not happy

He has not been ripped off, nor was he ever being ripped off in my opinion.

He bought an out of date camera,secondhand,that had a big chunk missing from it, without all the accessories.That would indicate a well used ex-demo that had possibly been dropped. Or as Flashy mentioned, perhaps a return under the 30 day no quibble returns policy.

If the camera was new,then I could understand it. As it is, I think Jessops stack up well offering hos money back so readily. The cost of the accessories that he bought is of no relevance to Jessops at all, I assume he knew these were missing before he bought the camera at what, I assume, to be a discounted price.

Or maybe I have it all wrong.............:shrug:
 
Slimbert said:
I think Sony could have done him a favour instead of quoting £280 for the repair. I fully understand that Sony are a business, not a charity, and have to make a profit, but £280 is a bit steep to repair an A100 IMO. Bet they could build one from scratch for less!
Click to expand...
they probably don't really want to do a major repair on a 3 year old camera - it will of course cost more to disassemble, fix/replace, reassemble & test than simply installing said parts at the factory during manufacture.

I'll give you a similar example - when I had a Vx Omega after many years the control/flap directing cabin airflow failed. The quote to repair was about £5.50 for the part & ~£550 labour to replace it because of the work involved at getting at it & then putting the car back together.
No doubt in the factory that part went in in about 30 seconds.
 
bobiscuit said:
I think some people should remember that I wrote the title to this thread at the same time I wrote the first post ;).
At that time, I was being told that the fault was a result of damage which I caused, and they will not do anything.
Click to expand...

At the time you wrote the first post, you were making an assumption and the thread shouldn't really have been titled that way in the first place as it was an unproven allegation. You also could have changed the title at any time subsequently and appear to have chosen not to (I did post a subtle hint earlier in this thread, too subtle? ;)). I think it may be a good idea to change it now don't you think?
 
fabs said:
At the time you wrote the first post, you were making an assumption and the thread shouldn't really have been titled that way in the first place as it was an unproven allegation. You also could have changed the title at any time subsequently and appear to have chosen not to (I did post a subtle hint earlier in this thread, too subtle? ;)). I think it may be a good idea to change it now don't you think?
Click to expand...

Just my opinion of course :) but at the time the OP felt 'ripped off' by jessops and it is of course possible that he was ...:thinking: The camera had been damaged and sold as ex demo :shrug: the camera should still be fit for purpose and if the fault was due to the damage then he probably has been ripped off as Jessops must have known the cause of the damage!

The OP is out of pocket as a result of dealing with Jessops and should not be .... Surely changing the title ofthe thread is pointless as the outcome will become obvious to anyone reading the posts ...:cool:
 
Splog said:
Just my opinion of course :) but at the time the OP felt 'ripped off' by jessops and it is of course possible that he was ...:thinking: The camera had been damaged and sold as ex demo :shrug: the camera should still be fit for purpose and if the fault was due to the damage then he probably has been ripped off as Jessops must have known the cause of the damage!

The OP is out of pocket as a result of dealing with Jessops and should not be .... Surely changing the title ofthe thread is pointless as the outcome will become obvious to anyone reading the posts ...:cool:
Click to expand...

The title states it as fact when it was his feelings at the time. You can debate the ins and outs of how jessops handled the situation until the end of time but the thread title claims that it was a deliberate act on their part of which there is no evidence, therefore it is an unproven allegation. Given that it appears that a resolution has been reached and the OP has had a refund, having a title to the thread that states that they ripped him off is unfair at best. I am giving him the opportunity to change the title himself, I could have done it myself but I think I'm being quite fair.
 
I would say that was a fair piece of modding Fabs
 
fabs said:
The title states it as fact when it was his feelings at the time. You can debate the ins and outs of how jessops handled the situation until the end of time but the thread title claims that it was a deliberate act on their part of which there is no evidence, therefore it is an unproven allegation. Given that it appears that a resolution has been reached and the OP has had a refund, having a title to the thread that states that they ripped him off is unfair at best. I am giving him the opportunity to change the title himself, I could have done it myself but I think I'm being quite fair.
Click to expand...

Fair point (But they did know the camera had been damaged! and had possibly not checked the camera properly to ensure it was fit for sale!)

