Import issue - what would you do?

[Strapps]

I recently bought a Canon P rangefinder from a Japanese ebay seller. The shutter curtains in these cameras are made from tissue-thin stainless steel painted black and it's difficult (but not impossible) to find one that doesn't have a crease or a wrinkle in one or both curtains. I asked the seller about this before buying and he replied that the curtains were crease-free, plus the description said that the camera was in excellent condition and was working perfectly.

On receipt, the camera, while definitely the one pictured in the ebay auction, seems a little scruffier than I was expecting. A couple of screws were missing and the rear shutter curtain has a couple of small creases. These appear to be cosmetic as I test-fired it and most of the shutter speeds seemed ok, though the shutter dragged when using 1/60s. I'm guessing this is the crossover between high and low speeds as the camera is fully mechanical and you can hear a whirring spring on speeds of 1/30s and slower.

I cleaned it up a bit and put a few drops of lighter fluid into some key areas and it's much smoother, plus after several test fires, 1/60s seems to have picked up to somewhere near normal. I wasn't happy about having to do that with a camera described as excellent and working perfectly, so I raised a claim for a partial refund to cover the cost of a full CLA from someone who knows what they're doing. The seller has responded with an offer of returning the camera for a full refund instead.

I paid a bit less than these normally sell for on the bay so I'm not too surprised that the condition doesn't quite match the description but I'm annoyed at the seller's answer on the shutter when I asked about that issue specifically. That said, the creases don't appear to cause any issues and the curtains are in much better condition than many other examples I've seen.

I'm also put out as this was supposed to be my last camera purchase for some time. I wanted a good-looking manual rangefinder with an L39 mount and didn't mind that it isn't metered because it'll give me a kick into thinking more about my exposures and using sunny 16 instead of relying on the camera meter.

Right now though, I'm undecided on what to do. If I return the camera, it's got to be posted by Wednesday to keep in line with the resolution through ebay. If I keep it, it's likely to end up costing me more than the price of another body and I doubt whether parts are widely available given it was only produced for a few years and hasn't got the community support that a Leica or Voigtlander has. On the other hand, I think it looks better than a lot of the alternatives, which was one of the key drivers for me, and it's a lovely piece of mechanical engineering. Plus returning it would mean attempting to reclaim the import duty and VAT, something I haven't needed to try before.

I've stuck a few options in a poll. What would you do in the circumstances? Am I being overly sentimental about a camera I haven't put a single roll of film through yet? Or should I wise up and not accept being stitched up?

 

[srichards]

Typical fleabay. Item not as described. Get a full refund. Then hopefully these dodgy chancers will stop lying about the condition. You asked about creases SPECIFICALLY and the seller said there weren't any. They lied. Full refund and make them pay return postage as well as outbound.

Take photos of the issue and send the item back. If it is clear the camera isn't the one that is being sold and the listing said it was again Ebay should be cracking down on dishonest sellers.

 

[wickerman]

I didn't realise it was possible to reclaim the duty if you return goods overseas. Having looked it up I found this:
What to do if you return the goods after you've paid tax and/or duty
If you return goods to the sender after you've paid duty and/or tax you can ask the UKBA for a refund. You'll need to claim in writing within three months. Write to the address on your charge label and enclose:

• the original charge label
• the Customs Declaration and the part of the packaging showing your address
• a certificate of posting to prove you've sent the goods back

If you can't provide all these, UKBA may reject your claim.

Have you still got the first 2 in the list? If not it seems you may not get your refund. This may have a bearing on what you decide to so.

 

[Strapps]

Full refund and make them pay return postage as well as outbound.

Thanks, Suz. Regarding the bit I've quoted, the email from ebay said I'd be responsible for paying return postage so how do I go about getting the seller to refund it? Is that something I need to raise with the resolution centre or with the seller?

I've only had to return items a couple of times previously and it's been sorted out through direct communication with the seller but this guy is using the system.

 

[Strapps]

Have you still got the first 2 in the list?

I do - I'm almost pathological about receipts and packaging, which keeps getting me told off by t'missus because I have so many empty boxes in the spare room "just in case".

