I purchased a Pro Breeze 25L Smart Compressor Dehumidifier, model PB-D-37W-W, and discovered a fault with the display. Two segments remained permanently illuminated, resulting in incorrect humidity readings, while the defrost indicator stayed on continuously, even when the room temperature was well above the temperature at which defrosting should be necessary.

I contacted Pro Breeze on 30 September 2026 and provided photographs, a video, the batch number and all the troubleshooting information they requested. I followed their instructions, including switching the unit off at the mains, but the problem persisted.

Although the dehumidifier still collected water, the display fault significantly affected its usability. I could not reliably establish the humidity level in my room or tell whether the unit was actually defrosting.

On 4 October, Pro Breeze offered me two options: a 15% partial refund if I kept the defective unit, or a replacement if I returned it.

I opted for the replacement.

After confirming that replacements were only available for the same model, I explicitly asked them to proceed with the exchange on 14 October. Their response was to request my address, telephone number and a collection date so they could collect the defective unit and then proceed with the replacement.

However, before arranging collection, I noticed that the model was showing as out of stock on their website. I therefore contacted them on 21 October and asked whether it would make more sense for me to continue using my existing unit until replacement stock became available. I was perfectly happy to wait. I simply wanted to avoid being left without a dehumidifier.

Their response was that they could not guarantee when or whether the product would be restocked and that, if they collected my unit and a replacement was unavailable, they would issue a full refund instead.

I explained why I considered this unfair. I had purchased a product that was defective through no fault of my own, and they had already offered and agreed to proceed with a replacement. Their stock shortage should not mean that I have to surrender my existing unit and potentially be left without the product I originally purchased.

I subsequently received a 15% partial refund offer from another member of their support team, supposedly as an interim solution while I continued using the defective unit. However, when I asked whether accepting this would still allow me to receive a replacement once stock became available, this was never properly clarified.

Most recently, on 4 November, Hansen simply repeated that they wanted to collect the unit and issue a refund. Once again, none of my actual questions were answered.

What I find particularly frustrating is the complete lack of ownership and consistency between customer service representatives. I have had to explain the same situation repeatedly to different people, despite the entire email history being available to them.

I have not been unreasonable. I have not demanded an immediate replacement when the product is out of stock. I have offered a perfectly practical solution: let me continue using the current unit, contact me when the same model is available again, and arrange the exchange then.

Instead, Pro Breeze seems determined to push the easiest administrative solution for itself: collect the product, issue a refund and close the case.

That is not what I requested, and it is certainly not the customer service I would expect after purchasing a defective product.

I would like Pro Breeze to take ownership of this matter, confirm that I can be contacted when the model is back in stock, and honour the replacement that was originally offered and subsequently agreed upon.

Very disappointing experience.