Warning - Nikon REFUSES to replace equipment they cannot fix, even if under warranty part 2

Started Jul 21, 2013 | Discussions
BirgerH
Senior MemberPosts: 1,513Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon no longer supplies 3rd party repairers
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 22, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:

BirgerH wrote:

Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon.

That's mind boggling. How anyone can think a faulty camera and multiple repairs is not the fault of the manufacturer. Nikon attempted and failed to do the repair several times. Nikon do not allow 3rd parties to purchase parts from them anymore. Nikon also don't supply their service software to third parties. Therefore there is no one except Nikon that can do the repair whether parts are needed or firmware parameters need adjusting.

Now it may be true that the retailer is responsible and the buck stops with them to ensure the goods they sell work, but they can send the camera to the manufacturer for repair or have the buyer do so as an attempt to rectify the situation.

And thats exactly what WEX is trying to. In the very same moment you send a camera directly to a repairman or Company you are breaking the conditions for the sellers warranty, risking loosing the warranty. Therefor blame the right.

Once Again - Nikon has nothing to do with you buing a Nikon camera - the agrement is made to the reseller.

And Again - The OP's problems has nothing to do with Nikon. He has problems with WEX.

I'm not aware of anywhere that's against the law. Once Nikon accepts the camera for repair they're involved and responsible.

-- hide signature --

Sammy.
My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

BirgerH.

 BirgerH's gear list:BirgerH's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Tamron SP AF 11-18mm F/4.5-5.6 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron AF 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,224
Like?
their call
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 22, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

BirgerH wrote:

Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon.

That's mind boggling. How anyone can think a faulty camera and multiple repairs is not the fault of the manufacturer.

No one said it wasn't. Your confusing the repair process with the manufacturing process.

No I'm not. "Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon" is not an ambiguous statement.

Yes it may because solving Juggernaut122's issue may indeed have nothing to do with Nikon Japan. And based on the resolution he got, apparently it indeed did not have anything to do with the manufacture. Not sure, in the OP's case here, if the manufacture was ever involved in the problem resolution.

Nikon attempted and failed to do the repair several times.

The Nikon repair facility the OP used in this case...is Not Nikon USA.

That's fine. Which country's implied warranty regulations would you like me to look up exactly? Most are very comparable and differ only in the detail of who's responsible in the first instance.

Only matters who's responsible for the warranty regards which issue your speaking of. Nikon USA, Nikon Japan, etc. Certain differences do come into play.

Nikon do not allow 3rd parties to purchase parts from them anymore.

Not sure that policy holds with the independents in Europe.

It looks like they've had to waver a little in the US as well

http://shop.nikonusa.com/store/nikonprt/en_US/home/ThemeID.30573000

Not a waver at all. Nikon Parts store is Nikon USA...not a third party

Hardly consumer friendly behaviour...

Actually very friendly...I can now order a door directly. Couldn't before


Now it may be true that the retailer is responsible and the buck stops with them to ensure the goods they sell work, but they can send the camera to the manufacturer for repair or have the buyer do so as an attempt to rectify the situation.

Not necessarily. The repair facilities, world wide, have different agreements with the manufacture. Works very different from how Canon works.

Regardless as soon as they accepted the camera for repair it's their responsibility to it correctly.

Yes, but not necessarily the manufactures, depending on the country we are speaking of.

I'm not aware of anywhere that's against the law. Once Nikon accepts the camera for repair they're involved and responsible.

There are nuances. Certain Nikon repair facilities in Europe will accept a US body, and then the terms get fuzzy.

If they want to stick only to the letter of the law that's fine.

Sure...their call. I'm not commenting regards the subjective right or wrong...always pluses and minuses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,224
Like?
Didn't try
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 22, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Nikon built a faulty camera, couldn't fix it after multiple attempts and gave the OP the run around.

You're confusing companies. The company trying to repair the camera is not the company that manufactured it. The company repairing it is an INDEPENDENT SUBSIDIARY. Canon does it different and it really is a big difference.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sammy Yousef
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,416Gear list
Like?
Re: their call
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 22, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

BirgerH wrote:

Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon.

