Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Home | Photography Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon Factory Store
If you would like to post a reply, then please login (if you already have an account) or register (if you don't).
Page: <<prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9
Oct 13, 2017 22:48:00   #
khalidikram
 
Thank you. This clarifies that Nikon has got its back covered.
wolfman wrote:
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.
Also from terms of sale: br br br A. All orde... (show quote)
 
Oct 13, 2017 22:56:25   #
Hank Radt
 
jdedmonds wrote:
The amount of money involved here is far, far below the threshold that would be required for any lawyer to get involved and for you to pay attorney's fees.


I would agree, if you had said "required for any lawyer to get involved 'on a contingency basis'" - lawyers are business people also, and aren't going to waste their time on contingency pursuing something they either don't think they can win or if the potential payout is too small - in this case, we're talking about $1000 and a typical contingency fee of 33% or 40% is going to result in a couple $hundred - less than an hour's time for a top lawyer; maybe two or three hours for an inexperienced one. On the other hand, even if a lawyer doesn't think you have a good case, you can still request they file the suit (or file the suit yourself, though you'll likely get chewed up by the legal system if you do...) - in this case, a lawyer may tell you that the only way s/he is going to proceed is on a retainer basis - you pay the lawyer's hourly rate, and the second part of your sentence would likely apply - you'd probably spend more in attorney's fees than you would get out of any judgment. Note: all lawyers, except public defenders in criminal cases, have the right to refuse a case or client. But I'm sure you can always find one that will take your money - one reason why it is ALWAYS a good idea to talk to several lawyers before deciding to proceed. If they all tell you your chances are slim, well, that tells you something, even if one agrees to take your case.
Oct 14, 2017 00:02:24   #
Hank Radt
 
billnikon wrote:
Interesting discussion here. As a former Nikon rep I highly doubt Nikon sent him the camera for the price HE CLAIMS THEY ADVERTISED IT FOR. Nikon would not have done that. Companies I represented could cancel any purchase they wanted AS LONG AS THEY REIMBURSED THE BUYER. Which is exactly what I am sure Nikon did. Look, this guy is sour because he knew Nikon made a mistake and he tried to take advantage. I am sure he knew no one sells a refurb D810 for that price, NO ONE. So he jumped on it, knowing deep down it was a mistake. When Nikon caught it, he got mad cause he couldn't get it for a ridiculously low price that HE KNEW WAS INCORRECT. He is just upset he couldn't get it. SO, HE TOOK IT OUT ON THEM THROUGH THIS SITE.
Yes, Nikon made a mistake listing that camera for the price, IT WAS A MISTAKE. How many folks on this site would sell there $10,000.00 car for misprinted newspaper price of $1000.00. Answer, NO ONE. The OP was mad cause he couldn't take advantage of an honest company, shame on him and shame on anyone who supports him.
Interesting discussion here. As a former Nikon rep... (show quote)


I have noted that it appears to have been a mistake, and that companies with reputations to protect are extremely unlikely to bait and switch (which is a deliberate act). But please do re-read the OPs posts - he was disappointed, but not outraged, when he was told there was nothing in stock, but then it was re-listed, then received an email saying the order was shipping, then was told it was not. How many of us have spent frustrating hours dealing with unresponsive or incompetent customer service organizations?

Nikon may be completely within its rights to refuse the order; on the other hand, it may not be under consumer protection legislation - the legal system exists to sort out differences when two parties can't reach an agreement. And, to the point that a frivolous lawsuit would drive up costs, there are some built in checks and balances to the system, the first one being a lawyer who advises his or her client if the likelihood of success is small and that pursuing legal action will cost a lot of money, the second one being that if the court thinks a suit is frivolous, it will throw it out.

I also noted that Nikon could have resolved this fairly easily at any point (and likely still can) - it could decide that a couple $hundred is a small price to pay against the risk of a suit they may lose (or spend a lot more defending), or it could look at the issue differently, empathizing with the customer, and decide that this is a great opportunity to cement a relationship with a longstanding customer. Could be a lot better investment than spending advertising dollars (to the point about walking in another's shoes, well, I have owned those shoes in the past, and I looked for opportunities to create customer loyalty whenever I could). Nikon may even learn that there are some flaws in its customer service process and systems that it needs to resolve - in this case, the OP might actually be doing it a favor.

