mt-m wrote:
Jon - wouldn't you expect the metering to be off?
Typically when people post they present the highlights and not every gory detail. Apparently that gives some people liberties to assume you're a dumbass. They do have a recommended setting to use and in fact the exposure compensation needed was the *best* that could be obtained after I tried all of them. It wouldn't be nearly as offensive if you phrased it as a question: example - "Did they tell you which screen setting to use in the custom function?". This way when I say "Huh?", you'd know I was clueless and could then explain. Sorry if this seems like I'm being "crusty" but I'm a little tired of "talk down" posts that seem to be getting more common on FM...
Jon
Jon, not sure where in my post did you feel the intent of "talking down" to you, or an assumption of you being less than bright.
In your post you came across as being surprised that the metering was off with the new screen. This is what my response was addressing. No assumptions. My apologies if my post came across otherwise.
If what he said is true, it speaks volumes about your integrity, credibility and character. Since you started this, are you willing to defend your actions by publicly calling him a liar?
Wow. I think the OP really does to address Jim Lakey's claims of doctored repair forms. If what Jim Lakey says is true then its the OP's behavior that is not only scummy but fraudulent.
This customer, Peter Gassner purchased a screen on December 19, 2005 and approximately two years later he started having problems..... after he internally removed the Canon factory shim from his 5D Canon camera. He had bent the Canon factory shim and called us for help.
We agreed to repair and calibrate his camera for our standard fee, which we did, and the camera tested 100% accurate focus when it was returned to him on December 14, 2007.
The customer contacted us after receiving his camera back and stated he still had an issue and wanted to return the camera to us for more service. We advised him the camera was accurate and we could do nothing else. We suggested that he could also have a lens issue and suggested he send his camera and lens to Canon and furthermore we voluntarily agreed to refund his payment if he was charged by Canon to fix this camera issue.
The customer did send his camera to Canon and also sent one 24-105 LENS to them as well which did have the back focusing issue.
Canon agreed to adjust the lens and the camera to match focus at NO CHARGE.
The customer then emailed us Canon repair quotes, which he had intentionally altered (forged) to remove the NO CHARGE service fees in hopes we would refund him our service and shipping fees, which we voluntarily agreed to do if Canon charged him. This was above and beyond our call of duty.
The customer simply wanted to avoid any payment for services after he admitted damaging his camera by removing and bending the original factory shim in his camera.
He was not charged anything by Canon because they felt the problems were with the lens and they did mention a minor camera adjustment and or cleaning was also made, all at no charge.
When we declined to refund our fees for our services and return shipping fees the customer was not happy as he wanted everything free for the damage he caused and adjusting his lens, which we never saw. He then said he would simply dispute this matter with his credit card company, which he did.
We answered his dispute with his credit card company supplying all of this information including the altered quote documents where the customer had removed the NO CHARGE data. His credit card company reversed his dispute in our favor as they should have, which angered him to write what he did omitting the real truth. Some people are just never happy paying what they should for something they abused.
We would also be happy to provide copies of the altered Canon no charge service quotes, his dispute letter to the credit card company or any other documents including the letter from the customer admitting removing the factory shim to anyone of interest.
In our history of 27+ years we have never had a single other complaint of repair services for cameras.
So now the real truth can be known and all can feel free to share or post this response with anyone you choose. Our law firm will review legal actions for defamation of character immediately.
Joanna & Jim Lakey, President & Founder
www.brightscreen.com
Thanks for posting this. I was just about to copy your letter here, since you had stated that it was free to share. But I'm glad you posted it here yourself, and I am also glad to see the presence of your company on the FM forum. I hope that you will stay and give us the benefit of your expertise from time to time.
This is my FINAL post . I have read my post over, and every letter is 100% factual ,and I am willing to defend it anywhere I have to. Please note that other people have come out of the woodwork with poor experiences with Brightscreen. Did they make them up also?
peteygas wrote:
This is my FINAL post . I have read my post over, and every letter is 100% factual ,and I am willing to defend it anywhere I have to. Please note that other people have come out of the woodwork with poor experiences with Brightscreen. Did they make them up also?
Don't try and confuse the issue with other posters. You posted the original message and made certain assertions. Reading the company's response shows that many of your statements are likely true, but the timing and what you left out are highly signficant omissions.
Edited by DanBrown on Apr 04, 2008 at 03:42 PM GMT
peteygas wrote:
This is my FINAL post . I have read my post over, and every letter is 100% factual ,and I am willing to defend it anywhere I have to. Please note that other people have come out of the woodwork with poor experiences with Brightscreen. Did they make them up also?
I hope it IS his final post - ever and anywhere.
I had not heard of this company before, but I will pass by their site and keep them in mind if they have anything I can use. They seem to be stand-up people.
I have personally known Jim and Joanna Lakey for several years and I have found them to be nothing but upright and honest people. They are both some of the hardest working individuals I have ever met. I have purchased several cameras, lenses and various equipment from them over the years and never have I had one problem with them. They have always provided the very best service and if for any reason there is any problem, they have always corrected it immediately and returned the equipment in excellent working condition. Many times they have gone up and beyond the call of duty for me and never charged me a penny extra. That is simply the kind of people they are.
Just wanted you all to know what I thought of my friends, Jim and Joanna!
This customer who cross posted both here and on DP Review finally admitted forging the Canon repair quotes on DP Review and we also posted the following proof on DP review. He also made newer wrongful and very doubtful claims with the same reply after he said he earlier he would not post again.
The proof can be found here: http://www.brightscreen.com/evidence.htm
Two files are posted here that were sent to us by the customer which were forged and one of the REAL FILES obtained by us. Note: repair descriptions were both written the same on the lens and the camera and both at no charge.
The customer also made this quote by email on 12/20/07 admitting the camera focus was some better.
"I just received my 5D back from you. The back focus issue is only slightly better."
It was more than some better and was perfect with our tests. It was his lens as we had advised him and was proven by Canon.