That's mind boggling. How anyone can think a faulty camera and multiple repairs is not the fault of the manufacturer.

No one said it wasn't. Your confusing the repair process with the manufacturing process.

No I'm not. "Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon" is not an ambiguous statement.

Yes it may because solving Juggernaut122's issue may indeed have nothing to do with Nikon Japan. And based on the resolution he got, apparently it indeed did not have anything to do with the manufacture. Not sure, in the OP's case here, if the manufacture was ever involved in the problem resolution.

Nikon Japan? What are you talking about? Was the camera even put together in Japan? I don't think that model of camera is but I coiuld be wrong. The manufacturer's warranty may be provided by Nikon in another country but it's still Nikon.

Nikon attempted and failed to do the repair several times.

The Nikon repair facility the OP used in this case...is Not Nikon USA.

That's fine. Which country's implied warranty regulations would you like me to look up exactly? Most are very comparable and differ only in the detail of who's responsible in the first instance.

Only matters who's responsible for the warranty regards which issue your speaking of. Nikon USA, Nikon Japan, etc. Certain differences do come into play.

Only in terms of legalities. When it comes to that, if the camera is put together in Thailand Nikon Japan has very little to do with it. Except of course that they do have a hand in the setup, finances and policies of their subsidiaries world wide. Now you're suggesting a consumer needs to concern himself with the subtleties of running an international business and the organisation of it's holdings. As far as the consumer's concerned he or she has only one choice in who to deal with and that is Nikon locally.

Nikon do not allow 3rd parties to purchase parts from them anymore.

Not sure that policy holds with the independents in Europe.

It looks like they've had to waver a little in the US as well

http://shop.nikonusa.com/store/nikonprt/en_US/home/ThemeID.30573000

Not a waver at all. Nikon Parts store is Nikon USA...not a third party

Nikon parts store is a concession that they've had to make. The policy they had announced was that parts would not be supplied to third parties. I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding that back down.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/12/Nikon-cuts-out-independent-service-companies

Hardly consumer friendly behaviour...

Actually very friendly...I can now order a door directly. Couldn't before

Yes now you may have to become involved in the specifics of the repair whereas before you could contract a 3rd party to do the work. Heaven help us from friends like that.

Now it may be true that the retailer is responsible and the buck stops with them to ensure the goods they sell work, but they can send the camera to the manufacturer for repair or have the buyer do so as an attempt to rectify the situation.

Not necessarily. The repair facilities, world wide, have different agreements with the manufacture. Works very different from how Canon works.

Regardless as soon as they accepted the camera for repair it's their responsibility to it correctly.

Yes, but not necessarily the manufactures, depending on the country we are speaking of.

Have you ever considered a career as a lawyer? I don't mean that as a compliment. If we're talking about the company's moral obligation it's clear that Nikon in the country of supply is responsible. If you tried to deal with Nikon Japan (or Nikon Thailand or whereever this particular camera is manufactured) they would refuse to deal with you and would direct you to the local company. So why are we even talking about this?

Clearly whichever company built the camera released a faulty unit. Whichever company did the repairs failed to fix it on multiple occasions. They all operated under the Nikon brand.

I'm not aware of anywhere that's against the law. Once Nikon accepts the camera for repair they're involved and responsible.

There are nuances. Certain Nikon repair facilities in Europe will accept a US body, and then the terms get fuzzy.

If they want to stick only to the letter of the law that's fine.

Sure...their call. I'm not commenting regards the subjective right or wrong...always pluses and minuses.

I find that statement disingenuous.

-- hide signature --

Sammy.
My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sammy Yousef
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,416Gear list
Like?
Re: no need
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 22, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako, you're not being fair here. Nikon makes a mistake or has a bone headed policy and "that's the reality of dealing with humans". OP asks for confirmation in writing not realising the implications of doing so and it's all his fault.

Never once did I say it was all his fault (other thread). Only explained what happened from a diffrent perpective.

Why should anyone care about that different perspective?

