Beware the B&H refurbs

William Castleman · Nov 26, 2002

It seems that the contributors to this thread have two conflicting wishes. One group wants plastic sealed refurbished equipment from Canon USA, another wants B&H to do an inspection on the equipment.

The defective refurb lens I received from B&H was in immaculate shape. However, it failed a lens resolution test. There would have been no way for B&H to reasonably check it out. However, they took it back and refunded the expense based on my word without question.

It seems that people who have complaints about refurbished Canon gear ought to be aiming their concerns at Canon USA rather than one of their their retail outlets.

The reason the item is refurbished is because it was damaged or defective. We buy refurbished Canon equipment with the hopes that Canon has put the item in "like new" condition and function.

Just another perspective.....

Jack A. Zucker said:
I had a similar experience buying a refurbished EOS3 in which the
exposure compensation LED was not working. I sent it back and
recieved another refurb in which part of the LCD panel wasn't
working. I was very disappointed in this as B&H should have checked
this out and even casual inspection would have revealed these flaws.

Unfortunately, when I posted about it I was flamed by B&H backers.

P.S.
I love B&H Photo and have had lots of great transactions with them
so please do not bash me!

--
William Castleman
http://www.wlcastleman.com

KilgoreTrout · Nov 26, 2002

Henry Posner/B&H Photo said:
killgoret said:

I’d like to add that I really don’t think B&H is trying to take
anyone, and it is possible that the Canon tech reps are just behind
the loop a bit.

Click to expand...

They MUST be a bit behind, because the manager of our Used Dept is
prepared to fax a copy of our packing slip from Canon USA
demonstrating that the cameras in question were delivered to B&H
directly from Canon USA.

Thanks for clearing this up Henry. From my perspective, I had three separate Canon techs insisting the D60 was not being refurb by Canon, and I panicked. Since your digital camera return policy is 7 days from purchase and there is more than one problem with the camera (one of which may involve the sensor), I did what I thought was right at the time by returning the camera.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

Even if it is the case that Canon is refurbing
these units, there should have been a warranty card in the box

Click to expand...

WHY? Canon isn't warranting them for one minute. They're ONLY
warranted by B&H Photo, as is all the merchandise purchased from
our Used Dept.

This is what I was being told by the Canon techs. They put the seed in my head that I should take caution.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

and the box should have been sealed.

Click to expand...

Well, I've only been at B&H for 8-1/2 years and this is the only
retailer I ever worked for, but I've NEVER seen a "sealed" package
in the Used Dept, and even so, shrink-wrap machines are a
dime-a-dozen, so sealing a box means nothing.

There is a paper sticker on the box opening that has been broken. Again, one of the Canon techs suggested this shouldn't be the case.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

From the packaging it did look
like it may be a legit Canon factory refurb,

Click to expand...

Which is was, but in all honesty, how much experience do you have
with Canon factory refurbs that you'd readily know?

None at all, but the packaging had a finished look to it.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

but it is hard to tell
for sure (all of the stickers on the box looked laser printed)…

Click to expand...

That's how we get 'em, except for the tags we puty on the boxes
ourselves for inventory purposes.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

The lack of warranty card made the Canon tech (and to be honest, me)
wary.

Click to expand...

Needlessly. No warranty = no warranty card.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

Add to that the fact that the B&H used dept. customer support
was only willing to have me send the camera to B&H for service

Click to expand...

As opposed to WHAT other option? We warrant it, you send it to us.

The Canon techs claimed a warranty card should have been in the box.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

and
you can see why this set off the bells and whistles in my consumer
warning system.

Click to expand...

I must be missing something. I see no cause for "bells and
whistles." I see a customer who unfortunately doesn't know the
whole story, and one regrettably lead astray by a misinformed Canon
employee.

This is a correct statement. The reason I returned the camera was due to the conflicting information. A call to the Canon tech department should remedy this problem in the future.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:

My main concern was that the camera would go back
and forth for weeks without ever being fully repaired. At this
point, I’m willing to spend the added money ($400) to get a sealed
camera with a 1 year Canon factory warranty (the refurb had a 90
day warranty).

Click to expand...

The ONLY way to do that (except the "sealed" part) is to bite the
bullet and buy a new one. They're not sealed either, but they will
have a Canon warranty.

As I stated in my first post, I plan to buy a new D60 from B&H as soon as my card is credited (that is, if you'll still take my order after this thread).

Thanks again for clearing this up Henry. I apologize for any trouble it may have created.

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
--
Henry Posner
B&H Photo-Video, Inc.