I certainly was not challenging your reasoning :cool: however my point is that the thread reveals the detail and that the title is actually irrelavent :thinking: If I was to suggest a change of title it would be to simply add a question mark ... "Ripped off by Jessops ?" .... :)

Steve
 
Splog said:
Fair point (But they did know the camera had been damaged! and had possibly not checked the camera properly to ensure it was fit for sale!)

I certainly was not challenging your reasoning :cool: however my point is that the thread reveals the detail and that the title is actually irrelavent :thinking: If I was to suggest a change of title it would be to simply add a question mark ... "Ripped off by Jessops ?" .... :)

Steve
Click to expand...

No, the title is definitely relevant for the reasons I have already stated but I'm not going to get into a debate with you about it.
 
In the OP's 2nd sentence he states 'It was in fully working condition'!
 
fabs said:
No, the title is definitely relevant for the reasons I have already stated but I'm not going to get into a debate with you about it.
Click to expand...

I am not asking for debate :shrug: just expressing an opinion on the OP's issue, as have others! as I said 'it was the OP's opinion' and perhaps the OP should have put it as a question! People are intelligent enough to read a thread and decide the issue for themselves :thinking: perhaps you should re-title the thread if you feel so strongly about it ....
 
so much drama over a thread title :/

why are you changing the thread title? it's not your thread is it? seems a bit ott modding imho, not that i agree with the title but the drama and subsequent changing just smacks of "i've got nothing better to do syndrome" :S

and isn't it his decision to decide whether jessops have ripped him off and no-one elses? regardless of whether you agree with it?
 
Missed the "with Jessops" bit though .... :lol:
 
Since there was a battery missing, how to know the camera is in fully working condition?

Besides, what is the warranty you got? 12 months by the shop or 12 months from the manufacturer? It is not exceptional that people buy cheap camera, refurbished lens or other ex-demo parts from some super outlet. What will they be covered by the warranty?
 
I have asked for the camera back. I will test it again and see if it's useable. If not I'll stick it on eBay for spares.

Thing is - they said it should get back to the branch by the end of next week.

That's SIX WEEKS, just to tell me that it's not economical to repair and to get it back to me.

I'm not impressed. :thumbsdown:
 
admirable said:
The ultimate warranty is your money back, you have been offered that and you are still not happy.

Unbelievable. :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

I completely understand - could have been at an excellent price, not available anyomre etc. My opinion, having the item repaired is best rather than a refund.
 
In case anyone's still interested...

It's now coming up to 7 weeks.

I have not had my camera back. The estimated date of return was last Thursday, but there's still no sign of it.

I'm off on holiday tomorrow and won't be able to pick it up for at least another week (if it even comes in that time).

How can it take that long when they never even opened it up? :shake:
 
Didn't you get a refund then?
 
I didn't want a refund - I got the camera at a very good price (as a second camera) and bought some accessories (batteries, bag, strap) for it before it developed this fault.

If I get a refund, the accessories I'm left with will be useless. By the time they told me they're not repairing the camera, it was too late to return them.

I'd rather just get it back now, and see if I can work around the fault. But they can't even do that :thumbsdown:
 
bobiscuit said:
I didn't want a refund - I got the camera at a very good price (as a second camera) and bought some accessories (batteries, bag, strap) for it before it developed this fault.

If I get a refund, the accessories I'm left with will be useless. By the time they told me they're not repairing the camera, it was too late to return them.

I'd rather just get it back now, and see if I can work around the fault. But they can't even do that :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...


Have you tried explaining about the accessories to the branch manager and also point out the time scale and the fact that you have spent the money and have nothing to show for it and if done politly and in the correct manor you may find the manager may as a good will gesture give you the value of the accessories that you purchased. even if they dont I think you may be cutting your nose off to spite your face as you will have a faulty camera that is not working for the sake of the cost a bettery bag and strap, of which you could use the strap and bag for another camera so in actual fact its really only the price of a battery.
 
I can't understand why someone would prefer to keep a faulty camera to sell on Ebay for spares rather than getting a refund from the shop they originally bought it from.

As for saying the accessories are useless if you were to get a refund on the camera, the bag and strap can presumably be used with any camera and the batteries could be sold on Ebay so you'll actually have lost very little financially. It's the risk you take by not buying brand new unused goods.
 
