Liberal Return Policies vs. "has my camera been used?": A way to Solve This

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
ne beginner
Senior MemberPosts: 2,005Gear list
Like?
Like trying to have a logical discussion ...
In reply to Patrick McMahon, 2 months ago

... With a drunk in a bar ... even worse when you're the sober one. Or an adolescent who keeps trying to shift the discussion when they are caught. Patrick, I have allowed you to take this so far off topic, and wasted time following along. Enough.

You clearly have a fixation on taxes, which is not the point of this thread. You're like Rainman, "but what about the taxes??".  You clearly know less about UCC than I do, and I have acknowledged several times I don't know much about it. You thought it was a law until I gave you that answer.

You continue to argue indefensible positions, like it's ok for a retailer to resell sold, used, and returned items as new, even when presented with examines from state laws the the contrary, as long as they give them a "vigorous inspection".  First its OK for then to do so, but if caught, they would replace it "they are both contractually and legally obligated to so". Why suppose do you think that is?  Could it because they were caught? Because they are misrepresenting used items as new, in violation of state consumer laws?  Which is it? Oh, it's just an accident. Those darned returns from the warehouse just keep getting mixed up on the shelf in the store. Over and over again.

Out of left field you bring in when a manufacturer contracts a 3rd party to recondition returns. Again, you are off topic and off on a tangent.  That's not what this thread is about. My company does that too, with some electronics, but with items that have been retuned but not used.

Sorry Patrick, enough. Peace and good luck.

Patrick McMahon wrote:

Hi Patrick,

I am very sorry, you were absolutely correct. It appears that after a limited search of the internet I have discovered, contrary to my earlier legal opinion based on wikipedia(?) cut and paste, that in fact the UCC does involve the selling of goods from merchant to consumer.

Rather than take the time to recognize this I will gloss over it, as you'll note, I did with my earlier assertion that failure to collect sales tax and shipping fees are "a wash" to the consumer.

Instead, get this, I am actually going to start to quote actual language from various UCC's that have been adopted and their interpretation! Can you believe it! No really....

So let's look at it, shall we, Patrick. Hmmm.... now that I look at it... hmm... it says things like "generally" and "could be considered" and "guidelines"... I don't understand?

(This is where if we were actually having a meaning conversation, [i.e. you listening and not saying I am wrong for 5 threads and then realizing I am right and ignoring the fact that you were complete and utterly wrong] I would say)

Well good buddy,

What that means is that a retailer who sets up certain guidelines and has had them approved by both counsel as well as the manufacturer (to fully warrant and treat the item as new) can under certain circumstances sell that item as new.

But, but, but... didn't you read all that I cut and paste?

Yes, good buddy I did. And under the UCC and the laws governing contracts- if you feel you have gotten a used item rather than a new item you must give the merchant the opportunity to rectify the situation. And, funny thing, they likely will unless you are attempting to pull a fast one. I know mine will without batting an eyelash.

But I am a read blooded American! I want to sue! I've been wronged here! How dare they sell me that item as new!

Accidents happen, I am sure that as good as my retailer is, a box can slip in the wrong pile. That is where trust comes in. I trust that they will uphold their contractual deal with me. If they send me a refurbished item as new or a used (real) item as new I know for a fact that they will do for me what they are both contractually and legally obligated to do and rectify the situation.

Again, my retailer does a vigorous inspection to determine whether something is new or if it will be sold as slightly used.

Thank you very much Patrick. I understand, but I am not at all happy about this.

As I said earlier, I understand your position though I do not subscribe to it. I believe your best and most sound course of action, short of the seal, is to develop a relationship with a retailer that you trust.

If you don't want to deal with a brick and mortar locally because of sales tax, then call one up in a neighboring state or visit them sometime. Explain to them your position and I am sure they would appreciate the business. Tell them that you don't want a humanly touched camera and you are willing to subscribe to a 20% restocking fee. Crap- why don't you visit them, asked for an unopened box from inventory, seal it with a piece of masking tape, put your signature on it and have it shipped to your neighboring state.

Anyway - develop some trust... or pick a different hobby. Good luck.

Thank you very much Patrick, you are a true gentleman.

 ne beginner's gear list:ne beginner's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm F3.5-4.5G ED VR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow