Nikon "claim" I broke my camera... :(

beercan

beercan

Suspended / Banned
Messages
582
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
I bought an S8000 in March when it was released. Overall it's not a bad little compact but a couple of weeks ago, one evening out of the blue the shutter didn't open properly and the lens woudn't fully extend. I turned it off and on a couple of times and it eventually freed itself, however the lens now has a big scratch on it.

I sent it to Nikon via my local camera shop and Nikon have reported back that basically, whilst they don't dispute it jammed, "whatever I put in it to un-jam it" has scratched the lens. Thus, the warranty is now void...

Now I know categorically, and have witnesses to the incident, that I didn't put anything in it. I'm not stupid enough to do so and even if I had broken it (even by accident), I would have claimed on my insurance rather than as warranty.

They have told the shop they want £55 to repair it...

How would you handle this please?

Thanks for looking. :thumbs:
 
Didn't the shop check it for knocks & dings? when i sent a camera back to Sony via Jessops they made a note of the condition. Good job too because when it came back it looked like they played football with it.
 
Yeah sorry I should have said, the shop checked it before hand and agreed I should send it back. It was scratched when I took it in, that's why I sent it back.
 
I would phone up Nikon and speak to them, politely, and see what they have to say, unfortunately it is the same with all goods sent back to the manufacturer, you will need to prove you did nothing wrong.
 
Thanks. It's really annoying when you know you've done nothing wrong but they won't accept your explanation, so I guess I'll have to see what they say directly. :bat:
 
isn't there something about within a certain amount of time it's on them to prove it and outside of that time it's on you to prove you didn't?

i'd contact trading standards and see what they've got to say :)
 
Tbh I think you're on a hiding to nothing, unless you can prove the scratch was caused by the lens jamming.

As far as the repair goes, £55 doesn't sound like a lot if the front element needs replaced, you'd be as well paying it and chalking it up to experience.
 
I had a similar thing with sony and an Xperia phone, (it had a fault - they said i broke it). It took a dozen calls and letters to directors to get anywhere. This seems to be a regular warranty cop out.

I'd say pay the £55, buy a new camera or prepare yourself for a month of constant phone calls and letters. I got there in the end but I have to say it probably wasn't worth the effort.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Tbh I think you're on a hiding to nothing, unless you can prove the scratch was caused by the lens jamming.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think you should be fine. Ring them up, or e-mail them, stating what you did and didn't do, and how the scratch occurred. It's up to them to prove that there is a reason not to replace or repair after an alleged within-warranty fault. If they argue then get whoever witnessed the event to write to them.
 
Thanks all. Consumer Direct says
"If you make a claim for a repair or replacement of faulty goods within six months of purchase its up to the seller to prove that the goods were not faulty when sold to you. After six months you may be asked to prove that the fault has not been caused by accidental damage or wear and tear and you may want to obtain an independent expert’s report to back up your claim."

Trouble is, obviousy it wasn't faulty when they sold it as it worked for 3 months... :shrug:
 
I'd just go with the advice that you should call or write to them clearly setting out the circumstances and that you have a witness, although presumably they aren't entirely independent? Worth an ask isn't it?
 
If all else fails, then £55 for a camera repair is a bloody good price. Other places would charge you that just to open the packaging.
 
Personally I think it's worth pursuing this with the retailer under the Sale of Goods Act - it really doesn't take too much effort to write an EMail.

Remember that if you go down this route, you're dealing with your contract with the retailer not with your manufacturer's warranty. Nikon have nothing to do with it - they have a separate contract with the retailer and that's between those two parties.

If the camera malfunctioned within 3 months of purchase, then clearly there was an inherent fault with it at the time of purchase. A camera should last more than 3 months without failing, provided that you've not mistreated it.
And I don't think that anyone is disputing that, in fact by taking the camera from you and returning it to Nikon for repair the retailer has effectively acknowledged their responsibility to offer a repair or replacement under the SOGA.

The issue of the scratch is a trickier issue as it's damage rather than an obvious "fault". However, as you've already looked at, within 6 months of purchase (and as long as you're asking for repair / replacement rather than a refund) the onus is on the retailer to prove that the damage was NOT due to a fault with the camera, rather than on you to prove that it was.

:shrug: I guess it comes down to how much effort you want to put in for £55. I think you have a reasonable case under SOGA, but it'll likely take you a bit of effort to get there.
 
Thanks guys. It's more the principal than the cost which I why I intend to pursue it.
I'll let you know how I get on tomorrow. :thumbs:
 
however the lens now has a big scratch on it.

From that I assume that happened after purchase, and as warranties only cover manufacture defects and not physical damage after the fact, I'm not sure how you plan to peruse this.

Bottom line - wasn't scratched when you bought it. Now it is....
 
You'll be lucky, I had an epic fight with Sony after my laptop screen developed a fault.