 

[srichards]

No idea how you'd get the seller to refund apart from asking and putting in a dispute with ebay if they don't agree to it. Had they been honest you wouldn't have bought it as you specifically wanted a non creased version. I don't use ebay really so I don't know the ins and outs of getting what you want....

 

[ChrisR]

I thought I saw something recently to the effect that many sellers do refund postage for a return not as described, and that fleabay were thinking of forcing all to do so. The other option was refunding the money but not asking the buyer to return the object. When I claimed a not as described refund (described as a mju II when what I got was a mju 1 zoom), fleabay did not respond to my request for refund of postage, but they did refund my money and never asked me to send it back. I did anyway.

You can ask in the dispute centre, but my feeling is, until the policy change comes don't hold your breath. The problem if they refund you and you don't send it back would be a hit on your feedback. So you might end up wearing the postage. Does that affect the decision?

 

[abdoujaparov]

Excellent poll. Good options. Would vote again.

 

[dean messenger]

raise it to a dispute for partial refund.. ive done this in past after a seller sold me something that was not as how described ( a vaccum cleaner listed as ex display unused arrived and had been used and was scuffed ). they originally offered full refund and i stated i wasnt prepared to ship it back and pay shipping costs ( though i gather ebay rules on shipping has now changed with faulty/incorrectly described goods ) so i pushed for a partial refund and sent the proof of description along with photo showing actual description to ebay dispute and eneded up getting around 25% discount back.

 

[Strapps]

So you might end up wearing the postage. Does that affect the decision?

Not really, it was only cheap relative to other examples so it'd be worth returning for a refund. I did buy a lens to go with it but that was being sold separately (by the same seller) and I've no reason to return it so no refund on that. To be honest, that's colouring my decision more than the issues with the camera as it's a thing of beauty (Canon 50mm f/1.4 L39 mount lens with 9 diaphragm blades).

I'm veering towards keeping it and replacing it with an M-something when it eventually breaks.

 

[Strapps]

raise it to a dispute for partial refund..

Done that, asked for £50 to pay for a full CLA.

... they originally offered full refund and i stated i wasnt prepared to ship it back and pay shipping costs ( though i gather ebay rules on shipping has now changed with faulty/incorrectly described goods ) so i pushed for a partial refund and sent the proof of description along with photo showing actual description to ebay dispute and eneded up getting around 25% discount back.

That's interesting. Last time I raised a partial claim and a full refund was offered, ebay dispute told me that as a full refund had been offered, I had to either accept it or go away. That was about 2 years ago though so the policy may have changed. Thanks

 

[Strapps]

Excellent poll. Good options. Would vote again.

Top TPer, great response, A++++++++++++

 

[dean messenger]

i have found in past ( though they are owned by same people ) if ive paid with PP i get quicker and better action if i raise the dispute direct with PP rather than go through ebay wait time..

 

[Steve Smith]

I'm veering towards keeping it and replacing it with an M-something when it eventually breaks.

I would keep it too but try to get a partial refund.


Steve.

 

[steveo_mcg]

Well this be lesson on trying to avoid UK tax and supporting dodgy grey import companies, if you'd bought from a UK seller you could easily return it... I'm just kidding.

Could you sell it for what you paid in its current condition? (accurately described of course) if so try and get what you can from the seller for a cla etc if not you'd probably be as well taking on the chin by the time you return it and chase the tax office. Odds are you'll not get parcelfarce extortion back either.

 

[Andysnap]

Oy git, I've just read the last option on the poll.....I voted for that one.

 

[ChrisR]

Oy git, I've just read the last option on the poll.....I voted for that one.

3 times, apparently!

 

[Strapps]

I would keep it too but try to get a partial refund.

I think a photo of the shutter curtain and a copy of the message where the seller says it's perfect wouldn't hurt my case

Well this be lesson on trying to avoid UK tax and supporting dodgy grey import companies, if you'd bought from a UK seller you could easily return it... I'm just kidding.