Because the OP in the other case could have got his final resolution 6 weeks earlier had he understood the nuances ans reasoning behind there decisions. (never commented on the right or wrong of that specific decision/policy)

I'll repeat again. The consumer should not need inside contacts within a company and an intimate knowledge of their internal policies and structures to get his warranty issue resolved. Such knowledge should have no impact on his rights. Asking for confirmation in writing of something he'd been told verbally is not unreasonable and Nikon could easily have refused without changing the action they had promised to undertake. Such a change in their action could depending on the local law and the way they had phrased the agreement constitute a breach in their warranty obligations. The customer has been treated poorly.

The customer does not need to learn or know anything about the camera manufacture or retail business in order to expect working gear.

No need to at all. Knowing though has certain advantages.

Yes it does. But you can't expect everyone to know and you can't blame someone for not knowing an unpublished policy you have been told by word of mouth by contacts you trust but the OP doesn't know.

If it were me I'd be insisting on a full refund at this point (probably from the retailer but I'm not familiar with the intricacies of US consumer law).

Would most likely not happen. The retailer is under no responsibility (US) to meet your request. Pointless to demand for something that you might be used to getting in another country. For cerberusjf, that might have been an option

I'm no expert on US retail law

Understood. That's why your perspective may not be as relevant to the case in the other thread. Might apply more to the Op's here though.

Gee...and you accuse me of quoting out of context....want to finish my sentence in green there?

The legal obligation - retailer or manufacturer and which subsidiary may be debatable and may vary by country. However the moral obligation to the customer and the implications to the reputation of the brand are not ambiguous. This is not acceptable behaviour.

Furthermore by refusing to sell 3rd party repairers with parts and service software, Nikon has made itself the ONLY company that can repair a faulty camera in most circumstances.

In the US, that is correct and done by design. Turns out to be a pretty good business decision and has side benefits for the consumer as units are no longer getting bricked due to repair folks using the wrong software. Wasn't an issue pre-D7000. Is now.

Repair folks using the wrong software? That'd be because Nikon refuse to sell or make available the correct software. This is a condition they have artificially created. It is anti-competitive and as anti-consumer as you can get. It's not a good business decision at all. In the long term it's a terrible decision.

And please explain why this wasn't an issue pre-D7000 and is now?

-- hide signature --

Sammy.
My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sammy Yousef
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,416Gear list
Like?
Re: Didn't try
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 22, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Nikon built a faulty camera, couldn't fix it after multiple attempts and gave the OP the run around.

You're confusing companies. The company trying to repair the camera is not the company that manufactured it. The company repairing it is an INDEPENDENT SUBSIDIARY. Canon does it different and it really is a big difference.

Not to the consumer it's not. Since the manufacturer will direct a customer to deal with the subsidiary who acts on their behalf, the internal workings of Nikon (or Canon) don't enter into it when we're talking about the consumer's rights. The brand takes a hit when a customer is treated like this. The consumer does not buy a Nikon Japan D5100 camera or a Nikon Thailand D5100. They buy a Nikon D5100. And they don't get an option to send the camera back to the manufacturing subsidiary.

-- hide signature --

Sammy.
My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sammy Yousef
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,416Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon no longer supplies 3rd party repairers
In reply to BirgerH, Jul 22, 2013

BirgerH wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

BirgerH wrote:

Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon.

That's mind boggling. How anyone can think a faulty camera and multiple repairs is not the fault of the manufacturer. Nikon attempted and failed to do the repair several times. Nikon do not allow 3rd parties to purchase parts from them anymore. Nikon also don't supply their service software to third parties. Therefore there is no one except Nikon that can do the repair whether parts are needed or firmware parameters need adjusting.

Now it may be true that the retailer is responsible and the buck stops with them to ensure the goods they sell work, but they can send the camera to the manufacturer for repair or have the buyer do so as an attempt to rectify the situation.

And thats exactly what WEX is trying to. In the very same moment you send a camera directly to a repairman or Company you are breaking the conditions for the sellers warranty, risking loosing the warranty. Therefor blame the right.

Once Again - Nikon has nothing to do with you buing a Nikon camera - the agrement is made to the reseller.

And Again - The OP's problems has nothing to do with Nikon. He has problems with WEX.

We're going in circles.

WEX can't fix the camera.

