Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/04

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Here is what it says....Part deux
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:38:58 -0500

> >Is all the nonsense about who stamped what when legally binding? OR when
> >push comes to shove, if you have proof of purchase in the form
> of a check,
> >credit card receipt, etc., is a manufacturer required to stand behind its
> >product from that date until the normal expiration of the warranty. Just
> >curious.
>
> BD
>
> Under US law, an item is warranted automatically under the UCC and various
> other legislation, though is is a pretty minimal warranty.  As to Leica's
> own warranty, it is the law in many, if not most, states that no special
> registration can be required to enforce a warranty, and I would suspect
> that proof that you purchased the item new and that Leica refused to honor
> their warranty would be sufficient to allow judgement in a small-claims
> court as Austin proposed, though the limits on this might be rather low in
> some states.

Thanks, Marc.  Limits in MA are $2500.  Enough for most any Leica repair, I
would hope...

What about the signature clause, and "authorized dealer" clause etc.?

Austin

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html