Only problems with that are a) finding a UK seller who has one (ironic given that the P stands for Populaire) and 2) finding a UK seller who doesn't appear to believe it's made from dragon's breath and unicorn tears based on the prices of the couple I found when I was looking. The defence enters Exhibit A for the court's attention. Interestingly (if you've recently bought a Canon P that was incorrectly described), the two big creases in that one's shutter curtain are in the same location as the ones on my example, though mine is not as bad as that.

I'm going to sleep on it, though after giving the camera another fondle tonight, I'm not sure if I want to send it back. The shutter speeds sound good now and it seems daft not to at least put a film through it and see what it's like.

 

[Andysnap]

Strangely enough I only voted once, which must mean that 2 other people are as sorry as I am that I sold my Voigtlander....Now, I wonder if they care enough to donate toward a new one?

 

[Strapps]

... it seems daft not to at least put a film through it and see what it's like.

Loaded a roll of Rollei Retro 100 last night, took a few snapshots this morning, discovered that the rangefinder needs to be adjusted. Of course it does.

I'm planning to run off the roll at lunchtime and develop it as soon as I get home. There's no pretence of artistic merit but the results might help with the indecision.

 

[Swanseajack]

As for returns, the new procedure for sellers to issue a postal refund doesn't come into play until the 15th September 2014.

As regards to partial refunds, a lot of chancer buyers are claiming that goods have arrived not as described and trying to get a partial refund. Sellers are wising upto these chancers and are requesting a return, the seller has nothing to loose currently and a lot of buyers are not returning as they are trying it on. Unfortunately these chancers mess it up for genuine buyers like yourself.

What you now have to weigh up, is the cost of insured / registered post return going to be greater than servicing the camera, if he doesn't issue a postal refund.? Although it's bloody annoying for you, as you specifically asked the question regarding the curtain.


http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/th...y-not-as-described-goods.555024/#post-6419582

 

[Strapps]

As regards to partial refunds, a lot of chancer buyers are claiming that goods have arrived not as described and trying to get a partial refund. Sellers are wising upto these chancers and are requesting a return, the seller has nothing to loose currently and a lot of buyers are not returning as they are trying it on. Unfortunately these chancers mess it up for genuine buyers like yourself.

This did cross my mind as I'm going to be selling some kit soon and decided that's what I'd do if I got a partial refund claim!

What you now have to weigh up, is the cost of insured / registered post return going to be greater than servicing the camera, if he doesn't issue a postal refund.?

Good point - Royal Mail track & sign for an 850g parcel to Japan is £20.35 and the last time I got a CLA it cost £45. Add in the hassle of applying to get the import duty refunded, which may take up to 3 months, and the ParcelFarce extortion fee which won't be refunded and it's difficult to say whether it'd be worth sending it back unless it needed parts that aren't available any longer.

 

[Swanseajack]

It's a difficult one to weigh up, theres nothing worse than spending money and having nothing to show for it, in your case return postage. As the old saying goes, i'd rather give it away.

As you had the camera cheaper than you would have got in the UK, could you look to sell on and make a little profit or not loose any monies if your not happy with it. You will possibly have that little niggle in the back of your mind, wondering about parts availability.

 

[srichards]

You shouldn't have to bear any losses due to the lies of the seller though. They were dishonest and you have proof.

Write to the seller and restate that if they won't agree to a partial refund to cover the difference in condition you'll have to raise a dispute for the associated costs of returning the goods back ie return postage, parcel farce fees and inconvenience as well as the full refund as just the full refund doesn't actually cover the full costs you will have paid out. Had they been accurate with the condition you wouldn't have bought it in the first place. Hopefully they will realise a partial refund will cost them a heck of a lot less. With a change in Ebay's policy imminent the seller will quickly realise they could have to pay a full refund and not expect the camera back to due to how much trouble it will be to return!

 

[Andysnap]

I just had a similar issue with a Nikon FE. Described as fully working and nearly mint when it arrived it was nearly mint but the shutter wouldn't fire. I raised it wirh ebay and a full refund was immediately offered but I still had the cost of return postage to pay out, quite annoying.
In your case Dean, I think if it were me I would wait until you have devved the test film and if its ok just ask for a partial refund to cover the cost of a CLA...or sell it and buy a Voigtlander.