If I had the choice of what I was going to sell on ebay it'd be the new batteries the OP bought, rather than having to flog them and the faulty camera, which he could have got a full refund for from Jessops; I'm kind of surprised the OP turned the refund down! That's damage limitation, innit?

I also found all that hoopla earlier about the thread's original title a bit ridiculous; all this "unfounded accusation" shiznit. It's quite clear from the OP's first post that he felt as if Jessops may have been a little economical with the truth about the condition of the camera in the first instance, and that they weren't really doing enough to help; I would have been inclined to feel ripped off if such a large and established retailer started acting in a manner akin to a dodgy ebay drop-ship merchant; I'm guessing he only agreed to buy used from Jessop's precisely because they're a well known high street brand.

However, I do think he's been a bit rash by not accepting the refund; why not take the opportunity to get all his money back and make it Jessop's job to take ownership of the camera and dispose of it themselves?

:bonk:
 
Seriously, the suggestions above are wisest. You can make some money back by selling stuff on again and then buy a used but working camera that doesn't have signs of damage. If you sell the camera for spares you will not get your money back - and if you go for a repair it is pretty unlikley it will be cost effective.

That fault sounds like it would seriously impair your photography so your chances of working around it are pretty low really.
 
Well, I'm happy to say the store seems to have better customer service than the customer service department :).

I went in today to ask the store manager for his advice - I'm not gonna be able to get back to the branch for a week or two, so wasn't happy that the camera wasn't back yet.
Turns out the camera was delivered back to the store minutes before I got there! Why did the CS tell me it would be tomorrow at the earliest? :cuckoo:

He was also surprised the camera didn't get fixed, especially after the nonsense where he had to fax pictures of the box with "Manager's Special" stickers to the repair centre a few weeks ago, when they accused me of causing the damage myself!

End result - he offered me a really good deal on an A350 as a replacement. So good, I couldn't pass it up :thumbs:.

It took nearly 7 weeks, but at least I have a result now. :)
 
Congratulations Bob and well done to the Jessops store manager for earning a little bit of positive PR for a change.
 
bobiscuit said:
He was also surprised the camera didn't get fixed, especially after the nonsense where he had to fax pictures of the box with "Manager's Special" stickers to the repair centre a few weeks ago, when they accused me of causing the damage myself!

End result - he offered me a really good deal on an A350 as a replacement. So good, I couldn't pass it up :thumbs:.
Click to expand...

So did they replace the original camera with the A350 (and presumibly a little cash) or do you now have 2 Sony bodies?
 
I hope you haven't swapped 1 managers special for another. I assume this offer that was too good to refuse was for a brand new, never used camera.

What are you going to do with your totally useless batteries, bag and strap? Or have they suddenly become useful again now that you have an A350?
 
Mike.P said:
So did they replace the original camera with the A350 (and presumibly a little cash) or do you now have 2 Sony bodies?
Click to expand...

They gave me both options.

I took the "2 bodies" option and they said I can still bring the A100 in for a refund.
I didn't have a chance to fully test the A100 before I took it in for repairs. I don't know yet how useable it is since the IS fault started - so I wanted to check.
 
-Rob- said:
What are you going to do with your totally useless batteries, bag and strap? Or have they suddenly become useful again now that you have an A350?
Click to expand...
Yes :). That is why I wanted a replacement rather than refund.

Well, to be fair the batteries aren't compatible, but I will probably end up sticking the A100 on eBay for spares/repair where I expect it will fetch more than I paid for it - so I'll include them with it.
 
looks likea good result for you. I am pleased.
 
good result

did you have to pay much more for the a350

having had the a300 it was a good camera

now you can pair it with the new toy lens ;-)
 
bobiscuit said:
Yes :). That is why I wanted a replacement rather than refund.

Well, to be fair the batteries aren't compatible, but I will probably end up sticking the A100 on eBay for spares/repair where I expect it will fetch more than I paid for it - so I'll include them with it.
Click to expand...


So.... you accepted the A100 back anyway instead of the refund? And the good offer on the A350 is something totally separate, i.e. it is not an actual replacement for the A100, and you are paying for it in full out of your own pocket? Or have Jessops credited what you paid for the A100 to the value of the A350, and let you keep the A100 gratis? Maybe I'm being slow... :shrug:

Also, don't you think you'd better change the name of the thread to "happy" as I'm afraid it is misleading as it currently stands, blah-de-blah... :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top