nice letter from Canon ( now next step )

[santana007]

My D700 is probably approaching half that figure in 2 months. I would be jumping up and down even if it had failed after 2 years on half of the expected life. I doubt Canon will have much of an issue replacing it.

if i didn't have so much canon kit .. and the second hand value .. i would be going out to replace it with Nikon

if i only had one body then the count would be at 13'000 .. still low on Canon's claim of over 150'000 ...

What they should say is 150'000 or 6 months which ever comes first .
but then they can say the shutter ain't failed i suppose :bang:


Rog

 

[Mike54]

As far I understand it the goods should be of merchantable quality, and 6000 clicks falls way short. Jessops and or Canon should be taking an interest in this, its their reputations which are being affected.
If an item is cheap and disposable then 1 year warranty is fair enough, a camera is neither and the warranty reflects this, as above 6 years is not unreasonable.

 

[santana007]

As far I understand it the goods should be of merchantable quality, and 6000 clicks falls way short. Jessops and or Canon should be taking an interest in this, its their reputations which are being affected.
If an item is cheap and disposable then 1 year warranty is fair enough, a camera is neither and the warranty reflects this, as above 6 years is not unreasonable.

Spot on Mike54 ... it should be about reputations ... If for instance you are looking on here thinking of getting a canon from jessops and you read this .. well now you might just choose a Nikon from jacobs ..

but if you read how well and quickly the problem was sorted then jessops and Canon win ...

Canon are a global company .. what harm would showing good will do them ......

Rog

 

[pearce_jj]

From Sale of Goods Act...

• Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.

• Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.

• It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

• If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)

• For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

• A purchaser who is a consumer, i.e. is not buying in the course of a business, can alternatively request a repair or replacement.

• If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit

• In general, the onus is on all purchasers to prove the goods did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).


I would have thought this thread might help with the last point - it seems that general concencious is that a £1500 camera body with light or moderate use should last the full six years (indeed this is my own view). OP - why not start a poll?

 

[admirable]

I don't think there is anyone on here that wouldn't be disappointed if their £1500 camera failed at 2 years.

I don't see any mileage in contacting Canon as it's not their problem, it's down to Jessops.

Are Jessops washing their hands on this?

 

[santana007]

From Sale of Goods Act...

• Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.

• Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.

• It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

• If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)

• For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

• A purchaser who is a consumer, i.e. is not buying in the course of a business, can alternatively request a repair or replacement.

• If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit

• In general, the onus is on all purchasers to prove the goods did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).


I would have thought this thread might help with the last point - it seems that general concencious is that a £1500 camera body with light or moderate use should last the full six years (indeed this is my own view). OP - why not start a poll?

Might ask for a signed petition ...

I don't think there is anyone on here that wouldn't be disappointed if their £1500 camera failed at 2 years.

I don't see any mileage in contacting Canon as it's not their problem, it's down to Jessops.

Are Jessops washing their hands on this?

Although as you say it is nothing to do with Canon .. i was just disappointed with their response ... As i say it is their camera's reputation .. Good will doesn't cost a lot but goes a long way ..

At the moment it is early stages ... letter's are being written and we will then have to wait for answers .. Canon , Jessops and Finance company ..
two of them are responsible and one could do more ...

Alyson phoned Canon today asking why the Camera had failed .. Their reply was, ............... they will get back to us within 72 hrs ..

Wait , wait , wait ...... surly they must know why ... if only they had stated why in their letter ..

As i pointed out when they told me to return the Camera to them ... their email said "QUOTE"

Please can you package the LENS as securely as possible, including a proof of purchase, a description of the fault and you own return contact details. :shrug: Lens ...

Good job someone is paying attention

Rog

 

[admirable]

So as things stand just now, there isn't a problem?

 

[incapete]

A couple of others have mentioned this but it's worth re-stating: your contract is with the retailer who may or may not take steps to get reimbursement from the manufacturer.

They have a duty to provide goods that are fit for purpose; the Sale of Goods Act and the Consumer Protection Act both have sections referring to this. Don't let anyone tell you there was only a year's warranty oranything similar - there is no absolute timescale however 6 years is often taken as a benchmark unless you can argue otherwise.

So I'd suggest continuing to go after Jessops - it's up to them to repair or replace it but they may have an agreement with Canon where it's sent straight to them.

The only area where I'm not sure about is the fact that you have a finance agreement.

 

[santana007]

So as things stand just now, there isn't a problem?

Well we will only know that if we don't end up paying .. But so far jessops have said ... 6000 seems a lot and you wouldn't want to buy a second hand Camera with that many ..