We all have a world view and you are of course free to disagree. Maybe calling someone shameful has worked for you in the past. But I'm much more likely to be convinced by a solid argument based in facts and logic.
Oct 14, 2017 09:54:12   #
tomcat (a regular here)
 
vino2nite wrote:
I ordered a D810 refurbished body from the Nikon Factory Store, but was having trouble with the links with the final purchase, so I called them directly. A rep said he would put me on hold to find out what the problem might be. After about 5 minutes, he said the offer was sold out and they had not had a chance to correct the site, so I voiced my disappointment in having to spend nearly 45 minutes trying to order it in the first place. Curious, I checked the site again and found the D810 back on the site with a different price. Within a few minutes of checking the 2nd time, I received an email stating that my purchase was going through showing my credit card was charged and a tracking # issued. Elated, I said to myself that Nikon was doing the right thing given all the bad press they have been getting. Some 2 hours later they asked that I call them where I expected them to ask if I was satisfied. Instead, they tell me that they will not honor the price and the camera will be returned on receipt. Yes...the price was extraordinary at $1099 which is why I responded to the offer, I call this BAIT AND SWITCH. Has anyone had a similar problem with Nikon? Am I right in believing that once the order was accepted and a tracking # issued that the sale is complete? Suggested recourse?
I ordered a D810 refurbished body from the Nikon F... (show quote)


A similar situation happened to me with a refurb model 500 flash. Nikon showed them available on the website, but when I ordered, I was told they were out of stock. I called and griped a whole lot to the live person about the website not being updated and accurate and later that day, more stock mysteriously appeared. I think it's an issue with Nikon not keeping their website up to date. I supposed they'd have to have someone at the computer with their fingers on the update program trigger to change stuff as rapidly as it becomes available or goes out of stock. But at least there is the option to get the camera, albeit at a different price.
Oct 14, 2017 10:03:04   #
Hank Radt
 
tomcat wrote:
I supposed they'd have to have someone at the computer with their fingers on the update program trigger to change stuff as rapidly as it becomes available or goes out of stock.


Or get a bar code reader that scans incoming inventory and automatically updates the web site. If this is happening with any frequency, you're probably right that they're still on a manual system (or they've got a very serious inventory shrinkage problem!).
Oct 14, 2017 11:03:56   #
RonM12
 
Not being critical of anyone, but common sense should have raised a red flag that something wasn’t right as the price was too good to be true. Hindsight is always 20/20, I would have investigated a little further to verify the “sale” price. It is odd that the camera was out of stock and it then mysteriously became available.
 
Oct 14, 2017 11:39:02   #
vino2nite
 
THANK YOU. You said it best! I never had any intentions of suing and only wanted them to live up to the sale after they were not truthful from the beginning. Sending a confirmation of the sale, some 7 hours after the first contact meant that they intended to honor the sale. My contention is that they knew of the mistake or the original price was correct at 60% off the previous factory price on a refurb camera that has been replaced with a newer model. Yes, it's a great deal, but I recognized it and acted in good faith. Hopefully they will come to their senses on Monday in a good will resolution. If I was outraged, I would be trying to sell nearly $20K worth of equipment which is pointless knowing I'd get cents on the dollar for many camera bodies. Thanks again.
Hank Radt wrote:
I have noted that it appears to have been a mistake, and that companies with reputations to protect are extremely unlikely to bait and switch (which is a deliberate act). But please do re-read the OPs posts - he was disappointed, but not outraged, when he was told there was nothing in stock, but then it was re-listed, then received an email saying the order was shipping, then was told it was not. How many of us have spent frustrating hours dealing with unresponsive or incompetent customer service organizations?

Nikon may be completely within its rights to refuse the order; on the other hand, it may not be under consumer protection legislation - the legal system exists to sort out differences when two parties can't reach an agreement. And, to the point that a frivolous lawsuit would drive up costs, there are some built in checks and balances to the system, the first one being a lawyer who advises his or her client if the likelihood of success is small and that pursuing legal action will cost a lot of money, the second one being that if the court thinks a suit is frivolous, it will throw it out.

I also noted that Nikon could have resolved this fairly easily at any point (and likely still can) - it could decide that a couple $hundred is a small price to pay against the risk of a suit they may lose (or spend a lot more defending), or it could look at the issue differently, empathizing with the customer, and decide that this is a great opportunity to cement a relationship with a longstanding customer. Could be a lot better investment than spending advertising dollars (to the point about walking in another's shoes, well, I have owned those shoes in the past, and I looked for opportunities to create customer loyalty whenever I could). Nikon may even learn that there are some flaws in its customer service process and systems that it needs to resolve - in this case, the OP might actually be doing it a favor.

