In dispute with jessops

[glennbing89]

Hi all, bit of an essay coming up so bear with me.

Around 6 weeks ago we went away to spain, the day before we left i was using my camera (nikon d3100) and all was well. Happy as can be, so i popped it in its camera bag along with lenses charger etc for hand luggage, at no point did it leave my side or have any liquids in with. Upon arrival, i take the camera out to take some shots and all i get is a black photo, hmmmm turns out the shutter curtain was jammed and in bulb it would come down really slowly. Around 7 seconds to fully open. So that was that, a broken camera for the holiday.

When we returned i took it into Jessops in Tunbridge Wells where i had got is 7 months previous. "no problem. Its still under warranty" i was told. A week later i receive a quote for almost £200 to reapair my "water damaged" camera. Knowing it was fine one day and not the next and that it had not been in contact with any liquids i wasnt very happy. Contacted Jessops to express my feelings and they agreed to investigate. They called nikon who said "its got moisture in it due to impact damage" when i was told this i was even more unhappy and so Jessops investigated further. They recquested photographic evidence of the damage so they could judge where to go from there. Upon revieving the evidence they noticed the 18-55 kit lens had clear impact damage, the front lens glass was completely smashed.

Jessops did not send it to Nikon in this way and came to the conclusion it had happened in transit by the courier. I have been assured it was "packaged very well in bubblewrap and boxed up as usual, very well protected." so the case has now been refered to the Jessops area manager and i was told the chances are the store will offer to swallow the repair costs.

This is where i dont know what to do, if the courier could carry out such an impact to smach the lens glass through a box and bubblewrap, it must have taken a serious pounding. Im not sure i want a repaired camera that has suffered such impact.

Im not sure where i stand legally and what my consumer rights are, but would i be within my rights to request a brand new replacement camera or could i ask for a full refund?

Sorry its such a read but i wanted to make sure you have the full story, any advice as to where i stand would be very much apreciated as i really dont want the repaired version back. Thanks Glenn

 

[Digifrog]

No apology needed, it's a frustrating situation to be in. First I would contact Nikon (Kingston Upon Thames) by phone and explain the situation to an engineer if possible.

For legal advice, you can try the MoneySavingExpert Consumer Rights forum...
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=173
...and explain it to them, they may offer more specific advice on where you stand. If Jessops admit that it probably happened in transit via courier get this in writing and forward a copy to Nikon

Sorry to hear of your frustration, hope you get it sorted soon.

Regards

Scott

 

[downs523]

Have you asked Jessops? if that amount of damage was caused in transit to the lens the camera must have been knocked also. I would tell Jessops that you are not willing to accept the camera back refurbished due to the impact it has had in transit as it may lead to future issues... and by then it may be out of warranty!

 

[gramps]

Have you asked Jessops? if that amount of damage was caused in transit to the lens the camera must have been knocked also. I would tell Jessops that you are not willing to accept the camera back refurbished due to the impact it has had in transit as it may lead to future issues... and by then it may be out of warranty!

 

[glennbing89]

I did say to a member of staff i would not be happy with a repaired camera, he said the manager would probably only be able to offer me the repaired camera. I told him to tell the manager i wanted a full refund but am still waiting to hear what they can offer. Not much im sure. Ill call them tomorow to find out the latest.

 

[srichards]

When packing up any item to go via courier assume they will drop kick it into the back of the van and stomp on the parcels in there if they need more space. Couriers are not in the least bit careful. If you mark anything 'fragile' they'll probably be even more careless with them.

I'd contact trading standards/consumer direct as they should be able to advise on what to do. If you packaged it adequately and has been smashed to bits by the courier then I'd think the courier should be replacing the camera and lens not jessops.

 

[gramps]

Think Jessops must have packed it, from reading 1st post - shouldn't require O/P dealing with anyone apart from Jessops.

 

[DemiLion]

Btw 'water damage' and 'impact damage' seem to have been Nikon's standard get out clauses for warranty repair of late (although the second one sounds to be valid in this case).

