Kinda funny I run across this thread as just last night I was pm'ing with another Canon user that was getting hosed by Canon Canada for the repair of an impact to a lens he claims never occurred...and a big repair $$...so I asked if he requested the replaced parts returned and apparently they cannot provide...??
Anyways I think what we're seeing here is the results of these companies latest financials...with the disasters recently experienced and world economic turmoil..ultimately the customer pays
Simple question, but I am probably asking too much.
If Adorama have Helen Oster, and B&H have Henry Posner, to scan photography forums like FM, why can't Nikon hire someone to deal with these customer service horror stories? (Helen even poped-up to help someone in a Toronto-based photo meetup forum.)
Both Helen and Henry are a huge asset to the company they represent. Nikon should learn from them.
lara_ckl wrote:
Simple question, but I am probably asking too much.
If Adorama have Helen Oster, and B&H have Henry Posner, to scan photography forums like FM, why can't Nikon hire someone to deal with these customer service horror stories? (Helen even poped-up to help someone in a Toronto-based photo meetup forum.)
Both Helen and Henry are a huge asset to the company they represent. Nikon should learn from them.
Cynical (but probably correct) answer: Because B&H and Adorama both recognize and respect that consumers have a choice for retailers. There's at least a dozen reputable places online to buy your gear, often at the same price due to MAP and unilateral pricing. It's much more difficult for users to change systems, especially when they're already using what they believe is the best system. Nikon knows people will take the lumps of terrible customer service because they don't want to stop using the products they love.
Wayne Willison wrote:
Nikon has had it in the "Shop" for focus issues since Feb 20-13. I called today, the 26th, and now they claim there is impact damage and that the new status is RE-ESTIMATE. The girl on the phone said the warranty will be voided because of the damage. She has requested they(the techs) take pictures of the damage and then she will forward those pics to my email. "If you don't here from me in a day or two, feel free to call back," she said.
I have no idea what she is talking about. That camera has never even been bumped and now the warranty will be voided? ...Show more →
Yeah, impact damage from one of the techs dropping the camera probably. Just keep on them and if you have to get a lawyer to send them a letter saying you will sue them if they keep BS'ing you.
Betacamman wrote:
Hopefully they kept the shipping box.
I've had excellent Nikon Repair service at Melville many times.
But, I sent a lens in for adjustment and it was dropped.
Nikon did not keep or photo the box
USPS would not pay!
They said I sent it in for repair, therefore it must have already had the filter and front lens elements damaged.
I also got an "Impact Damage" report from El Segundo 10 years ago,
They claimed dirt inside the camera.
I sent it in for a free Sensor cleaning, Duhh.
After paying $800 to get my D1 back, it would not focus right and now had lots more "dirt inside it than when I sent it in.
I got a free mailer from Melville and they fixed everything with no charge.
Nikon Service updated my status today claiming impact damage as the reason for not honoring my camera warranty. The charge for the repair is $224.
I called them and argued that there was no damage done by me to the camera. That got me to where they would ship the camera back un-repaired. I then would be able to put my $3000 camera on a shelf and leave it there (the D800 isn't heavy enough to use as a doorstop).
These 2 images show the "impact damage". The one scrape on the bottom corner was either done by Nikon people or by me installing and removing an L-bracket. It is a paint scrape, not a dent from a blow.
The other image shows more prominent scrape marks, one on the lens mount and the other beneath the lever that engages focus on a lens. This lever was replaced by Nikon in Sept 2012. I can't prove they made the scrape marks, because I didn't notice them when the camera was returned to me last September. I can't prove anything about the cause of either of these scrapes because it never occurred to me to take macro pictures for when the company who has many thousands of my dollars comes back to bite me.
What I don't understand is what motivates a large corporation like Nikon to pirate a mere $224 from a customer who holds or shall I say held, their products in such high esteem as to own 3 of their cameras and several top of the line lenses?
mshi wrote:
Shipping insurance is a scam because that's easy money for them to steal from you. Read the fine print before you hand over your money.
No it's not.
I shipped a lens with UPS, dropped it off (got a receipt). It was never delivered and never scanned. I filed a clam and showed them the drop off receipt. Got a check a couple weeks later for the insured amount.