They can offer to send it to Nikon. Nikon's manufacturer warranty covers the product. Nikon is in fact responsible when they accept the warranty repair.

If Nikon can't do the job right the OP should go back to WEX. I would have done so sooner where he has agreed to have the camera repair or replaced again by the manufacturer.
The consumer being upset with both manufacturer and retailer in this circumstance is perfectly reasonable.

-- hide signature --

Sammy.
My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,224
Like?
Don't understand?
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 22, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

BirgerH wrote:

Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon.

That's mind boggling. How anyone can think a faulty camera and multiple repairs is not the fault of the manufacturer.

No one said it wasn't. Your confusing the repair process with the manufacturing process.

No I'm not. "Solving the OP's problem has nothing to do with Nikon" is not an ambiguous statement.

Yes it may because solving Juggernaut122's issue may indeed have nothing to do with Nikon Japan. And based on the resolution he got, apparently it indeed did not have anything to do with the manufacture. Not sure, in the OP's case here, if the manufacture was ever involved in the problem resolution.

Nikon Japan? What are you talking about? Was the camera even put together in Japan? I don't think that model of camera is but I coiuld be wrong. The manufacturer's warranty may be provided by Nikon in another country but it's still Nikon.

Nikon Japan/Sendai/Tochigi (Parent) is the company that builds and ships cameras. There is a Nikon Thialnad, but the arrangement with Sendai/Tochigi is very different, AFAIK. Some they sell and distribute themselves...and some they sell to Independent Distributor Companies that also do repairs. Once Nikon USA buys and distributes a camera or lens...it's now treated different than a Nikon/Sendai/Tochigi body/lens (grey market) and different laws/rules apply. I'm surprised you don't understand the concepts of "Independent Subsidiary" and the ramification of that arrangement. One bounus for Nikon Japan...Independent subsidiaries that actually operate as independent businesses provide considerable liability protection for the parent company. Note also, not all Independent subsidiaries operate the same. Many differences and very complicated.

Subsidary list

Nikon attempted and failed to do the repair several times.

The Nikon repair facility the OP used in this case...is Not Nikon USA.

That's fine. Which country's implied warranty regulations would you like me to look up exactly? Most are very comparable and differ only in the detail of who's responsible in the first instance.

Only matters who's responsible for the warranty regards which issue your speaking of. Nikon USA, Nikon Japan, etc. Certain differences do come into play.

Only in terms of legalities. When it comes to that, if the camera is put together in Thailand Nikon Japan has very little to do with it.

No...Nikon Imaging is the parent company and the manufacture. The have factories in Japan and Thailand.

Except of course that they do have a hand in the setup, finances and policies of their subsidiaries world wide. Now you're suggesting a consumer needs to concern himself with the subtleties of running an international business and the organisation of it's holdings.

Yes, if he wants his warranty honored. It helps to know who will and will not honor it.

As far as the consumer's concerned he or she has only one choice in who to deal with and that is Nikon locally.

Not true regards repair situations the consumer wishes to pay outright for.

Nikon do not allow 3rd parties to purchase parts from them anymore.

Not sure that policy holds with the independents in Europe.

It looks like they've had to waver a little in the US as well

http://shop.nikonusa.com/store/nikonprt/en_US/home/ThemeID.30573000

Not a waver at all. Nikon Parts store is Nikon USA...not a third party

Nikon parts store is a concession that they've had to make. The policy they had announced was that parts would not be supplied to third parties. I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding that back down.

They did not back down. The Nikon store does not sell to third part repair businesses. That policy did not change.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,224
Like?
paper weight
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 22, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako, you're not being fair here. Nikon makes a mistake or has a bone headed policy and "that's the reality of dealing with humans". OP asks for confirmation in writing not realising the implications of doing so and it's all his fault.

Never once did I say it was all his fault (other thread). Only explained what happened from a diffrent perpective.

Why should anyone care about that different perspective?

Because the OP in the other case could have got his final resolution 6 weeks earlier had he understood the nuances ans reasoning behind there decisions. (never commented on the right or wrong of that specific decision/policy)

I'll repeat again. The consumer should not need inside contacts within a company

Sure, but it would have helped in this case.