 

[Swanseajack]

You shouldn't have to bear any losses due to the lies of the seller though. They were dishonest and you have proof.

Write to the seller and restate that if they won't agree to a partial refund to cover the difference in condition you'll have to raise a dispute for the associated costs of returning the goods back ie return postage, parcel farce fees and inconvenience as well as the full refund as just the full refund doesn't actually cover the full costs you will have paid out. Had they been accurate with the condition you wouldn't have bought it in the first place. Hopefully they will realise a partial refund will cost them a heck of a lot less. With a change in Ebay's policy imminent the seller will quickly realise they could have to pay a full refund and not expect the camera back to due to how much trouble it will be to return!

I think if you read the earlier posts that the seller is playing the game. He has offered a full refund. As it currently stands the purchaser has to bare the cost of return postage and the seller will refund the camera cost. If a dispute is raised there will be no further actions required from the seller than just issuing a refund for the camera. He would have complied with ebay's policies.

Until it comes in on the September 15th, sellers dont have to cover the return postage cost, although reputable sellers usually do. And this is why ebay are tightening up due to poor seller descriptions.

Edit: This is why it currently sucks the seller doesn't loose any money from a disputed sale if he returns purchase cost, it's the buyer loosing out. Also, the seller doesn't then pay any fees so he is back in square one. The only thing the buyer can currently do is leave negative feedback. In this case the seller would say it's been misundertsood in translation or words to that effect in his reply.

This is the risk when buying used products from abroad, in this case Japan.

 

[muscleflex]

If you're not happy with it, take it back - once unhappy about something, it will always hunt you!

 

[Strapps]

As you had the camera cheaper than you would have got in the UK, could you look to sell on and make a little profit or not loose any monies if your not happy with it. You will possibly have that little niggle in the back of your mind, wondering about parts availability.

Possibly, though after taking about 10 shots so far today I'm really impressed - the film advance is smooth and light (see if that changes as more film goes on the take-up spool), the shutter release is firm and positive which is how I like them, the rangefinder spot, though out of alignment, is easy to see and the framelines are clearly defined. The viewfinder is nice and bright, has 1.00x magnification with all three sets of framelines (35, 50 and 100mm) in view but the silvering is done in a way that makes the unused ones easy to ignore. The parallax correction appears to be working as expected and the shutter speed dial is light but positive.

Doesn't change the fact that parts will be difficult to source, considerably more so than an M3 or IIIf/g, though it didn't cost me anywhere near what those sell for, hence my thought of using it until it's beyond economic repair and then looking for a suitable replacement.

In short, first impressions are good enough that I'm beginning to question the morality of pursing a partial refund when I'm already enjoying using the camera. That said, it wasn't as described either in the original auction description or in personal communications so my squeamishness is probably my innate sense of fair play despite the other chap not playing with a straight bat.

You shouldn't have to bear any losses due to the lies of the seller though. They were dishonest and you have proof.

This is what I need to remember!

Write to the seller and restate that if they won't agree to a partial refund to cover the difference in condition you'll have to raise a dispute for the associated costs of returning the goods back ie return postage, parcel farce fees and inconvenience as well as the full refund as just the full refund doesn't actually cover the full costs you will have paid out. Had they been accurate with the condition you wouldn't have bought it in the first place. Hopefully they will realise a partial refund will cost them a heck of a lot less. With a change in Ebay's policy imminent the seller will quickly realise they could have to pay a full refund and not expect the camera back to due to how much trouble it will be to return!

I think I'm going to tell them I'm not prepared to return it due to the cost and losses I'd suffer, support that with the evidence that the seller isn't particularly honest, pursue my dispute for a partial refund to cover a CLA and suck it up if it ends up going in their favour.

 

[JohnX]

Get a £quote for a CLA asap and include it with the dispute. Proves nothing other than what you want as a partial refund.

 

[Swanseajack]

Seems like a good plan if your happy with the camera and it's the camera you want.

Also, remember that the Distance Selling Regulations don't apply in this instance as you bought camera from abroad. You have 45 days to issue a dispute with Payapl or ebay, Im not sure if you have raised a dispute or you have just gone to seller for partial refund.

