I purchased a Cannon safe largely because of its advertised lifetime warranty, expecting support if a core mechanical component failed under normal use.
Out of the blue, the safe would not open, but after repeated attempts we were lucky and managed to open it. We planned to never close it again until it was repaired. The safe’s internal locking mechanism had developed excessive slack, meaning the sliding bar could move too far before the lock engaged. On this model, the electronic lock only blocks the sliding bar; it does not move it. Because of the slack, the bar would press against the lock even at rest, creating side load on the lock and making it difficult or impossible to open the safe.
Unfortunately, during repeated troubleshooting steps requested by Cannon — which often felt duplicated or unnecessary — the safe eventually jammed completely and will no longer open.
Over four weeks of back-and-forth with Cannon support, the only resolution suggested was that I hire a locksmith to have the safe drilled open, at my own expense. No repair or replacement was offered for the internal mechanical assembly that failed. In my view, had the underlying issue been properly addressed initially, the safe likely would still be at least open.
Because it became clear that Cannon would not provide a functional repair, I began shopping for a replacement safe. While visiting a large national chain store, the manager asked why I was replacing mine. After hearing my experience, she commented that they recently sold the last Cannon safe they had and hoped not to carry the brand again, citing frequent post-purchase issues reported by customers. That was her observation, not mine.
In my opinion, a lifetime warranty should cover failures that render a safe unusable during normal ownership. My experience shows that this is not always how it works in practice.