The customer does not need to learn or know anything about the camera manufacture or retail business in order to expect working gear.

No need to at all. Knowing though has certain advantages.

Yes it does. But you can't expect everyone to know and you can't blame someone for not knowing an unpublished policy you have been told by word of mouth by contacts you trust but the OP doesn't know.

Now you know...and so do others. That was my only goal.

Furthermore by refusing to sell 3rd party repairers with parts and service software, Nikon has made itself the ONLY company that can repair a faulty camera in most circumstances.

In the US, that is correct and done by design. Turns out to be a pretty good business decision and has side benefits for the consumer as units are no longer getting bricked due to repair folks using the wrong software. Wasn't an issue pre-D7000. Is now.

Repair folks using the wrong software? That'd be because Nikon refuse to sell or make available the correct software.

Not at all. It was a price issue. Most independents simply could not afford the update and it was offered (very expensive and not sure who sets the price...I assume Nikon the Parent). Those independents continued accepting repairs and doing repairs without the needed software or hardware. The consumer, in many of those cases, got the shaft...and now we have a new policy from Nikon USA.

This is a condition they have artificially created

Maybe, I do not know.

It is anti-competitive and as anti-consumer as you can get. It's not a good business decision at all. In the long term it's a terrible decision.

Doesn't appear to be from Nikon USA's stand point. It looks as though their bottom line is increasing. As far as real repair statistics go...I have only 2nd hand data so not sure. Pluses and Minuses for the consumer me thinks.

And please explain why this wasn't an issue pre-D7000 and is now?

With the D90 and earlier...the old software worked just fine. With the newer bodies, trying to calibrate/repair with the old gear/software often results in a expensive paper weight that will not power on. Not sure the mechanics behind it.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sammy Yousef
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,416Gear list
Like?
Re: paper weight
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 23, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

I'll repeat again. The consumer should not need inside contacts within a company

Sure, but it would have helped in this case.

So would owning a camera company and having them provide you with exclusive service. Should we expect everyone to own one?

The customer does not need to learn or know anything about the camera manufacture or retail business in order to expect working gear.

No need to at all. Knowing though has certain advantages.

Yes it does. But you can't expect everyone to know and you can't blame someone for not knowing an unpublished policy you have been told by word of mouth by contacts you trust but the OP doesn't know.

Now you know...and so do others. That was my only goal.

Now I know that the Nikon subsidiary and repair center you deal with claims this, but I can't get them to verify it in writing now can I? I appreciate you have informed us of your experience, but that isn't the point.

Repair folks using the wrong software? That'd be because Nikon refuse to sell or make available the correct software.

Not at all. It was a price issue. Most independents simply could not afford the update and it was offered (very expensive and not sure who sets the price...I assume Nikon the Parent). Those independents continued accepting repairs and doing repairs without the needed software or hardware. The consumer, in many of those cases, got the shaft...and now we have a new policy from Nikon USA.

I don't believe for one second that Nikon ever sold it's service software to 3rd parties. They may have contracted 3rd party companies to do their repair work as was the case with Maxwell in Australia a few years ago (Nikon has since started doing it's own repair work here). That isn't the same thing as selling it to a third party though. I'm not aware of any instance in which Nikon has offered it's service software to a requesting 3rd party rather than their official repairers. I challenge you to show me proof of that....and if they did at a price that was not reasonable then I don't consider that an offer in good faith.

This is a condition they have artificially created

Maybe, I do not know.

Are you telling me you don't know whether Nikon controls the release of their own software and parts?

It is anti-competitive and as anti-consumer as you can get. It's not a good business decision at all. In the long term it's a terrible decision.

Doesn't appear to be from Nikon USA's stand point. It looks as though their bottom line is increasing. As far as real repair statistics go...I have only 2nd hand data so not sure. Pluses and Minuses for the consumer me thinks.

When you suddenly shut out the competition of course you'll get a temporary increase in revenue. If you didn't that would mean customers were throwing away cameras rather than having them repaired.

And please explain why this wasn't an issue pre-D7000 and is now?

