Jwshelton Loc: Denver,CO

Was this on the nikonusa.com website?

Tincoop Loc: Texas

Interestingly, I had a similar situation with a recent D750 purchase on the Nikon website, with a different result. I ordered the D750, new, at a price of $1495 and the transaction stayed in processing status for 5 days. On the 6th day, I got a cancellation notice due to no response from my CC company. Of course I had been watching the transaction there as well and it showed pending the whole time. I called Nikon and reached a pleasant young lady who told me they got no response after which I told her that simply was not true and explained. She told me the promotion had ended and the new price was $1895 and I told her that was unacceptable given the mixup was theirs. I then asked to speak to her supervisor. She asked me to hold and came back 5 minutes later to tell me she was going to request a special code to get the camera at the first promotion price. She said to call her back the next day if I hadn’t received the code but it came through about 2 hours later. I had the camera in hand 2 days later after reordering and paid the original price. Just got lucky I guess.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Oh, you are so right, why don't you start this movement, this boycott based on one persons side of the story. Have we heard the other side, NO we have not. But you go right ahead and charge into the valley of death based on what, ONE PERSON'S SIDE OF THE STORY. You go get um boy. I'll stand back and watch. You have fun now you hear.
You are so quick to condemn a company WITHOUT due process. But I am sure a states Attorney General has nothing better to do than charge down from the state capital and sue the ass off any company a citizen CLAIMS has done them wrong without checking all sides of the story. Boy, I am so glad there are level headed members like you on this site. I almost reassures me that justice will be done.

whitewolfowner

You are exactly right and no one should allow a retailer to get away with cheating you either. If everyone would go after stores that pull this stunt, it would not be a regular practice by them anymore. They only do it because most people won't follow through.

whitewolfowner

Morons like you are the reason these problems exist. I'm so sure (not) the OP is lying to us about his experience. Besides I've had enough dealings with Nikon over the years, I'd believe any story against them that anyone posted. And why, because I'm an intelligent person who can think for himself; I also have deductive reasoning which I can use to evaluate a situation (from past experiences); obviously something you severely lack. And as far your defense of the Attorney General, this is his job, a job you are paying him to do, so expecting him to take action is not an expectation but a right that you prepaid for.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

As I said in an earlier post, I wish you luck but if you think about it, at that price you must have known that it was a miss print and to be honest with you, I would have called Nikon and let them know about the mistake someone had made. I like a great price as much as anyone, but I wouldn’t have felt good about paying that price knowing that it was a MISTAKE. But I realize that you are not me and if your conscience is ok with taking it further, good luck to you.

Jwshelton Loc: Denver,CO

I am still waiting for the original poster to verify that it was nikonusa.com that was offering the camera.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

There is only one official Nikon site

papa Loc: Rio Dell, CA

Another thread gone South. What does Wal-Mart have to do with the Nikon factory and the transaction??? As Homer Simpson would say, "Dope!". I'm so thankful that even in my Autumn years I'm one that has lost my sense of direction.

Hank Radt

First, given the OP's later post that the re-posted price was $1999, it is not hard to imagine the original price of $1099 was a mistake, given the proximity of 0 and 9 on the keyboard, and probably not a bait and switch. Nor is it hard to imagine, as one poster suggested, that Nikon was having a fire sale to get rid of excess inventory (stores do this frequently). We don't know.

So for those claiming we're only getting one side of the story, absolutely true. But there is nothing to prevent someone from Nikon responding either in this open forum, or contacting the OP directly. When I was an executive, while our marketing departments always hoped that customers would contact us directly with an issue, they did keep tabs on various sites either directly, or indirectly by setting up an alert function (rather simple to do), and would reach out when we learned of an issue and try to resolve it (heck, nothing to prevent anyone on this thread from informing Nikon of a potential brewing problem...). We never asked the customers to give us a positive rating, but they frequently did (I've seen several such posts here).

What appears to have irked the OP (and certainly would have irked many here), is that after being told it was sold out (for which he noted his disappointment, but no indication of outrage), it was re-posted with a different price. Maybe the rep was lying or maybe the database wasn't updated on the rep's screen (plausible - databases can be complicated to maintain current across a network). Either way, the information provided wasn't correct.

IF the rep had had the correct information, s/he could have said initially, "sorry, we made a mistake, and the correct price is $1999; because we made a mistake, we'd like to offer it to you for $1599 (or something...maybe they offer to sell it to him at their actual cost - the cost of the used body plus the cost of refurbishing it, whatever that is)." If not, the rep could have called him back later and told him, "sorry, we made a mistake and here's what we propose." Of course, we don't know what the OP would have done, and each of us can decide for ourselves what we would have done. But let's assume Nikon did do this, and the OP accepted - they cement the loyalty of a long-term customer. And, sacrificing a couple $hundred in potential profit is a very cheap price to pay vs. the downside cost of negative publicity - even a handful of customers deciding to buy another brand would cost them more in lost sales than the cost of satisfying one customer. This is just good business sense.

A final observation, based on real experience, is that this customer service process has some potentially serious flaws in it and if not fixed, is going to cost Nikon a lot more over time. The OP may succeed, or he may not. If nothing else, pursuing this, regardless of the outcome - unless the head of customer service is a dolt - is going cause Nikon to make some changes.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Really, name calling, that's the best your deductive, evaluative mind can come up with. What a shame.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

I brought up Wally world when I thought the OP was taken on the Bait and Switch thing. But for "one that has lost my sense of direction." I'll cut you some slack.LOL

khalidikram

I am not a lawyer and hence my question: is there a difference between "order" and a "contract"? The OP made an offer, and it appears that Nikon accepted it in writing and by charging the OP's credit card. This should make the transaction a contract. Nikon's terms and conditions of sale appear to refer to their right to cancel an order; does it give them the right to unilaterally void a contract? I would appreciate some clarification from those that are versed in law.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

I think you have described the situation very accurately. The problem seems to have escalated when the OP was given incorrect information [sold out] which was then proven wrong by the re-posting of the item and price. Perhaps as you say, the rep may not have had updated information, but it is still subject to suspicion. Then another rep put the sale through, which was subsequently cancelled. What has been described as "opening a can of worms"!

Customer service is definitely a weak link for a lot of companies. That is why whenever I decide the rep doesn't have the understanding, knowledge, experience, etc. to deal with my issue, I will hang up and call back again. This often works because the next person who gets my call may be more capable. However, this situation looks a lot like employees covering up a mistake. Not knowing what is the right thing to do, fearing for their job, etc. is not an excuse when there are supervisors who can help straighten things out. I have frequently been connected to a supervisor and generally gotten better results! In general, though, customer service reps are well-trained and anxious to do a good job of providing good service and satisfaction to the customer.

I hope that by re-contacting Nikon and reaching someone with more authority, he will get some satisfaction. Not necessarily the price that was posted in error, but something better than the re-posted correct price...

wolfman

Also from terms of sale:


A. All orders for Products, Software and/or E-Courses from the Nikon Store are subject to Nikon’s approval and acceptance, and Nikon reserves the right to reject any order, in whole or in part, at Nikon’s sole discretion at any time before shipment or delivery, as the case may be. Reasons for rejections of orders include, but are not limited to, credit card rejection, out-of-stock Products or Software, and/or unusually large or excessive quantities of Products, Software and/or E-Courses ordered.