KilgoreTrout · Nov 26, 2002

William Castleman said:
Henry Posner's reasoned response to an upset and not-fully-informed
customer is one reason I keep doing business with B&H.

B&H is really a class act.

I'll second this... Thanks again Henry.

JohnM31499 · Nov 26, 2002

Lee Rothman said:
I've bought so called NEW items from them and received them in like
conditions.

Just like the recent thread that was caused by DeltaInternational doing the same thing. All retailers make mistakes, the good one correct them to the customers satisfaction. Delta corrected their screwup & I'm sure B&H will do the same thing.

-john

Gary Rodgers · Nov 26, 2002

William Castleman said:
Henry Posner's reasoned response to an upset and not-fully-informed
customer is one reason I keep doing business with B&H.

B&H is really a class act.

And myself as well. I'd have bought my D60 if they had one in stock, but they didn't so I had to go elsewhere.

The fact that Henry participates, and acts as an advocate for his customers, on this forum and others, reinforces my belief that B&H is one of the best companies to deal with.

Gary
(who also likes Dell & Adorama)

Juli Valley · Nov 26, 2002

I have had nothing but good experiences with B & H. Too many for my budget. LOL.

Gary Rodgers · Nov 26, 2002

Jack A. Zucker said:
I had a similar experience buying a refurbished EOS3 in which the
exposure compensation LED was not working. I sent it back and
recieved another refurb in which part of the LCD panel wasn't
working. I was very disappointed in this as B&H should have checked
this out and even casual inspection would have revealed these flaws.

Unfortunately, when I posted about it I was flamed by B&H backers.

P.S.
I love B&H Photo and have had lots of great transactions with them
so please do not bash me!

and herein lies the problem. We want refurbs. We want the refurbs factory sealed. We want the vendors who sell us the refurbs to check them out top to bottom first. Guess what - ya can't have all 3!

My local camera shop, who charges pretty much retail for all equipment he sells (and he DOES sell a fair amount of it), pretty much handles every piece he sells - or the prospective buyer does. It's part of the sales process. I'm CONSIDERING making a $2400 purchase. I want to TOUCH it. Whoops, I have to think about it. Is the retailer not supposed to sell it now that it's been out of the package? Who do you choose to please? Expectations are too high sometimes.

Just my $0.02.

Dick Ginkowski · Nov 26, 2002

First, I want to congratulate Henry for responding.

Henry and I go back a few years and we don't always agree 100%. However, he's never been afraid to tackle a situation, even if you don't like the answer. The fact that he weighed in here (and in other cases where B&H has been attacked) says something. (For example, despite hundreds of posts about problems with Dell misrepresenting D60 availability and shipping dates, nobody from Dell ever chimed in.) This is one reason why B&H remains one of my favored personal suppliers.

Now...since I play a lawyer in real life...

Henry Posner/B&H Photo said:
WHY? Canon isn't warranting them for one minute.

I am not so sure about that. Even though there isn't an express warranty, there may be an implied warranty of merchantability. When Canon delivers these refurbished unit to B&H with the understanding that they are for resale, it does so with the implied warranty that they are in saleable (useable) condition fit for the intended purpose. In other words, if that D60 is defective out of the box, with broken parts or inoperative, then it certainly isn't saleable or useable for fit for the intended purpose.

Now B&H tacks on its own warranty for used merchandise on top of the implied warranty of merchantability but that is a separate issue. Depending on the circumstances, the defective D60 may actually be governed by the implied warranty of merchantability both as it applies to the consumer's purchase from B&H and ALSO to B&H's purchase from Canon.

http://www.pbase.com/dickg/

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. · Nov 26, 2002

**** Ginkowski said:
First, I want to congratulate Henry for responding.

Thank you.

**** Ginkowski said:
Henry and I go back a few years and we don't always agree 100%.

Shucks! I ALWAYS agree with lawyers.

**** Ginkowski said:
However, he's never been afraid to tackle a situation, even if you
don't like the answer. The fact that he weighed in here (and in
other cases where B&H has been attacked) says something. (For
example, despite hundreds of posts about problems with Dell
misrepresenting D60 availability and shipping dates, nobody from
Dell ever chimed in.) This is one reason why B&H remains one of my
favored personal suppliers.

Thanks again.

**** Ginkowski said:
Now...since I play a lawyer in real life...

**** Ginkowski said:
Henry Posner/B&H Photo said:

WHY? Canon isn't warranting them for one minute.

Click to expand...

I am not so sure about that. Even though there isn't an express
warranty, there may be an implied warranty of merchantability.
When Canon delivers these refurbished unit to B&H with the
understanding that they are for resale, it does so with the implied
warranty that they are in saleable (useable) condition fit for the
intended purpose.

