Olympus E-1 Digital SLR - £98.70 (Apple Education Store) [CLOSED]

deary65

Just a though, if this matter goes to the small claims court and before a justice of the peace,being such a grey area of the law might not have the legal learning to hear the case.As I'm not up to speed in small claims department,i just wonder does he have the power to send the matter to a higher court,if so then you talking big money!

P.S. Our infamous law student seems to have done a runner!!!

Flimber

StudentOfLaw wrote:

Well, i'm really shocked, I tried to offer you all some honest advice, which you'd rather disregard for your own 'cloud cukoo land' misgivings. Sorry to anyone who doesn't like my comments, i'm only trying to save you time and possibly money.

ps. I found this site by typing Olympus E1 Apple into google!

For the record, I don't seriously doubt your genuineness and never did which is why my post had a tell-tale wink attached

Mike.

somerandomguy_2

deary65 wrote:

Just a though, if this matter goes to the small claims court and before a justice of the peace,being such a grey area of the law might not have the legal learning to hear the case.As I'm not up to speed in small claims department,i just wonder does he have the power to send the matter to a higher court,if so then you talking big money!

P.S. Our infamous law student seems to have done a runner!!!

Hmm, not sure. I have recently been involved in defending a claim via the small claims for breach of contract, and it is a judge who hears the case, and he certainly seemed to have the appropriate skills.

wireframebox

Although the camera may well still be current and in production, Apple are simply not the only company stocking the camera. As far as I know, orders of such products in volume need to be made months in advance. Has anyone considered that Apple simply aren’t able to obtain the stock requirements due to pre-arranged commitments to other companies for the latest batches of E1's?

Also the camera could be on its final production runs, which quite possibly could already be allocated to awaiting clients? This could mean that although the camera is still in production, they have in essence already gone out of stock.

All the same, I am disappointed with the way that such an apparently large company has dealt with, what should be, a well organised and straight forward system.

hesjane

wireframebox wrote:

Although the camera may well still be current and in production, Apple are simply not the only company stocking the camera. As far as I know, orders of such products in volume need to be made months in advance. Has anyone considered that Apple simply aren’t able to obtain the stock requirements due to pre-arranged commitments to other companies for the latest batches of E1's?

Also the camera could be on its final production runs, which quite possibly could already be allocated to awaiting clients? This could mean that although the camera is still in production, they have in essence already gone out of stock.

If you see my son's email from Olympus it states

"Dear John,

I can confirm that the E-1 is still current and there are no known issues with supply.

Regards,
Customer Support
Olympus UK Limited "

see page 98 of this thread for his actual post. This was in response to his question of whether this is still a current model, in production, and where there were any issues over stock supplies.

Hesjane

g10_2

wireframebox wrote:

Although the camera may well still be current and in production, Apple are simply not the only company stocking the camera. As far as I know, orders of such products in volume need to be made months in advance. Has anyone considered that Apple simply aren’t able to obtain the stock requirements due to pre-arranged commitments to other companies for the latest batches of E1's?

Also the camera could be on its final production runs, which quite possibly could already be allocated to awaiting clients? This could mean that although the camera is still in production, they have in essence already gone out of stock.

All the same, I am disappointed with the way that such an apparently large company has dealt with, what should be, a well organised and straight forward system.

I agree that a thousand E-1 camera’s may not be immediately to hand for Apple, however that shouldn’t have stopped them fulfilling whatever orders that their stock allowed…then put in an order into Olympus for whatever else they could grab.

I think we can safely say that Apple has no wish to fulfil orders at £98 or €99…I’ve not heard anyone say they’ve got one delivered at those rates. I think Apple may have been more successful obtaining stock if we’d all placed orders at £599. Funny that…

I’m still going to put a letter into them though.

rowantoad

Apple don't have to get all 1000 cameras, how many can they get? Are they not required to get as many as they can. They afterall must 'make every effort to supply'.

wireframebox

rowantoad wrote:

Apple don't have to get all 1000 cameras, how many can they get? Are they not required to get as many as they can. They afterall must 'make every effort to supply'.

How can you define exactly what 'every effort' means though to be able to show that they haven't? All seems very vague to me. Is that what is known as a 'grey area'?

g10_2

rowantoad wrote:

Apple don't have to get all 1000 cameras, how many can they get? Are they not required to get as many as they can. They afterall must 'make every effort to supply'.

I think we're in agreement that Apple appears to have made no effort at all to source.

StudentOfLaw

I've not done a runner as you so politely put it, i've merely finished in the University Library for the day, and was driving home. Watching Neighbours now and Issy is looking sweeeeeeeeeet!!!

If the small claims court can't make a decision on it, it would go to a magistrates court where costs are normally £250 a day for each day that it is being discussed by the magistrates (who incedently make the decision, there is no Jury), although every courts prices differs. Even in a small claims court Apple are going to employ the best possible Lawyers, Solicitors, and Baristers to fight their corner and I would warn that should you see a small claims case through, what a lot of people don't tell you is that if you lose the case the Judge could also award costs to Apple where you will have to pay the legal costs that Apple incur. Its David vs Golliath in a modern sense. You appear to have a few pebbles which could potentially kill Golliath, but in this case Golliath has a rather large helmet on (the contract).

Hope this helps!