Second hand sales point of law help

the black fox

the black fox

Suspended / Banned
Messages
17,082
Name
Jeff
Edit My Images
No
my son earlier this year bought a second hand 500mm Nikon f4vr from a camera shop ,also a 1.4 tc to go along with his Nikon d810 ,he is having awfull trouble getting it to focus properly ,it has been away to lemanhs in stoke ,they sent it to Nikon and after a few weeks came back supposedly re-calibrated ,after trying it out it appears to be no better and micro adjust is not curing it ,the shop has offered to send it back to Nikon and it's going in today .if by some chance they can't get it right ,how does he stand with claiming a refund taking into account we are talking about a 5k lens and t.c here .
Can anyone tell me what the law states re 2nd hand goods like this as the shop says it doesn't do refunds
 
same as new goods

When you make a purchase from a second-hand shop, you can exercise exactly the same rights under the Sales of Goods Act as you can with a high-street shop that sells new items. This means that if the item is not fit for purpose or is faulty, you can demand a refund.
 
Last edited:
It still has to be of merchantable quality. If it came from a shop the sale of goods should still apply, even on s/h goods I would think? Therefore it should do the job you bought it for and if it doesn't you are entitled to a repair or money back. I don't think "we don't do refunds" is a legal defence.
 
if they dont do refunds they are A: breaking the law
and B: if item is faulty then a replacement should also be offered if item is beyond repair , so if they say sorry no refund then state that you want an identical replacement .
 
Ps. Personally I would take all the kit into the shop to demonstrate what the fault is.
 
From the Which? website:

Returning faulty goods
If you buy a product that turns out to be faulty, you can choose to reject it which means you can give it back and get a refund.

But, the law only gives you a reasonable time to do this – what's reasonable depends on the product and how obvious the fault is.

However, even with major purchases or complex items, it’s safest to work on the basis you usually have no more than three to four weeks from when you receive it to reject it.

Getting faulty goods replaced or repaired
You have the right to get faulty goods replaced or repaired if it's too late to reject them. You can ask the retailer to do either, but they can normally choose to do whatever would be cheapest.

Under the Sale of Goods Act, the retailer must either repair or replace faulty goods 'within a reasonable time but without causing significant inconvenience'.

If the seller doesn't do this, you're entitled to claim either:

• a reduction on the purchase price, or
• your money back, minus an amount for the usage you've had of the goods (called recision)

If the retailer refuses to repair the goods, and they won't replace them either, you may have the right to arrange for someone else to repair your item, and then claim compensation from the retailer for the cost of doing this.

You have six years to take a claim to court for faulty goods in England, Wales and Northern Ireland; in Scotland you have five years.
 
The restriction on the "three to four weeks" above really should make allowance for the time it's been away for attempted repair. So long as it went back to the shop the first time within that sort of timeframe the time beyond that should be irrelevant. Sounds as though you have given them every opportunity to repair it.

Devil's advocate here, but do you have any evidence that it's has actually been back to Nikon or just the shop's word for that? Maybe they've been trying to repair it themselves, sounds unlikely to me that Nikon would return it if it wasn't repaired.
 
furtehr to the 3-4 weeks, actually the onus is on the seller to prove the fault WASNT there in the first 6 months . after that its on the buyer to prove it was.

Proving your claim for faulty goods
If your claim under the Sale of Goods Act ends up in court, you may have to prove that the fault was present when you bought the item and not, for example, something which was the result of normal wear and tear.

If your claim is about a problem that arises within six months of buying the product, it's up to the retailer to prove that the goods were of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, or as described when it sold them.

Beyond six months, it's up to you to prove that the problem was there when you received the goods even if it has taken until now to come to light.

So, you may need to prove that the fault was not down to ordinary wear and tear or damage you caused, and that the product (or a component) should have lasted longer than it did.

To do this you may need an expert's report, for example, from an engineer or a mechanic.

Always try to keep the cost of any report proportionate to the value of the claim and, if you can, try to agree on an expert you and the seller both agree has the necessary expertise.
 
did he pay be credit card ? (if he did take it up with the CC company and let them sort the shop out)
 
stemll said:
The restriction on the "three to four weeks" above really should make allowance for the time it's been away for attempted repair. So long as it went back to the shop the first time within that sort of timeframe the time beyond that should be irrelevant. Sounds as though you have given them every opportunity to repair it.