 

[srichards]

Misread it. Thought the OP had packed it... It's Jessops problem either way then! If the courier has smashed the thing to bits then there's no way I'd want that camera and lens back.

 

[Dave *]

It's Jessops problem, but I'd suggest moving up the chain, google a few email addresses for Head Office staff or Directors.

Sit down and write a factual and concise report of the event, dont get emotional or write ten thousand words. Keep it short, and just lay out the facts, and end with how you want the matter settled.

The Organ grinders have far more latitude in resolving these sort of issues.

 

[Sponge]

What sort of warranty will any repair work come with? I'd want a new replacement, but if that was unobtainable I'd want the repaired camera to have a fresh one year warranty. Push for the new replacement.

 

[Dave *]

What sort of warranty will any repair work come with? I'd want a new replacement, but if that was unobtainable I'd want the repaired camera to have a fresh one year warranty. Push for the new replacement.

I doubt Jessops would be able to arrange a new warranty (and wouldn't be confident in their ability to do so even if they said so, and you need help with it 10 months down the line).

The OP should push for a replacement of the same or new equivalent model from Jessops.

 

[simonblue]

The law is on your side,it all in Jessops hand to sought.

If they dont play ball,tell them you will take it to the small claims court

 

[deadalus3000]

You bought from Jessops..thats the only people you deal with...no ifs or buts...
I would push for a replacement, after they've treated your property sooo badly, it's the least they can do to remedy the situation.
Good luck man, i feel for you...

 

[gad-westy]

I don't know if I'm reading this different to everybody else but I don't see that you need to take any action at all just yet. Jessops seem to have accepted liability and are going to come back to you with a proposal. No point worrying about your legal rights until you have at least given them a chance to remedy the situation. If they come back with something your're not happy with then it is time to kick up a fuss.

Chances are that they will offer a replacement anyway, I'd be very surprised if a repair was more economical as they very rarely are.

 

[J4MIE_P]

I don't know if I'm reading this different to everybody else but I don't see that you need to take any action at all just yet. Jessops seem to have accepted liability and are going to come back to you with a proposal. No point worrying about your legal rights until you have at least given them a chance to remedy the situation. If they come back with something your're not happy with then it is time to kick up a fuss.

Chances are that they will offer a replacement anyway, I'd be very surprised if a repair was more economical as they very rarely are.

I agree with this. They've offered to investigate into what they are going to do, so why not wait for a reply? If you do not like the response, tell them and ask if you can seek further advice and call them back?

 

[Keeby]

Your contract as such is with Jessops. They selected the courier so any damage the courier caused is for them to pursue, not you.

As you gave Jessops a damaged camera, which I guess technically after it had been repaired could be classed as refurbished, I'm not sure if you could refuse a refurbishment. I would try and stick out for a replacement but you may have to accept the repair.

Just my thoughts.

 

[White Rose]

In my experience the couriers get away with murder. When you sign for a delivery you're also signing to say that its been received in good condition. Whoever signed for your camera at Nikon has effectively let the courier off the hook by confirming that it was delivered in good condition. I know this from bitter experience at work :-(

It's a tough one to call regarding blame. It's clearly not your fault or Nikon's either. I hope it works out for you.

 

[glennbing89]

Just spoke to Jessops, the best they can do is repair the camera. Im not entirely happy with that. Id like a new one. So do i take it further and take it up with the Jessops big wigs or am i being a bit over the top by not accepting the refurb?

 

[Deleted member 49549]

In my experience the couriers get away with murder. When you sign for a delivery you're also signing to say that its been received in good condition.

Whenever i sign for something i generally print the word 'Uninspected' next to my signature.

 

[big soft moose]

Just spoke to Jessops, the best they can do is repair the camera. Im not entirely happy with that. Id like a new one. So do i take it further and take it up with the Jessops big wigs or am i being a bit over the top by not accepting the refurb?

"Dear Mr Area manager

*lays out position thus far *

I am reluctant to accept a simple repair as the impact you admit was caused by your couriers has the potential to have caused further, as yet undiscovered, damage.