With the D90 and earlier...the old software worked just fine. With the newer bodies, trying to calibrate/repair with the old gear/software often results in a expensive paper weight that will not power on. Not sure the mechanics behind it.

Again where's your information coming from? I'm not aware of anyone using old software to repair newer cameras? I'd be surprised if there wasn't a check against firmware to prevent such nonsense.

-- hide signature --

Sammy.
My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sammy Yousef
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,416Gear list
Like?
Re: Don't understand?
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 23, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Nikon Japan/Sendai/Tochigi (Parent) is the company that builds and ships cameras.

Incorrect. The D90, D7000, D7100 are made in Thailand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_D90

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_D7000

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3474424#forum-post-51316085

There is a Nikon Thialnad, but the arrangement with Sendai/Tochigi is very different, AFAIK.

You are incorrect.

Some they sell and distribute themselves...and some they sell to Independent Distributor

They do not have 2 factories making the consumer bodies.

Companies that also do repairs. Once Nikon USA buys and distributes a camera or lens...it's now treated different than a Nikon/Sendai/Tochigi body/lens (grey market) and different laws/rules apply. I'm surprised you don't understand the concepts of "Independent Subsidiary"

I'm surprised you're accusing me of not understanding what a subsidiary is given that you've repeatedly stated factually incorrect information. Whether or not Nikon USA covers a camera that hasn't come through their distribution change has no bearing on where it was made. You or a company you deal with becomes the importer instead of Nikon USA when you buy grey market. If you import yourself you're no longer covered as there is no retailer. If an unauthorised 3rd part company imports and sells to you it becomes a lot muddier as that retailer still is obligated to provide warranty but Nikon USA will refuse to honour the warranty as they were not involved in the distribution.

and the ramification of that arrangement. One bounus for Nikon Japan...Independent subsidiaries that actually operate as independent businesses provide considerable liability protection for the parent company. Note also, not all Independent subsidiaries operate the same. Many differences and very complicated.

Yes and any time the customer is bitten by Nikon protecting themselves in this way they remember it. It really doesn't matter if they're legally protected in the long run because if enough customers are bitten the brand will decline.

Except of course that they do have a hand in the setup, finances and policies of their subsidiaries world wide. Now you're suggesting a consumer needs to concern himself with the subtleties of running an international business and the organisation of it's holdings.

Yes, if he wants his warranty honored. It helps to know who will and will not honor it.

I agree with that statement. However if he hasn't bought grey market and has bought through an authorised distributor he is as covered as he can be.

As far as the consumer's concerned he or she has only one choice in who to deal with and that is Nikon locally.

Not true regards repair situations the consumer wishes to pay outright for.

Nikon can and will refuse repairs or quote high prices if they do not wish to repair.

Nikon do not allow 3rd parties to purchase parts from them anymore.

Not sure that policy holds with the independents in Europe.

It looks like they've had to waver a little in the US as well

http://shop.nikonusa.com/store/nikonprt/en_US/home/ThemeID.30573000

Not a waver at all. Nikon Parts store is Nikon USA...not a third party

Nikon parts store is a concession that they've had to make. The policy they had announced was that parts would not be supplied to third parties. I'm not familiar with the circumstances surrounding that back down.

They did not back down. The Nikon store does not sell to third part repair businesses. That policy did not change.

Note that the parts offered are limited and not the complete range.

As I said this is NOT good for a consumer who now has to deal with Nikon to get the part on behalf of a third party repairer if they wish to use one. Or are you suggesting that as well as knowing Nikon's internal policies and subsidiary structure, consumer law and international import law the consumer now needs to also know how to repair their own camera? This really is getting beyond ridiculous.

-- hide signature --

Sammy.
My forum postings reflect my own opinions and not those of my employer. I'm not employed in the photo business.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,224
Like?
Still
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 23, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

Nikon Japan/Sendai/Tochigi (Parent) is the company that builds and ships cameras.

Incorrect. The D90, D7000, D7100 are made in Thailand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_D90

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_D7000

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3474424#forum-post-51316085

There is a Nikon Thialnad, but the arrangement with Sendai/Tochigi is very different, AFAIK.

You are incorrect.