What a bunch of BS. Sorry to hear this is happening to you. I got my d800 back from nikon after they replaced the mirror box assembly. Then a pin fell out and they said it was due to impact. I said, bs, it was due to a faulty sub mirror assembly or your technician forgot to put the pin in. The only thing that saved me was I had sent an email the very day I got it back saying the autofocus was still buggered and I would have to send it in again. It was still usuable for a while, until the mirror almost fell out.
I swear they must go through the camera with a fine comb looking for little scrapes and bangs. I am confident though that the mount system on nikon is about half as durable as the canon mount.
Wayne Willison wrote:
Nikon Service updated my status today claiming impact damage as the reason for not honoring my camera warranty. The charge for the repair is $224.
I called them and argued that there was no damage done by me to the camera. That got me to where they would ship the camera back un-repaired. I then would be able to put my $3000 camera on a shelf and leave it there (the D800 isn't heavy enough to use as a doorstop).
These 2 images show the "impact damage". The one scrape on the bottom corner was either done by Nikon people or by me installing and removing an L-bracket. It is a paint scrape, not a dent from a blow.
The other image shows more prominent scrape marks, one on the lens mount and the other beneath the lever that engages focus on a lens. This lever was replaced by Nikon in Sept 2012. I can't prove they made the scrape marks, because I didn't notice them when the camera was returned to me last September. I can't prove anything about the cause of either of these scrapes because it never occurred to me to take macro pictures for when the company who has many thousands of my dollars comes back to bite me.
What I don't understand is what motivates a large corporation like Nikon to pirate a mere $224 from a customer who holds or shall I say held, their products in such high esteem as to own 3 of their cameras and several top of the line lenses? ...Show more →
WOW! That is BS! Nikon has mental problems. A scuff is "impact damage". And how can a scratch inside the mount be from "impact damage" ??
Wayne Willison wrote:
Nikon Service updated my status today claiming impact damage as the reason for not honoring my camera warranty. The charge for the repair is $224.
I called them and argued that there was no damage done by me to the camera. That got me to where they would ship the camera back un-repaired. I then would be able to put my $3000 camera on a shelf and leave it there (the D800 isn't heavy enough to use as a doorstop).
These 2 images show the "impact damage". The one scrape on the bottom corner was either done by Nikon people or by me installing and removing an L-bracket. It is a paint scrape, not a dent from a blow.
The other image shows more prominent scrape marks, one on the lens mount and the other beneath the lever that engages focus on a lens. This lever was replaced by Nikon in Sept 2012. I can't prove they made the scrape marks, because I didn't notice them when the camera was returned to me last September. I can't prove anything about the cause of either of these scrapes because it never occurred to me to take macro pictures for when the company who has many thousands of my dollars comes back to bite me.
What I don't understand is what motivates a large corporation like Nikon to pirate a mere $224 from a customer who holds or shall I say held, their products in such high esteem as to own 3 of their cameras and several top of the line lenses? ...Show more →
Wow. As a Canon user straddling the Nikon line (currently test-driving the D600 in addition to a Canon Kit) this gives me great pause. I know that a handful of reports does not the truth make, but it's quite disheartening to see this same tactic used with any type of frequency.
Instead of bashing Nikon as a whole why not send your camera to another repair facility for a second opinion. There will always be a couple of incompetent staff in every company that ruins the company reputation as a whole.
If the second repair facility have proven that it was not damaged from an impact and able to successfully repair your camera then you can write a letter to the first repair facility to reimburse you with shipping cost and insurance that you've paid for.
Remember, you always have a CHOICE instead of getting frustrated which won't do you any good.
surreal612 wrote:
Instead of bashing Nikon as a whole why not send your camera to another repair facility for a second opinion. There will always be a couple of incompetent staff in every company that ruins the company reputation as a whole.
If the second repair facility have proven that it was not damaged from an impact and able to successfully repair your camera then you can write a letter to the first repair facility to reimburse you with shipping cost and insurance that you've paid for.
Remember, you always have a CHOICE instead of getting frustrated which won't do you any good.
Well, I would say when we buy a product like Nikon or Canon we do so becuz of the warranty not in spite of it. Why would you send a warrantied camera to a non authorized dealer?. You pay for the warranty when you buy the camera new. Its part of the deal so you will have an out should you have an issue. Eh?
