Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] A question of a dealer's responsibilities and ethics
From: Nathan Wajsman <wajsman@webshuttle.ch>
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 09:13:00 +0200
References: <20010509055625.19743.qmail@www0a.netaddress.usa.net>

On the face of it the dealer should have told you to send the camera back to him
so he could check it out himself and then either fix it or refund your money.
However, since there was no warranty, I guess legally you do not have any rights.
I have had to send items back on a couple of occasions and the problem has been
fixed with no fuss, even if there was no explicit guarantee. Those dealers wanted
my (repeat) business and so needed to keep me happy.

The statement that "mint" does not imply mechanical perfection is B.S. I do not
have the latest LHSA catalog in front of me, but I am pretty sure that "mint" does
not just refer to the cosmetic condition, but also implies that everything works
exactly as it should.

If your dealer does not give you a satisfactory resolution, you should "out" him
here.

Nathan

gregor samsa wrote:

> I recently (last days of march) purchased an M6 classic in "mint condition"
> from an established, though not Leica-authorized, dealer whose name will be
> VERY familiar to most American LUGnuts. After perhaps a dozen or fewer rolls
> this camera started manifesting an annoying but not critical fault: when I
> double-stroked the film advance, it occasionally added space between frames
> (occurring perhaps once per roll on average), generally skipping about one
> sprocket hole. Over the following weeks, this problem has worsened so that it
> now might happen three or five or more times per roll. The problem, suffice it
> to say, can no longer be ignored. Just to repeat for clarity, the camera is,
> somewhat counterintuitively, ADDING space between frames.
>
> I called the dealer today to share this story with him and find a mutually
> satisfactory solution and was surprised and appalled by his response: "I can
> offer you a list of quality repair facilities and, well, good luck. We offer
> no warranty on our used Leicas." He was saying, in essence if not in these
> exact words, this "mint condition" camera was sold as-is and any mechanical
> problem is just my tough luck.
>
> Now, on the other hand, remember that it's been five weeks already that I've
> had the camera and also that I neglected to call him as soon as the problem
> started manifesting. (In my defense, and I'm no Clarence Darrow, I've been
> swamped with projects lately and also, what is clearly a problem today I
> rationalized as little hiccups originally).
>
> So my question to one and all is: what do you think is a fair resolution here?
> And, to help concentrate the mind, would you do business with this dealer,
> knowing what you know now?
>
> Thanks for any cool-headed responses.
>
> Gregor
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

- --
Nathan Wajsman
Herrliberg (ZH), Switzerland

e-mail: wajsman@webshuttle.ch

General photo site: http://belgiangator.tripod.com/
Belgium photo site: http://members.xoom.com/wajsman/
Motorcycle site: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/1704/

In reply to: Message from gregor samsa <gregor...samsa@usa.net> ([Leica] A question of a dealer's responsibilities and ethics)