Some they sell and distribute themselves...and some they sell to Independent Distributor

They do not have 2 factories making the consumer bodies.

You misunderstand the Nikon subsidiary relationship. Many things changed of late The PDF I provided can still help though. Much of the info isn't to hard to find.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,224
Like?
still works...
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Jul 23, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:


The customer does not need to learn or know anything about the camera manufacture or retail business in order to expect working gear.

No need to at all. Knowing though has certain advantages.

Yes it does. But you can't expect everyone to know and you can't blame someone for not knowing an unpublished policy you have been told by word of mouth by contacts you trust but the OP doesn't know.

Now you know...and so do others. That was my only goal.

Now I know that the Nikon subsidiary and repair center you deal with claims this, but I can't get them to verify it in writing now can I? I appreciate you have informed us of your experience, but that isn't the point.

No matter, some will have a very different experience.  I wish them all the best. There will always be a few who just end up having  a bad go of things.  Luckily, stats are relatively low when you look at the raw numbers. Still works in our favor.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BirgerH
Senior MemberPosts: 1,513Gear list
Like?
Re: Didn't try
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 23, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

Sammy Yousef wrote:

Nikon built a faulty camera, couldn't fix it after multiple attempts and gave the OP the run around.

You're confusing companies. The company trying to repair the camera is not the company that manufactured it. The company repairing it is an INDEPENDENT SUBSIDIARY. Canon does it different and it really is a big difference.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Hi.

And I am very sorry that I have been confused by some Companys too. I have mentioned WEX - it was confused with another thread - the one OP mentioned was Adorama.uk.

I'm sorry about that - but it will change nothing.

BirgerH.

 BirgerH's gear list:BirgerH's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Tamron SP AF 11-18mm F/4.5-5.6 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron AF 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Leonard Shepherd
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,737Gear list
Like?
Re: More on WEX service
In reply to BirgerH, Jul 23, 2013

BirgerH wrote:

Now it may be true that the retailer is responsible and the buck stops with them to ensure the goods they sell work, but they can send the camera to the manufacturer for repair or have the buyer do so as an attempt to rectify the situation.

And thats exactly what WEX is trying to. In the very same moment you send a camera directly to a repairman or Company you are breaking the conditions for the sellers warranty, risking loosing the warranty. Therefor blame the right.

Once Again - Nikon has nothing to do with you buing a Nikon camera - the agrement is made to the reseller.

Over the years I have bought a lot from WEX - and had 2 issues.

The first was a Nikon Coolscan 5000 (to replace a 4000) that would not start up. I rang Nikon to check I had done everything right. The person at Nikon agreed a problem, issued an incident number and said I could send it in for repair, or ask WEX (then Warehouse Express) for a replacement - and hinted in his opinion I should get WEX to sort it. I phoned WEX mid afternoon, quoted the incident number, was put on hold for a couple of minutes, and arrangements were made to deliver a replacement before 9 am the following morning. You do not get better service than that.

A second problem a few years later was a Giottos tripod with a swinging arm where the locking parts were machined to an abysmal standard and failed within about 3 weeks. I returned it to WEX, was annoyed when WEX returned it to Giottos UK importer, and the "fertiliser hit the fan" when the importer suggested I was not using the tripod properly.

WEX sent a replacement with the same defect, I photographed another Giottos in another camera store with the same defect, and also sent a photo of a Gitzo machined to a good working standard. When I went "upstairs" at WEX they apologised for sending the original for repair instead of replacing it, accepted the original and replacement were unsuitable for macro photography, and promptly returned my money without my having to mention UK/EEC law.

While I am sceptical about the implication Nikon cannot correct an alleged front focus issue, if the owner talks to WEX, even at this late stage months after accepting a repair as a substitute for a replacement, WEX may listen.

On the other hand if neither Nikon or WEX accept the camera has a fault the owner has the challenge of getting an independent repairer to confirm a fault remains. If the independent repairer confirms a fault WEX pay the repair charge and should IMO also make a goodwill gesture. If the independent repairer does not confirm a fault then it would seem there is nothing wrong with the camera.

