Opinions please

erding

erding

Suspended / Banned
Messages
11,424
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
May I have some your opinion please.

For this initial post, I prefer not to identify the supplier but suffice to say that the item was bought online from their website. This is because I am looking for opinion's without any pre-judgement from your own personal experience with this supplier.

Product in question is a rubber lens hood.

On receipt of the product - its was noted that the box had a stick on label title of 'Return to stock number' and a handwritten number written. The box had been opened and was a little battered.

My question is can this be considered a new item?

Tom
 
Hard to see how a conclusion can be reached from what you describe.

It is the condition of the hood that should decide whether it is new.

Perhaps the item was taken out of stock to show or sent to someone.

I recently got a lens mail order and decided it was not really what I wanted. I returned it for a full refund.
I had to break a seal on the box to open it, but I would still expect the supplier to sell it as new again.
 
arclight said:
Hard to see how a conclusion can be reached from what you describe.

It is the condition of the hood that should decide whether it is new.

Perhaps the item was taken out of stock to show or sent to someone.

I recently got a lens mail order and decided it was not really what I wanted. I returned it for a full refund.
I had to break a seal on the box to open it, but I would still expect the supplier to sell it as new again.
Click to expand...

You have made me think re something being sent out opened and sent back, Would this then be what one would describe as shop soiled and therefore offered at a reduced price? I ask the question because when you go to a retailer and ask to see an item they often give you one that's purely for selling purposes, then they go and get you a boxed unopened one if you decide to purchase. Alternatively if that's the only one they have they usually offer you something of the price as it's considered to be shop soiled (if they have been on display the do the same):). As to the original post I wouldn't be to happy if someone sent me goods in poor packaging of the nature you describe I wouldn't be to keen to accept it as new, just my opinion I could be wrong.:)
 
Denisw said:
As to the original post I wouldn't be to happy if someone sent me goods in poor packaging of the nature you describe I wouldn't be to keen to accept it as new, just my opinion I could be wrong.:)
Click to expand...

Certainly to their online description to the product is there any reference to the item being a return and therefore the implication is that it is new.

One of the concerns of mine is the reason it was returned in the 1st place - e.g. incorrect item ordered or faulty.

Tom
 
I can see how something arising in poor packaging would arouse a suspicion.
However, if traders were forced to reduce the price of new items purely because they had been returned by a previous purchaser then I think that they would soon drop out of the mail order market.

Go in to any Argos or similar where a 17 day no questions asked return guarantee is given and there are queues of people bringing goods back. These stores could never reduce the prices of all these things and the packing they were in is usually unopenable without damaging it.

If your hood seems new I'd accept it.
 
erding said:
My question is can this be considered a new item?
Click to expand...

I am of the opinion that if the item, including packaging, received were to deviate from the expected norm in such a way that it would detrimentally affect resale value then I would not pay "new" price for the item... unless it was a low value item and I didn't care about resale or the fact that someone was trying to pull a fast one. :)
 
erding said:
One of the concerns of mine is the reason it was returned in the 1st place - e.g. incorrect item ordered or faulty.

Tom
Click to expand...

Does it go on your lens OK and do its job? If yes, I would stop worrying. Its not as if it's got any electronics in it to go wrong.

btw, how much was it?
 
You say the box was damaged? was the lens hood ok inside? if yes then what's the problem?
 
Claymore said:
You say the box was damaged? was the lens hood ok inside? if yes then what's the problem?
Click to expand...

The item is not listed on their site as a return item and therefore in the absence of such a listing the item is new. I have therefore paid for a new item and what was supplied was a returned item and therefore not new.

Clearly there was a reason why it was returned - maybe wrong item was ordered. But maybe there was a fault so why should I risk fitting it to one of my lenses?
 
chrism_scotland said:
This may sound stupid but surely if a lens hood was faulty it would have to be something obvious like a crack or it being broken??
Click to expand...

As I see it, if the hood had been returned to the supplier, it would be because
1) it was faulty - cracked, torn rubber, stripped thread, etc
2) it was the wrong size
3) it was ordered in error
as somebody else said, there's no electronics or motors to break.

If the goods aren't damaged, my guess is that it was 2 or 3.
 