Interesting angle for consideration. I'm not a lawyer, but isn't the implied warranty between Canon & B&H? If so, does it necessarily extend to the customer? Also, I don't know if there's a written agreement between Canon & B&H regarding these particular products or refurbed items in general.

--
Henry Posner
B&H Photo-Video, Inc.

KilgoreTrout · Nov 26, 2002

I agree. Though the camera I received was in excellent cosmetic condition, the problems it exhibited should have been caught at the Canon repair facility. I can almost accept the long exposure problem being overlooked, but the LCD was very obvious and there should be a check for dust on the sensor before it leaves the repair facility.

As for the box seal, I would be happier to check out the camera myself than have the reseller check (at least in the case of refurbished cameras). That is, as long as there is a refund or exchange policy in place. Even though I'm down $45 in shipping costs (from B&H and back) I am happy with the way B&H handled the transaction. I also got a chance to know that the camera is right for me.

William Castleman said:
It seems that the contributors to this thread have two conflicting
wishes. One group wants plastic sealed refurbished equipment from
Canon USA, another wants B&H to do an inspection on the equipment.

The defective refurb lens I received from B&H was in immaculate
shape. However, it failed a lens resolution test. There would
have been no way for B&H to reasonably check it out. However, they
took it back and refunded the expense based on my word without
question.

It seems that people who have complaints about refurbished Canon
gear ought to be aiming their concerns at Canon USA rather than one
of their their retail outlets.

The reason the item is refurbished is because it was damaged or
defective. We buy refurbished Canon equipment with the hopes that
Canon has put the item in "like new" condition and function.

Just another perspective.....

Jack O'Neill · Nov 26, 2002

Hi Henry,
Please accept my apologies.

I can see with a big company like Canon, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.

It was wrong of me to jump to a conclusion before giving you a chance to give the B&H side of the story.

Again I am sorry and hope all of you at B&H have a happy holiday.

Jack
--
http://www.pbase.com/joneill

John Harrison82293 · Nov 26, 2002

Gary Rodgers said:
Jack A. Zucker said:

I had a similar experience buying a refurbished EOS3 in which the
exposure compensation LED was not working. I sent it back and
recieved another refurb in which part of the LCD panel wasn't
working. I was very disappointed in this as B&H should have checked
this out and even casual inspection would have revealed these flaws.

Unfortunately, when I posted about it I was flamed by B&H backers.

P.S.
I love B&H Photo and have had lots of great transactions with them
so please do not bash me!

Click to expand...

and herein lies the problem. We want refurbs. We want the refurbs
factory sealed. We want the vendors who sell us the refurbs to
check them out top to bottom first. Guess what - ya can't have all
3!

My local camera shop, who charges pretty much retail for all
equipment he sells (and he DOES sell a fair amount of it), pretty
much handles every piece he sells - or the prospective buyer does.
It's part of the sales process. I'm CONSIDERING making a $2400
purchase. I want to TOUCH it. Whoops, I have to think about it.
Is the retailer not supposed to sell it now that it's been out of
the package? Who do you choose to please? Expectations are too
high sometimes.

Just my $0.02.

Mitch Connor · Nov 26, 2002

As with the Dell example, all this talk of the law does not apply because the seller took back the product. Canon's agreement with BH covers their situation. BH is not a consumer. Canon did not sell to the consumer. You are confusing this with products liability.

Similarly, when you speak of fitness for an "intended purpose" you are again confused. At the very least the seller must know who the purchaser is. Something like, "I need a camera to take photos for National Geographic" and the customer winds up with a camera not appropriate for that use.

So, any implied warranties come from BH and go to the purchaser. Canon is not involved.

Also, Dell is busy leading us out of a recession. It would be hard for them to monitor this board anyway since posts that mention the discount they give on cameras are taken down (probably having to do with a policy of supporting companies that advertise here which is fair enough).

**** Ginkowski said:
I am not so sure about that. Even though there isn't an express
warranty, there may be an implied warranty of merchantability.
When Canon delivers these refurbished unit to B&H with the
understanding that they are for resale, it does so with the implied
warranty that they are in saleable (useable) condition fit for the
intended purpose. In other words, if that D60 is defective out of
the box, with broken parts or inoperative, then it certainly isn't
saleable or useable for fit for the intended purpose.