 

[Strapps]

You have 45 days to issue a dispute with Payapl or ebay, Im not sure if you have raised a dispute or you have just gone to seller for partial refund.

I raised an "item not as described" dispute with a request for a partial refund of £50 (my last CLA cost £45 and I have to cover postage both ways), seller responded with the offer of returning it in response to the dispute and ebay have told me I have to send it by 20 August. I'm going to post my objections through the resolution centre tonight and see how it goes.

 

[Strapps]

Rollei Retro roll replete, had a wander around the sports field down the road from the office and up to the nearby metal-bridge-with-flaking-paint to top up my cliché quota. All shots metered with an initial reading with the Exposure-Mat Mini which I carry in my wallet, then adjusted by guesswork based on whether the sun was in or out. I think the meter might need calibration ...

I had a quick google before I went out (filthy beast) and found that adjusting the rangefinder is quite straightforward. I was able to tweak the vertical without tools, though the horizontal fine-tuning requires the diddy screwdrivers that are at home. Hopefully the closer-up test shots won't be quite as out of focus as I thought they would be.

I'll get this film developed when I get home and hopefully the film will be dry enough to scan some samples before bedtime.

 

[Strapps]

Response to ebay sent along with 3 photos of the shutter curtains. I'll update when they reply.

In the meantime, here's a sample from my first roll of Rollei Retro, stand developed in Rodinal. As an aside, I think there's some sort of coating on the film that means it doesn't suit stand developing. I mentioned previously that I'd got a couple of rolls with what looked like bars across them from the sprocket holes and one of those was a roll of Retro 100. I'll try a standard development next time as a comparison.


Canon-P-Rollei-Retro-1 by Strappster, on Flickr

I've done some minor tweaks in Lightroom to compensate for the scan but overall I'm pleased with the results. Just got to hope the camera keeps working now...

 

[robhooley167]

If you have trouble with the coating and stand developing, it might be worth using a pre-soak. Stick some water in the tank for a couple of minutes and agitate regularly, this helps take the coating off.

 

[Strapps]

Email from ebay this morning, the seller has offered a partial refund of $70 (US), which is roughly £42. He has also apologised for the inconvenience, apparently he'd confirmed the partial refund to ebay but Google Chrome malfunctioned and offered a full refund instead. Which must be why I have so many cameras - I didn't mean to buy them but Google Chrome malfunctioned.

So, it's short of the amount I asked for but it's better than I was getting previously - should I accept or hold out for the full £50?

 

[Swanseajack]

I would take it if it was me.

In the grand scheme of things £8.00 isn't a lot but I know it's the principle. What you have got consider is that he ask's for a return of the camera and you end out of pocket by the postage cost of 20.35. Also, you seem happy with the camera after your initial tests and it's £42.00 more than yesterday. Your decision!

 

[srichards]

It depends on whether you think the extra £8 is worth a fight and how much of the original cost + customs the $70 represents. I think it is probably the best you're going to get all things considered. I'd take it if I wanted to keep the camera and have a quiet life but curse later if anything goes wrong with the camera

 

[abdoujaparov]

I'd bite their hands off for the £42, but I usually go for the easy life. It depends on how much you value not having to deal with it any more.

 

[steveo_mcg]

I agree with the consensus, take the money cut your losses if it worries you punt it to someone who thinks its made from pure unicorn. They're working USD and $70 probably seems like a fair amount it just doesn't translate well to GBP and UK prices.

 

[Strapps]

Also, you seem happy with the camera after your initial tests and it's £42.00 more than yesterday.

Very true and I certainly was happy, it's a lovely thing.

It depends on whether you think the extra £8 is worth a fight and how much of the original cost + customs the $70 represents.

It's just under half what the camera cost. I paid $160 (roughly £94 at the time) and that was the best price I'd seen in a few months of looking, hence asking the question about the shutter curtain because I wanted to be sure I was getting a good price, not a knackered camera. £42 won't pay for the service it needs but it's close enough that I'm happy to accept it and move on.

Thanks, everyone, for your replies