Devil's advocate here, but do you have any evidence that it's has actually been back to Nikon or just the shop's word for that? Maybe they've been trying to repair it themselves, sounds unlikely to me that Nikon would return it if it wasn't repaired.
Click to expand...
Yes it has been to Nikon ,the lad has spoken to Nikon u.k already regarding what they did . It's gone back today to the shop along with sample pics ..there may well be no problem with either the shop or Nikon but at this moment in time it's a wait and see what transpires
 
Last edited:
my sound a silly question but have you tested the lens yourself. mounted on a tripod with VR swtitched off and taken at various shutter speeds and DoF at a fixed subject.
as you havent mentioned your sons level of skill no disrespect but so many situations like this can be put down to simple user error so can only go by the information supplied which is very little other than focus problems. is is sharpness, hunting subjects and not locking on, poor image quality ?
 
just throwing this into the mix but could it be the lens is calibrated ok and its your camera that has the fault ?
 
my son is way way above my skill level and no it won't be user error ,he has driven himself and me potty with this ,and my reaction was take it back and demand a refund ,hence the thread
and the lens ,t.c and camera have all been back together to nikon u.k for calibration and matching .
 
the black fox said:
my son is way way above my skill level and no it won't be user error ,he has driven himself and me potty with this ,and my reaction was take it back and demand a refund ,hence the thread
and the lens ,t.c and camera have all been back together to nikon u.k for calibration and matching .
Click to expand...
Would that actually not put him in a bad position? I mean if the whole package has been to Nikon, the experts have calibrated it fine, then I don't think there is an argument about it being fit for purpose. I would say is that the only reasonable action left would be to just return the lens and take the hit on the restocking fee if there is anything....

Further more, if it has gone to Nikon and he is still not happy with it, then why not take it up with Nikon? I did that with a scanner, and the second time the job was perfect.
 
dejongj said:
Would that actually not put him in a bad position? I mean if the whole package has been to Nikon, the experts have calibrated it fine, then I don't think there is an argument about it being fit for purpose. I would say is that the only reasonable action left would be to just return the lens and take the hit on the restocking fee if there is anything....

Further more, if it has gone to Nikon and he is still not happy with it, then why not take it up with Nikon? I did that with a scanner, and the second time the job was perfect.
Click to expand...

two reasons for that. sale of goods act not fit for purpose etc is with the supplier NOT the manufacturer. second the lens as stated was purchased second hand so may either be out of manufacturer warranty or even a grey import . the repair is covered becasue its under the shops own warranty they supplied when it was sold.
the only real option is to take test shots showing the problem ( which other than to say your having trouble focusing ( but dont state what the actual trouble is ) then unless you can show the shop ( and maybe nikon) evidence of the problem then its difficult to know where to take it next
 
Last edited:
dean messenger said:
two reasons for that. sale of goods act not fit for purpose etc is with the supplier NOT the manufacturer. second the lens as stated was purchased second hand so may either be out of manufacturer warranty or even a grey import . the repair is covered becasue its under the shops own warranty they supplied when it was sold.
the only real option is to take test shots showing the problem ( which other than to say your having trouble focusing ( but dont state what the actual trouble is ) then unless you can show the shop ( and maybe nikon) evidence of the problem then its difficult to know where to take it next
Click to expand...
Don't disagree with that, but isn't it the case that there is actually nothing with it as proven by THE experts. It's a difficult one.
 
therin lies the difficulty though sale of goods states you have 6 months and the onus is on the seller to prove its NOT faulty, as far as the seller is concerned they have sent it off, its been fixed and returned so they have followed the law.

other than taking it to a specialist and have it checked out by a 3rd party who can write up an independant report which you can then present if a fault IS found then like i say not sure how you can proceed.
sure that may cost a little to get that done, but in comparison to the cost of the camera and lens its probably a small price to pay. and if an independent report comes back with no faults found then what?
 
dejongj said:
Would that actually not put him in a bad position? I mean if the whole package has been to Nikon, the experts have calibrated it fine, then I don't think there is an argument about it being fit for purpose. I would say is that the only reasonable action left would be to just return the lens and take the hit on the restocking fee if there is anything....

Further more, if it has gone to Nikon and he is still not happy with it, then why not take it up with Nikon? I did that with a scanner, and the second time the job was perfect.
Click to expand...

It is not unheard of for major optical company service department to pass shoddy kit as within spec and send it straight back. It happened to me a few times. You can then phone them and tell them to take it back (postage paid for) and sort it out properly and hope it won't take too many tries.
 
daugirdas said:
It is not unheard of for major optical company service department to pass shoddy kit as within spec and send it straight back. It happened to me a few times. You can then phone them and tell them to take it back (postage paid for) and sort it out properly and hope it won't take too many tries.
Click to expand...
Agreed, as you can see that is what I wrote as well. That is what happened to my Nikon film scanner. Second time it was spot on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top