If considering a purchase from ScubaDiverGreg

[ScubaSteve]

And our inability to not start name calling and to not be able to keep conversations civin will now inevitably bring in the MODS to clean the thread up.

 

[Garth]

Ok, solution.

step 1: get a box, any box will do.

step 2: order sushi, lots of it and eat it.

step 3: the next day take a dump in the box and return the box to the seller.

 

[idocsteve]

And our inability to not start name calling and to not be able to keep conversations civinl will now inevitably bring in the MODS to clean the thread up.

You make an incorrect assumption.

I'm able, just not willing.

 

[ScubaSteve]

You make an incorrect assumption.

I'm able, just not willing.

<snicker> I have been there myself

 

[DCBC]

He has done NOTHING to rectify the situation apart from e-mailing a scan of the sales receipt after much prompting. And that proved to be of no help whatsoever, as could be foreseen. We're not arguing about what the law says but about what comon decency dictates.

John, I suppose that I'm hesitant to label someone for something they didn't do, based upon what's posted on a discussion board. I don't know for a fact what efforts have been made. I might say that there is an apparent a lack of effort, but I can't actually know with certainty.

 

[DCBC]

He most certainly is not "doing his best to rectify the problem". Such an ignorant statement is an insult to the buyer, and to everyone who has responded on the behalf of the seller.

Ignorant? Because of what you see on a discussion board, you are quick to brand another? Like you are in a position to know what is going on behind the scenes. If you want to talk about ignorant, perhaps here is a good place to start.

 

[SkimFisher]

He said "ignorant"...

I'm not saying I agree - just pointing that out...

 

[DCBC]

He said "ignorant"...

I'm not saying I agree - just pointing that out...

Thanks for pointing that out. Correction made in posting.

 

[bsee65]

Have the original receipt USPS mailed to the buyer. Send the item to the manufacturer with a proper copy of the receipt as a recipient of a gift. If you're the first one to open and try to use the item, then you are the "original owner" for all practical purposes. You aren't the "original purchaser". This is perfectly in keeping with the spirit of the warranty if not the letter and just a way to get around the bureaucracy that will prevent the right thing from being done.

It would certainly seem that the manufacturer deserves a black mark on their rep if they are denying half of the warranty claims that come to them. If this is really a "new" camera and looks like one, the warranty should be honored.

By the way, if the original seller had advertised *two* of these for sale with only one listed as new, it's certainly possible to use the battery and any other accessories for the "used" one to test the "new" one. When I bought an upgraded Canon camera body, I did just that since it used the same battery and lenses asmy old one. That way, if there was a problem, it would have been easier to get it all back together for return. Of course the seller could have saved $200 by just returning it in that case.

Are you sure it's not just a bad battery before you pay someone $150 to play with it?

 

[crd_kats]

Ok, solution.

step 1: get a box, any box will do.

step 2: order sushi, lots of it and eat it.

step 3: the next day take a dump in the box and return the box to the seller.

You have absolutely no respect for poor government postal workers, do ya?