Therefore in order to return me to the position I was in before this impact occured, I would request that you replace the camera like for like.

As a longstanding customer of your for x years I would like to see this matter concluded amicably, however if it has not been resolved to my satisfaction with 14 days I will have no option but to take this to your regional director, uk sales director, and if necessary the photographic press.

I trust that this will not be necessary, and look forward to hearing from you soon

Kind regards etc "

In my experience when the possiblity of bad publicity is raised retailers like jessops fold faster than a celebrity mariage. It is no skin off their nose to give you a replacement, because they'll be claiming the cost back from the courier company anyway

 

[Dave *]

Just spoke to Jessops, the best they can do is repair the camera. Im not entirely happy with that. Id like a new one. So do i take it further and take it up with the Jessops big wigs or am i being a bit over the top by not accepting the refurb?

I would actually complain to the CEO's office, he has a team to handle escalated complaints.

 

[White Rose]

Whenever i sign for something i generally print the word 'Uninspected' next to my signature.

That works if you're signing a bit of paper. These days most couriers get you to sign on some sort of electronic tablet where there's no opportunity to add any additional text.

 

[Kerioak]

Probably irrevelant in this case but it has reminded me that when I went to Spain and put my rucksack in the overhead locker I always had to remember to keep the camera section on the inner part as anything on the outer side often got wet, I have had clothes wringing with condensation on occasion

 

[allanm]

That works if you're signing a bit of paper. These days most couriers get you to sign on some sort of electronic tablet where there's no opportunity to add any additional text.

But Nikon received the parcel with the damaged camera in. Jessops can and should notify Nikon that the camera was undamaged when it was sent, apart from the original fault, so it is up to Nikon to claim from the courier.

As you bought the camera from Jessops, your contract is with them, not Nikon.They should source you a replacement camera ( I doubt it would be a new one, but you could try as it was entrusted to them when you handed over the camera) and they should then chase Nikon for a replacement.

Dont get fobbed off with waiting for the original camera to be repaired, the damage was not your fault so why should you accept a repaired damaged camera. I wouldnt..

If I were you, I would go into Jessops on a Saturday morning when they are busy and explain your situation in a firm voice. Prospective customers will be interested in hearing how Jessops deal with complaints.
Allan

 

[Flash In The Pan]

But Nikon received the parcel with the damaged camera in. Jessops can and should notify Nikon that the camera was undamaged when it was sent, apart from the original fault, so it is up to Nikon to claim from the courier.

It depends who engaged the courier, if it was Jessops who arranged it then they would be the ones who would take them to task, if it was Nikon then it would be up to them to do so.

It's a moot point anyway, in neither instance would it be the op's concern.

 

[Anubis]

Whilst I am new on these forums, I am a moderator on a consumer advice site (not sure if I can mention it here).

It is correct that as the contract was formed with Jessops, it is them who must resolve the issue.

I wouldn't bother with Area or Regional Managers; they've had their chance, and made an unsatisfactory offer. You may find that writing to the Chf Exec may help (and keep everything in writing, so you have an evidence trail), but if it doesn't, send a letter to their registered office address, by Special Delivery:

Dear Sirs


LETTER BEFORE ACTION

On (date) I took my Nikon D3100, serial no. xxxxxx and lens serial no. xxxxxx to your branch at (address), in order for it to be returned to Nikon UK for repair under warranty.

It was discovered on (date) that the camera and lens had been seriously damaged in transit between Jessops and Nikon UK. Since the camera was in your care at the time, you are entirely responsible for the damage.

Your offer to repair the camera and lens is noted, and rejected. The nature and extent of the damage is such that I do not have confidence that there is no additional, unseen damage, or that the camera and lens can be returned to the same condition they were in prior to being placed in your care. I therefore require you to replace both camera and lens, or refund the current replacement price of same. (make clear if you will accept a refurbished model or only a new one)

I am prepared to collect the replacement from your xxxxx branch. If you have not replaced the camera and lens, or refunded the cost of same in cleared funds within the next 14 days, I will bring a claim against you in the County Court, which will include my costs in the matter and interest at the statutory rate.