Tricky one Tom
The only thing that I can think of for returning a rubber hood
would be
1) Split
2)Knackered thread
or supplied wrongly in the first place
I guess technically that it is secondhand
as it has been opened and probably tried to be fitted
to a lens

I guess if your satisfied that its neither 1 or 2 and it is the correct item you ordered
then I probably wouldn't go through the hassle of returning it

Had it been a lens or body on the other hand then I would most certainly "kick-up"
( who ever the supplier was)
edit must type faster :D
 
Really, life is too short for this.
 
you have grounds to return, obviously it is not as new as spangly shiny new...but why bother if it works and not damaged...it's a rubber lens hood
 
Thank you all for your opinions. The opening post was the situation about 10 days ago and the developments since then are:

I was not comfortable with what had been supplied - the condition of the box clearly indicated that the package had been opened and was a returned item.

As to why it was returned I have no knowledge but in the past I have had issues with filters/step up/step down rings sticking to lenses due to damaged threads or being distorted - in all cases it is a hassle to remove. These are certainly not experiences I wish to repeat.

I contacted the supplier, explained the issue with the product supplied, and they agreed to replace the item arranged to have the item collected in 2 days time - my choice as I could not be at home the following day - but no courier arrived. I contacted the supplier again and another collection was arranged and again no courier arrived. A third collection was arranged and finally the item was collected.

Yesterday the postman brought a nicely packaged box. Inside this nice was was a lot of protective bubble wrap inside of which was the ordered product in the manufactures box. This box was not the same as that originally supplied but was in a similar condition in terms of looking a little battered and also having a 'return to stock' sticker on it but with a different number on it.

I have difficulty comprehending why when it was explained to the supplier why the original item was being returned - at their cost - do they replace it with an item in the same condition. :shrug:

My issue is that the item, as listed on the suppliers website, has no reference along the lines of 'returned items/stock clearance/damaged stock' etc. and therefore you would expect to receive a new product, yet it is not - a shop could not sell, over the counter, either of the 2 items supplied as being new.

Again I have no knowledge as to why the replacement item had originally been returned back to this supplier. As mentioned earlier I have no wish to have any hassle with a suspect item.

Any more thoughts?

Tom
 
HoppyUK said:
Really, life is too short for this.
Click to expand...

I presume therefore that you are quite comfortable with paying for goods which are supplied not as described in the suppliers adverts.

Tom
 
Tom How much are we talking here for this hood? from where I am at the moment it seems like you are going over the top for a hood. I would appreciate where you are coming from if this was a 70-200 f2.8 IS lens that had been returned and there was reason to believe it was returned stock due to some fault, however it is a lens hood! If it fits and seems ok keep it and use it if not return it to the supplier and ask for your money back and move on m8.
Ricky

Edited to say I am with HoppyUK on this one.
 
Ages since I had a rubber lens hood.
Seem to recall that they were handy, in that they could be folded back when used at wide setting on a lens.
More to the point, my recollection of these hoods is that initially the rubber had a feint white coating (French chalk, perhaps, to stop sticking since the hoods come folded), but once handled that came off and the rubber quickly did not look new.

Unless there is a problem with the thread I see no reason not to use it.
 
Hey Tom. :)

Ooh, I like this thread! Personally speaking, it would make no difference to me that the item you had paid for had cost a few pence or many hundreds of pounds - given what you've explained here I would be dissatisfied with both the item and the service received. It seems unlikely that you would be willing to accept the item, so either cut your losses and have it picked up and be refunded, or ask for a third (fourth/fifth/sixth) hood to be sent out.

I would likely send an email of complaint to head office, or if it's a smaller retailer at least want to have it out with the manager/owner.

This is what life is all about. :thumbs:
 
Surely its a wind up? if not? I think you should name and shame them! teach the scumbags a lesson! LoL
If you let them get away with this then what next? bubble wrap with some of the bubbles popped! shocking! How very dare they!
 
I sent a rubber hood back two weeks ago, just didn't fit over the lens flange

Nothing wrong with it other than it didn't work for my particular lens

Company was something like twistedpicture, full refund and no doubt they will sell it again and why not
 
Seriously??

I'm with Hoppy as well..

lets say you had bought a hood for £X and realised it was the wrong size. would you absolutely refuse to sell it on to the next person as a new item at £X (lets say you couldn't return it)? Why shouldn't the shop be any different?