We all have a world view and you are of course free to disagree. Maybe calling someone shameful has worked for you in the past. But I'm much more likely to be convinced by a solid argument based in facts and logic.
I have noted that it appears to have been a mistak... (show quote)
Oct 14, 2017 13:38:33   #
mikeroetex
 
billnikon wrote:
Interesting discussion here. As a former Nikon rep I highly doubt Nikon sent him the camera for the price HE CLAIMS THEY ADVERTISED IT FOR. Nikon would not have done that. Companies I represented could cancel any purchase they wanted AS LONG AS THEY REIMBURSED THE BUYER. Which is exactly what I am sure Nikon did. Look, this guy is sour because he knew Nikon made a mistake and he tried to take advantage. I am sure he knew no one sells a refurb D810 for that price, NO ONE. So he jumped on it, knowing deep down it was a mistake. When Nikon caught it, he got mad cause he couldn't get it for a ridiculously low price that HE KNEW WAS INCORRECT. He is just upset he couldn't get it. SO, HE TOOK IT OUT ON THEM THROUGH THIS SITE.
Yes, Nikon made a mistake listing that camera for the price, IT WAS A MISTAKE. How many folks on this site would sell there $10,000.00 car for misprinted newspaper price of $1000.00. Answer, NO ONE. The OP was mad cause he couldn't take advantage of an honest company, shame on him and shame on anyone who supports him.
Interesting discussion here. As a former Nikon rep... (show quote)

And this my friends is truly the correct answer! What's the old adage about cheaters never prosper?
I love how everyone hops up and down about a lawsuit. If you could even get a lawyer to take the case, he won't do it on contingency, his fees would be $1500- $2500 just for filings. If it made it to court, then you incur court costs WHEN YOU LOSE! So in reality, you would have spent over $5000- $7500 and then still have to spend the proper price for the camera. In other words, a nearly $10,000 D810 (body only). Nice!

P.S. Contracts are more than just offer and acceptance. They also require a thing called consideration. Which is usually cash or some deposit followed by a specific performance. That's why if they haven't charged the card yet, you get nada. And if they do, they haven't yet performed (shipped). And if they refund before delivery (contract completed), you get nada. You have the same right to refuse freight on your end to void the "contract." It's never as cut and dry as, "but I got an email..."
Oct 15, 2017 17:51:30   #
David Taylor
 
rjaywallace wrote:
Sorry you have had to endure such annoying hassle. Recourse? Fujifilm X-T2


Oct 18, 2017 19:51:46   #
vino2nite
 
The hassle is over and I am pleased with the resolution! Thanks to all who supported me with positive comments. Higher sources at Customer Service understood my problem completely. I am now a proud owner of a D810 + D3, two D300, D40, 24-70mm 2.8, 70-200mm 2.8, 20mm 2.8, 20-35mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 300mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4, 18-200mm 3.5-5.6, 70-300mm 4.5-5.6. And...Still an amateur. THANK YOU NIKON.
Oct 18, 2017 19:54:23   #
Screamin Scott (a regular here)
 
vino2nite wrote:
The hassle is over and I am pleased with the resolution! Thanks to all who supported me with positive comments. Higher sources at Customer Service understood my problem completely. I am now a proud owner of a D810 + D3, two D300, D40, 24-70mm 2.8, 70-200mm 2.8, 20mm 2.8, 20-35mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 300mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4, 18-200mm 3.5-5.6, 70-300mm 4.5-5.6. And...Still an amateur. THANK YOU NIKON.

Did they give you all of that?
 
Oct 18, 2017 21:26:28   #
vino2nite
 
No! You might have read into what I already own. The D810 is an addition at a cost. Sorry for the confusion.
Oct 18, 2017 23:54:20   #
Hank Radt
 
Glad it worked out for you.
Oct 20, 2017 16:25:58   #
SusanFromVermont (a regular here)
 
vino2nite wrote:
The hassle is over and I am pleased with the resolution! Thanks to all who supported me with positive comments. Higher sources at Customer Service understood my problem completely. I am now a proud owner of a D810 + D3, two D300, D40, 24-70mm 2.8, 70-200mm 2.8, 20mm 2.8, 20-35mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 300mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4, 18-200mm 3.5-5.6, 70-300mm 4.5-5.6. And...Still an amateur. THANK YOU NIKON.



You now have a camera worthy of all those good lenses! I have the 24-70mm f/2.8, but my wish list still contains the 70-200m f/2.8, the 14-24mm f/2.8 and the 200-500mm f/5.6! A long prime would be nice, but above my budget...

Glad your persistence paid off. Talking to someone higher up in the pecking order is generally what people have to do to get results!

Susan
Page: <<prev 1 ... 6 7 8 9
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2016 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.