All communication in this matter must be in writing.

Yours etc.

Only do this, of course, if you are prepared to make a claim. It's easy to do, but I'm not sure if you'd win, especially if Nikon say that they can fix the camera, and there is always the judge lottery, but if you aren't prepared to accept anything but a new camera it may be your only option. However, a Letter Before Action shows you mean business.

Going into the branch and causing a fuss is unlikely to be productive and will reflect badly if it ends up in court.

 

[Dave *]

Whilst I am new on these forums, I am a moderator on a consumer advice site (not sure if I can mention it here).

It is correct that as the contract was formed with Jessops, it is them who must resolve the issue.

I wouldn't bother with Area or Regional Managers; they've had their chance, and made an unsatisfactory offer. You may find that writing to the Chf Exec may help (and keep everything in writing, so you have an evidence trail), but if it doesn't, send a letter to their registered office address, by Special Delivery:



Only do this, of course, if you are prepared to make a claim. It's easy to do, but I'm not sure if you'd win, especially if Nikon say that they can fix the camera, and there is always the judge lottery, but if you aren't prepared to accept anything but a new camera it may be your only option. However, a Letter Before Action shows you mean business.

Going into the branch and causing a fuss is unlikely to be productive and will reflect badly if it ends up in court.

While I agree with contacting the CEO's office (as I suggested in an earlier post #22).

I don't agree with going in like an amateur lawyer and threatening legal action in the first contact you make.

All you will do is get there back up and possibly harden their response.

A friendly but concise email asking for help will work far better with the CEO's office.

Why on earth get their back up when they could be friendly and sort the problem without bad feelings?

 

[Anubis]

I see your point, but with respect:

- this is not the first contact

- Jessops have had opportunities to resolve the matter in a friendly way, but have not done so; how many chances are enough?

- I suspect that Jessop's attitude so far has already created bad feelings

- the Small Claims system is designed to be used by people without recourse to lawyers, and I made the point that one should only embark upon this course of action if one is prepared to go through with it.

Jessops is a large company; the bottom line for them is money. Their proposed solution is based entirely upon minimising their loss rather than customer retention. If they were taken to court, it would cost them much more than the cost of replacing the camera and lens, even if they won, given that they would be unlikely to get their costs in small claims.
They may decide that it would be cheaper to replace the camera and lens than defend the claim.

In the end, though, it's just one option.

 

[Ebilpirate]

That works if you're signing a bit of paper. These days most couriers get you to sign on some sort of electronic tablet where there's no opportunity to add any additional text.

Just write unchecked in the signature box and then sign. If the courier throws a wobbly then let him wait while you open the package, check off against the packing list and inspect for damage. Make him a cuppa and give him some biccies while you do it, it is only polite.

 

[gramps]

Just add "unex" for unexamined, easy to fit in.

 

[Dave *]

I see your point, but with respect:

- this is not the first contact

- Jessops have had opportunities to resolve the matter in a friendly way, but have not done so; how many chances are enough?

The OP has only been dealing at normal CS / store level, if he emails the CEO's office it will be his first contact.

God, what happened to a normal complaint and allowing the specialised team a chance to rectify.

Doing it your hard arse way will lead to the OP getting the bare minimum, asking the CEO to please help rectify a bad customer service matter might lead to a new camera in a short time period.

Let me guess, you normally post on CAG or MSE?

 

[tuttonp]

Many moons ago (about 20yrs) I worked in retail, Husbands Photographic and then ironically Jessops. Consumer law then, stated that a retailer can repair OR replace faulty item at their discretion if the item was outside of the statutory 28days sale of goods act. So threatening small claims may not get you far I'm afraid, I would suggest writing to the head office (Scudamore Red, Leicester if I remember) and stating your case.

 

[Anubis]

The OP has only been dealing at normal CS / store level, if he emails the CEO's office it will be his first contact.