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. No offence meant, but that they've already arranged a courier to come pick up an item which probably cost less than the cost of the courier (assuming here, unless i'm gravely mistaken on the cost of rubber lens hoods?) shows the extent of their sincerity imho. if you don't like it, return it and go to a real store instead of ordering over the internet!

cheers :)
 
How do you know the item had been sent to a customer and used / returned? It might simply be that the item/s had been 'picked' from stock for an order, then the order was cancelled, hence the return to stock :shrug:
 
having worked and managed shop stores I can tell you that if, while unloading or inspecting stock packaging is found as damaged then it is common for the item to be removed from stock, inspected and then returned.

Sometimes these changes are done verbally, other companies insist on computer records for everything.

It could even of been a new product in a box from a different hood, we used to send out items in boxes from other items if we needed too. After all, your paying for a product, not a box and as long as it's well protected, which yours was, what does it matter?
 
Last edited:
rickydiver said:
Exactly guys this boy is taking the ****!!!!!
Click to expand...


Why is he?

He has every right not to be happy about this and it matters not how or why it was returned to stock.

If I buy something that is supposed to be new I don't care how much it costs, if it comes in a battered box that has been opened with a label stuck on it that says returned to stock then it is going straight back to the supplier and I would expect them to send me a new one in its original and un-opened box and not one that has been returned to stock - and if they did the same to me again then that would be returned also except this time I would be demanding a full refund and would not be shopping with that particular company again.

If a company sells a product and marks it up front as a returned to stock item then it is my choice whether I buy that item or not - it is not for the company to make that choice for me.
 
Keith W said:
If a company sells a product and marks it up front as a returned to stock item then it is my choice whether I buy that item or not - it is not for the company to make that choice for me.
Click to expand...

So if a company does internal quality control as items come in to stock by removing so many of said item, checking them and then returning them to stock they are no longer able to charge new prices for them?

All that would resort in is no quality checks for incoming stock meaning that anything dodgy wouldn't of been picked up resulting in major issues with bad stock being sent out and then returned!

Basically, everyone here is arguing over a rubber hood when we have no idea of the company, the processes and procedures or their stock control methods. :cuckoo::p
 
They can charge new prices for those items if they want but what I said still stands:


If a company sells a product and marks it up front as a returned to stock item then it is my choice whether I buy that item or not - it is not for the company to make that choice for me.
 
Seems to me it was probably just returned under the Distance Selling Regulations for whatever reason.

It's not faulty, it does as it's described, it's still considered new (ie the product is unused).
It's a box.......I don't see what the fuss is here tbh.
If you bought something online which you then changed your mind about and returned under the DSR, do you think it's then fair that the supplier must lose out and sell it for much less to someone else?

The box could have been damaged in the post on the way to you perhaps?

If it was a large electrical item perhaps, and the product itself showed signs of use, then yes, I would seek to rectify the issue with the supplier.

But it's a rubber lens hood. Infact, it's not the lens hood, it's the box of a lens hood which for me would make it a non-issue.
 
Marcel said:
Seems to me it was probably just returned under the Distance Selling Regulations for whatever reason.

It's not faulty, it does as it's described, it's still considered new (ie the product is unused).
It's a box.......I don't see what the fuss is here tbh.
If you bought something online which you then changed your mind about and returned under the DSR, do you think it's then fair that the supplier must lose out and sell it for much less to someone else?

The box could have been damaged in the post on the way to you perhaps?

If it was a large electrical item perhaps, and the product itself showed signs of use, then yes, I would seek to rectify the issue with the supplier.

But it's a rubber lens hood. Infact, it's not the lens hood, it's the box of a lens hood which for me would make it a non-issue.
Click to expand...

Well said that man. I totally agree.
 
Keith W said:
Why is he?

He has every right not to be happy about this and it matters not how or why it was returned to stock.

If I buy something that is supposed to be new I don't care how much it costs, if it comes in a battered box that has been opened with a label stuck on it that says returned to stock then it is going straight back to the supplier and I would expect them to send me a new one in its original and un-opened box and not one that has been returned to stock - and if they did the same to me again then that would be returned also except this time I would be demanding a full refund and would not be shopping with that particular company again.

If a company sells a product and marks it up front as a returned to stock item then it is my choice whether I buy that item or not - it is not for the company to make that choice for me.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top