And Canon has asked for £285 without saying what caused the problem .. Then yes there is a problem ..
if jessops had said bl**dy hell that isn't many actions .. or Canon had shown good will then no there wasn't a problem ..

or if i had been some dufas who was willing to say i will send the money now , thankyou so much for fixing it .. then again no problem !!

A couple of others have mentioned this but it's worth re-stating: your contract is with the retailer who may or may not take steps to get reimbursement from the manufacturer.

They have a duty to provide goods that are fit for purpose; the Sale of Goods Act and the Consumer Protection Act both have sections referring to this. Don't let anyone tell you there was only a year's warranty oranything similar - there is no absolute timescale however 6 years is often taken as a benchmark unless you can argue otherwise.

So I'd suggest continuing to go after Jessops - it's up to them to repair or replace it but they may have an agreement with Canon where it's sent straight to them.

The only area where I'm not sure about is the fact that you have a finance agreement.

The problems i see is Canon say it is my fault and i won't be able to prove otherwise ..
or jessops and finance company get stuck in a your fault nothing to do with us situation ..

 

[Nod]

Does the sale of goods act still apply if the goods are used for commercial purposes?

From Sale of Goods Act...

• A purchaser who is a consumer, i.e. is not buying in the course of a business, can alternatively request a repair or replacement.

Since the OP appears to have bought the camera "in the course of a business", he may well not be covered by the SoGA.

 

[bambam]

I dealt with Consumer Direct earlier in the year and they were very good in terms of advice, specific law that had been breached and what to write in the letter to the retailer I was dealing with.
They also explained that there was recourse to the credit card company if you had used one to pay.
Worth a call if you haven't done so already...
Cheers and good luck.

 

[admirable]

So as things stand just now, there isn't a problem?

What I meant was,

I am presuming by your posts that Jessops have not refused to fix it.

Canon don't have to fix it as it outwith the terms of their trade warranty and you didn't buy it from them anyway so the (retail) sale of Goods act does not apply. Canons contract lies with Jessops. Canon may well carry out a repair for Jessops.

Canon do have a goodwill structure in place, as do other manufacturers and your camera does not qualify.

So we have pages of threads here and so far, no problem has arisen.

 

[santana007]

What I meant was,

I am presuming by your posts that Jessops have not refused to fix it.

Canon don't have to fix it as it outwith the terms of their trade warranty and you didn't buy it from them anyway so the (retail) sale of Goods act does not apply. Canons contract lies with Jessops. Canon may well carry out a repair for Jessops.

Canon do have a goodwill structure in place, as do other manufacturers and your camera does not qualify.

So we have pages of threads here and so far, no problem has arisen.

And your problem is what !!

Jessops said !! Once again 6000 actions is a lot ... WOULD YOU BE HAPPY IF YOUR CAMERA HAD TAKEN 6000 PHOTO'S HAVING COST £1500 TO BE TOLD THAT IS ALOT .....

. so then we contacted canon and canon asked us to send it to them ... Which i have done ...

but if pages of threads bother you don't add to them with your negative posts .. :bang:

Most people have offered sound advice .. some of which i am taking ..

one being Consumer Direct who have sent us a letter to send to jessops ..

i started the thread saying about what i thought to be a poor response from Canon .. after they had said it might be fixed under good will ..

Again if they had said what caused the problem .. i.e me dropping it in to a bucket of water then fine ..

Rog

 

[santana007]

I dealt with Consumer Direct earlier in the year and they were very good in terms of advice, specific law that had been breached and what to write in the letter to the retailer I was dealing with.
They also explained that there was recourse to the credit card company if you had used one to pay.
Worth a call if you haven't done so already...
Cheers and good luck.

Cheers m8

gave em a call and they have sent an email with what to send to jessops ..
thank you for your advice and help .. sorry to add yet another page to this thread .. maybe it should be closed until i have some news ..

 

[admirable]

I'm not being negative,

I've asked you twice, you still haven't answered me,

Are Jessops refusing to deal with this?

A yes or no will do fine.

 

[santana007]

I'm not being negative,

I've asked you twice, you still haven't answered me,

Are Jessops refusing to deal with this?

A yes or no will do fine.

They said 6000 is a lot of actions for a camera .. and that we should contact canon ..to have it repaired .. then added , you wouldn't want to buy a second hand camera with that many would you ..

. so i can't answer because when we phoned jessops they were less than helpful as the camera was over 2 years old with what they call alot of actions .. So no jessops have not said they won't fix it .. they havn't said they will ..

not sure what other answer other than that i can give you ...

as i have stated until i get a solid reply to the letters , there is no answer ..