Should retailers sell lenses with fungus?

T

Tricky01

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,547
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
I guess everything has a price, and if you're transparent about it, you're not deceiving the buyer. But it feels questionable to even put such things up for sale, especially when the headline condition is 'excellent'.

Is it responsible practice?




IMG_9974.png

IMG_9975.png
 
I agree. Most definitely does NOT deserve an 'Excellent' rating. I would give it a 'Poor' rating.
 
I had a Fuji 18-135 declined by MPB due to fungus internally.
 
I can't see anything wrong with a dealer selling second hand goods in any condition, provided they behave within the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015...

Consumer Rights Act 2015

An Act to amend the law relating to the rights of consumers and protection of their interests; to make provision about investigatory powers for enforcing the regulation of traders; to make provision about private actions in competition law and the Competition Appeal Tribunal; and for connected...
www.legislation.gov.uk www.legislation.gov.uk

There are three basic rules, which are the goods should be:
  • fit for the purpose the item was sold for
  • of satisfactory quality
  • as described in any advert, marketing materials or seller's explanation.
If they tell you there's fungus or any other defect and the lens works otherwise, then it's up to you to decide whether to buy or not.

I've had plenty of pleasing images from lenses that have fungus and/or other defects.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I can't see anything wrong with a dealer selling second hand goods in any condition, provided they behave within the provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015...

Consumer Rights Act 2015

An Act to amend the law relating to the rights of consumers and protection of their interests; to make provision about investigatory powers for enforcing the regulation of traders; to make provision about private actions in competition law and the Competition Appeal Tribunal; and for connected...
www.legislation.gov.uk www.legislation.gov.uk

There are three basic rules, which are the goods should be:
  • fit for the purpose the item was sold for
  • of satisfactory quality
  • as described in any advert, marketing materials or seller's explanation.
If they tell you there's fungus or any other defect and the lens works otherwise, then it's up to you to decide whether to buy or not.

I've had plenty of pleasing images from lenses that have fungus and/or other defects.
Click to expand...
But in no way can it be described as 'Excellent' - even by their standards!

Screenshot 2025-02-15 at 16.50.42.png
 
gramps said:
But in no way can it be described as 'Excellent' - even by their standards!
Click to expand...
I really think that would be something that only a court case, costly for all concerned, could decide on.

It would come down to whether the judge decided that the description would be agreed with by an "average" customer. In any case, if the seller offers a cost free return service, the customer would have no possible complaint.
 
As someone who sells a lot of very often knackered optical gear on ebay, I avoid using subjective words and stick to the facts with photos where possible.

We sell a lot of binos and cameras/lenses with dust, fungus, loose optics, scratches... The list goes on. Lots of things that are broken too. if the price is low enough, people will buy it. It's either that or the skip.

I also tend to describe optical condition as well as cosmetic condition. If something looks very well cared for and is cosmetically in good condition, but is full of dust, I'll say that. "Cosmetically excellent" may well be true, if a little misleading.

Either way, the DSR allow you to return it anyway. I've lost count of stuff we've sold that was spares/repair and clearly stated "not working", only to have it returned with the reason "not working".
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
I really think that would be something that only a court case, costly for all concerned, could decide on.

It would come down to whether the judge decided that the description would be agreed with by an "average" customer. In any case, if the seller offers a cost free return service, the customer would have no possible complaint.
Click to expand...
"Optics are clear" ??????????/
 
Horrible. Just hoping you won't notice
Eventually someone will make a mistake

It's like our local supermarkets have no problems selling obviously mouldy fruits, and even stick discount labels instead of binning. It surely has to be illegal
 
I think they made an error choosing Excellent to describe this one. Cosmetically, optics aside, it does look in excellent condition but the headline condition is misleading.

As for selling lenses with fungus; definitely. Many of my best purchases have been lenses that had fungus (and it was clearly stated) which I then took apart and cleaned with the appropriate liquids. So long as you know that is what you are buying then it's up to you to buy or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top