God, what happened to a normal complaint and allowing the specialised team a chance to rectify.

Doing it your hard arse way will lead to the OP getting the bare minimum, asking the CEO to please help rectify a bad customer service matter might lead to a new camera in a short time period.

Let me guess, you normally post on CAG or MSE?

Ah, I hadn't guessed that your definition of first contact didn't actually mean first contact...

What happened to a company taking a complaint seriously at the outset and dealing with it appropriately without the customer having to go to the head of the company?

I did say, in my first post: "You may find that writing to the Chf Exec may help"; I'm not sure which bit of it has confused you, but it ought to be clear that this means that the OP may find that writing to the Chf Exec may help to resolve the issue.

As I've also tried to make clear, going down the small claims route is only one option, and it is for the OP to make a decision on what he wants to do.

I completely understand that others may have different views, and I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree with you. I don't think your attempts to antagonise me will assist the OP, so I won't post again on this thread.

If you want to have the last word, please be my guest.

 

[gramps]

Does SOGA even cover this situation?
This isn't now a case of being sold a faulty camera, this is a case of a camera being destroyed whilst in for repair.

 

[tuttonp]

Does SOGA even cover this situation?
This isn't now a case of being sold a faulty camera, this is a case of a camera being destroyed whilst in for repair.

Nope SoGA only covers the 1st 28days if memory serves me well, after that its at retailers discretion to repair or replace a faulty item. This is complicated by damage in transit, but even then demanding a replacement for what is still a 5mth old camera may prove difficult.

 

[Paul Male]

I don't think legaly they have to replace the item, if the manufacturer say it can be repaired to perfect working order then that is that. Your 12 month warranty will continue until it has expired but 12 months is only a guide, the law says "a reasonable period" and the item has to be fit for the purpous.

Personaly I don't see the problem with it being fixed, just make sure you use it well before warranty expires to make sure there are no issues.

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Many moons ago (about 20yrs) I worked in retail, Husbands Photographic and then ironically Jessops. Consumer law then, stated that a retailer can repair OR replace faulty item at their discretion if the item was outside of the statutory 28days sale of goods act. So threatening small claims may not get you far I'm afraid, I would suggest writing to the head office (Scudamore Red, Leicester if I remember) and stating your case.

Under the SOGA, yes the retailer has the discretion to repair or replace, however that's in relation to a warranty claim, not where the item has been damaged whilst in their (or in this case, their agent's) custody.

The decent thing for them to do, particularly as it is a relatively low value item, would be just to replace it. By the sound of it the warranty and damage repair work will probably near, if not exceed, the value of the goods anyway, so for the sake of good pr replacement seems to me the only sensible option.

 

[Bristolian]

Whenever i sign for something i generally print the word 'Uninspected' next to my signature.

You can put anything you like next to your signature - it makes no difference. The terms and conditions of service (for all the major UK couriers) is that a signature signifies the package is in good order. Your signature acknowledges you accept those T&Cs. Note I say the package - not the contents - you then have from 24hrs to 5 days (depending on the courier) to notify them of damaged goods (i.e. contents). Actually, that's not strictly correct; the sender has that time so you need to inform them sooner.

To the OP: If the damage to the lens is as significant as you say then it is inconceivable, in my experience, for the package to be undamaged. If Nikon say the package was fine when it arrived then the damage happened afterwards, whilst in their possession. My experience extends to 7 years of (freelance) loss and damage prevention for Royal Mail, Parcel Force and DHL.

You should limit yourself to talking with Jessops - don't get involved in discussions with Nikon or the courier - as sorting this out is their problem.

Hope it all gets resolved to your satisfaction

 

[Bristolian]

But Nikon received the parcel with the damaged camera in. Jessops can and should notify Nikon that the camera was undamaged when it was sent, apart from the original fault, so it is up to Nikon to claim from the courier.

TILT! WRONG! The contract for safe delivery is between the sender and the courier NOT with the recipient. This is true irrespective of who has paid for the service.