Summing up knowing about legal rights and talking to the right person (WEX not Nikon) in the right way usually gets a good outcome. "Sounding off" on forums gets nowhere, other than indicating a UK owner buying in the UK has not taken the right steps to get a problem resolved.

-- hide signature --

Leonard Shepherd
Many problems turn out to be a lack of intimate knowledge as to how to get the best out of modern and often complex camera equipment.

 Leonard Shepherd's gear list:Leonard Shepherd's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BirgerH
Senior MemberPosts: 1,513Gear list
Like?
Re: More on WEX service
In reply to Leonard Shepherd, Jul 23, 2013

Hi Leonard.

My fault.

I have confused two Companys from two threads. I'm very sorry that I have mentioned WEX - it was surely Adorama.uk the OP mentioned in his starting post.

I have no right to trouble WEX and no reason at all.

Again I am very sorry - and very old.

BirgerH.

My apologize too to WEX if they read this.

 BirgerH's gear list:BirgerH's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D7000 Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Tamron SP AF 11-18mm F/4.5-5.6 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron AF 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cerberusjf
Regular MemberPosts: 300
Like?
Re: far from
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 23, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

cerberusjf wrote:

What demand did I make?

My mistake.

Okay, no problem as long as you understand that I didn’t demand anything from Nikon. I only asked them to repair the camera, I never asked for a replacement. Actually I assumed the back-focusing with the 35mm had been fixed with that body and didn’t want to repeat the process. As it turned out, they had forgotten to do it.

No, your experience, and take on things, is unique in some respects.

Could you explain what you mean by this please?  I'm not sure what you mean.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mako2011
Mako2011 MOD
Forum ProPosts: 16,224
Like?
Re: far from
In reply to cerberusjf, Jul 23, 2013

cerberusjf wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

No, your experience, and take on things, is unique in some respects.

Could you explain what you mean by this please? I'm not sure what you mean.

More than one same model body experience, different country and warranty rules than here, different level of focus understanding and testing, different personality, different subsidiary companies involved, different outcome, etc. Each persons experiences is often unique in some ways as is their personal reaction to events.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pixd90
Senior MemberPosts: 1,215Gear list
Like?
Re: far from
In reply to Mako2011, Jul 23, 2013

Mako2011 wrote:

cerberusjf wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

No, your experience, and take on things, is unique in some respects.

Could you explain what you mean by this please? I'm not sure what you mean.

More than one same model body experience, different country and warranty rules than here, different level of focus understanding and testing, different personality, different subsidiary companies involved, different outcome, etc. Each persons experiences is often unique in some ways as is their personal reaction to events.

Totally agree, so please shoot me so that I can get  "FAR FROM" this agonizing and never ending thread.

 pixd90's gear list:pixd90's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cerberusjf
Regular MemberPosts: 300
Like?
Re: Warning - Nikon REFUSES to replace equipment they cannot fix, even if under warranty part 2
In reply to BirgerH, Jul 23, 2013

BirgerH wrote:

To me - it is your vendor having customer hostillity (as some has called it in the other thread) by not replacing - and not Nikon.

And I know - I've been in that buissiness - as vendor - not photography but office machines.

Then back to US - seems like over there it is the manufactorer having the responsability to a deal between a customer and a vendor. Strange to me - but if they like it that way - then ok.

BirgerH.

I can see your point and agree that the vendor should have offered a replacement or a refund and they are responsible for creating the situation in the first place. I do blame them more than I did before.

But the camera did come with a manufacturer’s warranty which should have covered a repair due to “improper material or workmanship”. The fact that the workshop Nikon use did not did such a poor job (not once, but almost every time) gives me no hope of getting any Nikon equipment repaired.

The company that let me down time and again was Nikon, so although the vendor put me in the position of depending on Nikon, it was Nikon who are responsible for my dissatisfaction.

My only other experience with a camera having a fault within the warranty period was with my Samsung EX1. Samsung returned my camera within a week with an invoice stating what they had done and the work covered by the warranty. I didn’t contact the vendor in this case, I just followed the instructions for a warranty repair.

Dealing with Nikon forced me to find out my consumer rights, so I suppose I can be grateful for that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads