Re: [Leica] Warranty & New vs. Used

[V8PWR@aol.com]

Dans un courrier daté du 04/06/01 08:36:02 Paris, Madrid (heure d'été), 
Frank.Dernie@btinternet.com a écrit :

> Hi Austin,
>  here in the UK we have had a law since the 1970's (1972 I think) called the
>  "sale of goods - implied terms - act".
>  Basically a Retailer warrants that anything he sells is "fit for the 
purpose
>  for which it is sold". The retailer is responsible for satisfying his 
client
>  and is no longer able to fob him off with "I'll check with the 
manufacturer"
>  or such like. Many clients don't know this and several shops still try it
>  on. The favourable upshot of this is that unscrupulous vendors and
>  manufacturers are pretty well a thing of the past. It is, after all easier
>  for a retailer to monitor the reliability of goods and stop dealing with 
bad
>  suppliers - even with very profitable lines - if it is them that pays not
>  the customer.
>  Any dealer selling grey has to deal with warranty themselves.
>  I won't bore you with the details but it is fair. Caveat emptor was
>  frequently used as a means of theft before this (less so now).
>  Are many other countries like this?
>  cheers Frank

France has got the same rules . The seller is responsible for the warranty .
It is his responsability and in case of a problem with my Leica , He pays
for insured shipping , phone calls to Leica , and so on .

JO GOODTIMES -FRANCE/ AIRBORNE RADAR TECH / LIVE FREE OR DIE
will soon walk with mud covered combat boots...