They claimed it had been dropped (which it hadn't), and sent me a repair quote for £650 to replace the screen, the cheeky f***ers. I pursued it to near enough the highest level. I had sworn statements from people who had seen it before I sent it away to them under warranty. As someone mentioned earlier, when it returned it honestly did look like they'd given it a good beating - the screen didn't close down properly as it had become warped, and now the screen itself was completely dead - the LCD panel had physical damage to it as if someone had made deliberate forceful contact with it, whereas before it was some faulty lines, possibly a connection error or something very simple.

To conclude, I got nowhere - even after I complained in writing to the head of the Sony Vaio department. He backed up his moron 'colleagues' in the repair department saying I'd damaged it.
So I gave up, there's no point trying your word vs multi-million pound corporation. In the end, I sucked it up and sold the laptop as a faulty bit of kit for £150 (It cost me more than £700 only a few months before.)

Sorry to put such a downer on it, that's just my experience! Nikon might be a bit more accommodating if you push, so by all means try.
 
beercan said:
II sent it to Nikon via my local camera shop and Nikon have reported back that basically, whilst they don't dispute it jammed, "whatever I put in it to un-jam it" has scratched the lens. Thus, the warranty is now void...
Click to expand...

Just a thought that might be worth pursuing: If there was enough pressure to produce a scratch on the lens, wouldn't there be some other marks left of the levering you'd have done to do this?
 
puddleduck said:
however the lens now has a big scratch on it.

From that I assume that happened after purchase, and as warranties only cover manufacture defects and not physical damage after the fact, I'm not sure how you plan to peruse this.

Bottom line - wasn't scratched when you bought it. Now it is....
Click to expand...

Yes but my argument is that the lens cover jamming has scratched the lens, thus, had the cover not jammed, the lens would not be scratched...

Musicman said:
Just a thought that might be worth pursuing: If there was enough pressure to produce a scratch on the lens, wouldn't there be some other marks left of the levering you'd have done to do this?
Click to expand...

Good point! One I will certainly include. :clap:
 
how can you prove you didn't cause the scratch? Seems to have been caused by doing whatever you did to free the lens.......:shrug:

If it wasn't there when you bought it, and it was after you freed the lens, then whether accidental or not, you caused the scratch (yes I know the lens shouldn't jam)

So next time - take it back when the lens jams, not when you've killed it......
 
beercan said:
Yes but my argument is that the lens cover jamming has scratched the lens, thus, had the cover not jammed, the lens would not be scratched...
Click to expand...

How would the shutter/lens cover jamming scratch the lens? Under normal circumstances, even if the zoom function fails, there is no physical way the two can come into contact with each other.

The only way it could do that is if something pushed the cover/shutter down onto the glass.
 
The S8000 lens is extremely close to the cover. As such my opinion is that the lens trying to extend and hitting the stuck cover section has caused the scratch.
 
Without wanting to make it sound less likely you'll get this sorted, it does sound like something has been jammed behind the lens cover, ie a foreign object.
 
the mechanism should still be repaired under warrenty since a scratch on the lens won't cause this to happen.

Nikon still have to repair it because it is under warrenty, they don't have to repair the lens element although they do have to prove that you did it.


if you did actually do it then bend over and take £55 up yer backside lol
 
Well after much to-ing and fro-ing with Nikon, they have changed their tune a couple of times and now settled on the explanation that "a bit of dirt has got trapped behind the lens cover and caused the scratch so we can't do it as warranty".

So that's it. They've found a reason to not process the claim which can't really be disputed and also managed to avoid accusing me of damaging it in their "official" report.

Oh well, live and learn. :thumbsdown:
 
beercan said:
Well after much to-ing and fro-ing with Nikon, they have changed their tune a couple of times and now settled on the explanation that "a bit of dirt has got trapped behind the lens cover and caused the scratch so we can't do it as warranty".

So that's it. They've found a reason to not process the claim which can't really be disputed and also managed to avoid accusing me of damaging it in their "official" report.

Oh well, live and learn. :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

In reality, this does sound like the most probable cause - not really a manufacturing fault with the Nikon (which is all the Warranty is supposed to cover), and just really bad luck on your part :(
 
as far as i know the sender is responable for properly protecting an item that is sent by post or currior.

im going to have to pay £140 to get the pins ont he compact flash sorted out after one got bent somehow on my d300s . I`m just going to have to pay up and shut up . i got nowhere with nikon.

it seems that if you look at a camera void your warrenty

Cheers Steve
 
steve_lyt said:
as far as i know the sender is responable for properly protecting an item that is sent by post or currior.

im going to have to pay £140 to get the pins ont he compact flash sorted out after one got bent somehow on my d300s . I`m just going to have to pay up and shut up . i got nowhere with nikon.

it seems that if you look at a camera void your warrenty

Cheers Steve
Click to expand...

To be fair to Nikon, as discussed in your thread on this subject, you did break the camera and a warranty is only there for manufacturer defects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top