Now B&H tacks on its own warranty for used merchandise on top of
the implied warranty of merchantability but that is a separate
issue. Depending on the circumstances, the defective D60 may
actually be governed by the implied warranty of merchantability
both as it applies to the consumer's purchase from B&H and ALSO to
B&H's purchase from Canon.

http://www.pbase.com/dickg/

Mitch Connor · Nov 26, 2002

I'm not a lawyer, but isn't

Henry Posner/B&H Photo-Video Inc. said:
the implied warranty between Canon & B&H? If so, does it
necessarily extend to the customer? Also, I don't know if there's a
written agreement between Canon & B&H regarding these particular
products or refurbed items in general.

I am a lawyer. You have a good handle on the issues. Thank you for you posts.

Dick Ginkowski · Nov 26, 2002

Henry Posner/B&H Photo said:
Interesting angle for consideration. I'm not a lawyer, but isn't
the implied warranty between Canon & B&H? If so, does it
necessarily extend to the customer? Also, I don't know if there's a
written agreement between Canon & B&H regarding these particular
products or refurbed items in general.

--
Henry Posner
B&H Photo-Video, Inc.

...it could be (depending on the circumstances and the applicable law of the jurisdiction). There really are two customers here. B&H is a customer of Canon and the consumer is the customer of B&H. Unless there is a specific contract provision between Canon and B&H, Canon can't dump a lemon on B&H and then wash its hands of it.

Jack A. Zucker · Nov 26, 2002

William Castleman said:
It seems that people who have complaints about refurbished Canon
gear ought to be aiming their concerns at Canon USA rather than one
of their their retail outlets.

Except that the guy mentioned that his "refurb" had not come from Canon...
--
http://www.jackzucker.com

Mitch Connor · Nov 26, 2002

**** Ginkowski said:
**** Ginkowski said:

Interesting angle for consideration. I'm not a lawyer, but isn't
the implied warranty between Canon & B&H? If so, does it
necessarily extend to the customer? Also, I don't know if there's a
written agreement between Canon & B&H regarding these particular
products or refurbed items in general.
Henry Posner
B&H Photo-Video, Inc.

Click to expand...

...it could be (depending on the circumstances and the applicable
law of the jurisdiction). There really are two customers here.
B&H is a customer of Canon and the consumer is the customer of B&H.
Unless there is a specific contract provision between Canon and
B&H, Canon can't dump a lemon on B&H and then wash its hands of it.

Regardless of jurisdiction, B&H is not protected by consumer laws because it not a "consumer". It is a customer of course so they are guided by commercial law and their mutual agreements. Canon may sell a nonfunctioning camera to B&H if it wants to. There is only one consumer here - the person who bought the camera.

Peter Gregg · Nov 26, 2002

Interesting place to put this post. Trying to say something here??

Pete

Dick Ginkowski · Nov 26, 2002

...and, in fact, so does the Wisconsin Court of Appeals. I was just reading an opinion whereby a trial court's dismissal of an action brought under a claim of breach of contract and implied warranty of merchantability was reversed:

"The trial court also improperly dismissed the actions for breach of contract and breach of implied warranty of merchantability. Because we cannot determine the parties' intent regarding Palmer Johnson's [the dealer's] guarantee of quality, we cannot conclude as a matter of law that it did not breach the contract. Likewise, the record before this court does not conclusively defeat the claim that the yacht was not merchantable. An implied warranty is not invalidated merely because another entity has provided an express warranty. Palmer Johnson's alleged express warranty is not inconsistent with an implied warranty of merchantability. Palmer Johnson correctly notes that where there is an express warranty as to quality, there is no need to rely on an implied warranty. Yet Palmer Johnson argues that it has not provided an express warranty. Rather, it argues that Jefferson Yachts' [the manufacturer] express warranty overrides Palmer Johnson's implied warranty. It cites no authority for that proposition. Express and implied warranties must be construed as consistent with each other and cumulative unless such construction is unreasonable. See Wis. Stat. § 402.317 (1999-2000)."

It is true that an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose is not the same as implied warranty of merchantability although they do not exclude each other.

Dick Ginkowski · Nov 26, 2002

Luce Hooper said:
Mitch Connor said:

Mitch Connor said:

Interesting angle for consideration. I'm not a lawyer, but isn't

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Regardless of jurisdiction, B&H is not protected by consumer laws
because it not a "consumer". It is a customer of course so they are
guided by commercial law and their mutual agreements. Canon may
sell a nonfunctioning camera to B&H if it wants to. There is only
one consumer here - the person who bought the camera.

This comes under the Uniform Commercial Code's implied warranty of merchantability. Canon can't sell lemon cameras to B&H and then walk away leaving B&H to hold the bag in the absence of specific terms.

Beware the B&H refurbs

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Jack O'Neill

Guest

Senior Member

Active member

Active member

Senior Member

Jack A. Zucker

Guest

Active member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts