My S19 Max Due to Small Crack

Years ago, I chose Reeder phones for my entire family due to the brand's local entrepreneurial roots. This decision, unfortunately, led to a string of persistent issues that have severely eroded my trust in the brand. My first Reeder S19 Max experienced critical malfunctions within a month – it would shut down unexpectedly and lose audio. After a service replacement, the problems continued. My mother's new S19 Max had screen issues on day one, and a replacement from a different seller lost audio within six months. Similar complaints have surfaced from other family members who purchased higher-end Reeder models. Upon visiting a Reeder store for my S19 Max's warranty, staff immediately acknowledged, "This model has a chronic issue." Yet, they cited a minor screen crack as grounds to void the warranty, which is frankly unacceptable for what should be a simple screen replacement. Their proposed "solution" was even more absurd: "Pay an extra ₺5,000 to upgrade to a ₺15,000 model, and it'll have fewer issues!" My mother simply needs a phone for calls; a ₺15,000 Reeder is out of the question. A recent call from service reiterated this, offering a "new, higher-GB model for an additional ₺2,000" due to the crack. It's clear Reeder continues to sell these chronically flawed models. If a series has manufacturing defects, why are they still on the market? This practice of selling defective goods, then pressuring customers into costly upgrades, is unethical. A simple screen repair costs around ₺500, yet Reeder demands ₺2,000 and tries to upsell me. Reeder is responsible for the phone's internal workings. If Reeder continues to use minor screen damage as an excuse to avoid fixing chronic issues, I will gather all the family's Reeder phones and file a complaint with the Consumer Arbitration Committee for selling defective products and engaging in predatory sales practices. I intend to fully pursue my consumer rights.