Faulty camera, ebay, private seller, confused.

lodzor

I bought a second hand camera (Canon EOS 400D) from an ebay auction on the 16th of february. Since then i have only used the camera twice as my intended use is for documenting field work on my university course. The field work doesn't start until the 25th of march. The two times i used the camera to take some sample shots everything was fine, on the 13th of march i took the camera out again and it no longer worked, it displayed error code 99.

After researching the error i found that this brand of camera often incurs this fault and it re occurs over time. (It can be fixed temporarily but comes back after a while). This immediately make me think i had been sold this camera with the seller having the knowledge of this fault. I contacted the seller on the 15th of march which was within 30 days and within ebay's 45 days. Although i have now discovered reasonable time has no exacting limit.

The seller just said he had no idea on how to fix it and did not acknowledge that i asked him to rectify the sale. I contacted him again to request a refund and he refused so i opened a case with ebay. He has now responded to the case with the following reply:

'The object was exactly as described when I sold it i.e. it was working perfectly. It has never displayed an error code. I sold the camera on 16th February and shipped it the next day but it wasn't until 15th March that the buyer contacted me to claim that the item had a fault. The buyer could have tried the item immediately after receiving it (or at least within a day or so) and have contacted me at that point if there was a fault. He/she did not and the length of time the buyer has taken to contact me suggests that there was no fault after first use. Furthermore, he/she could have damaged the camera or lens at any point between receipt and claiming the fault i.e. over the period of nearly a month. For the reasons above I would argue that the item did not have the fault when I sold it and don't believe it is reasonable to hold me responsible for one that developed a month later, possibly due to misuse over that time. For all these reasons I dispute the claim.'

from what i have read i am legally within my rights to request a refund. Both under consumer rights and the sale of goods act. I do not know a lot about law but after reading the acts and online advice i believe he is in breach of several parts of the sale of goods act.

Can somebody please advise me on what is the best way to proceed and what my rights to refund/replacement/repair are. If i am correct i believe if it is deemed to be out of the reasonable time i am still liable to receive a repair or replacement from the seller unless it is too costly and therefore another remedy should be followed. I also read that because it is within six months it is up to the seller to prove it wasn't faulty when shipped.

The item was described as in perfect working order. In my opinion the camera is faulty and unfit for the purpose in which i bought it which was to document my field work for my university course which will now be a pain because i will have no camera on Saturday.

Sorry this is so long, thank you very much in advance for any advice you can give me.

wacko911

If you paid with paypal, raise a paypal item SNAD dispute ASAP not an ebay one and they will instruct you to return it tracked (make sure it is) and refund you if you are within their timelimits.

All the sale of goods stuff does not apply to a private sale - its buyer beware im afraid only paypal can save you as they almost always side with the buyer.

In fairness if I was the seller I would be thinking the same as him, you got it working and you broke it and if I was you I would be thinking he knew it was broke, patched it up and flogged it.

You should maybe post this in the ebay/auction sub-forum as there are a lot of bright ppl there.

lodzor

Hi i posted this in the consumer rights forum but i have been advised to post in the dedicated ebay section for more targeted help. my original post is below.

I bought a second hand camera (Canon EOS 400D) from an ebay auction on the 16th of february. Since then i have only used the camera twice as my intended use is for documenting field work on my university course. The field work doesn't start until the 25th of march. The two times i used the camera to take some sample shots everything was fine, on the 13th of march i took the camera out again and it no longer worked, it displayed error code 99.

After researching the error i found that this brand of camera often incurs this fault and it re occurs over time. (It can be fixed temporarily but comes back after a while). This immediately make me think i had been sold this camera with the seller having the knowledge of this fault. I contacted the seller on the 15th of march which was within 30 days and within ebay's 45 days. Although i have now discovered reasonable time has no exacting limit.

The seller just said he had no idea on how to fix it and did not acknowledge that i asked him to rectify the sale. I contacted him again to request a refund and he refused so i opened a case with ebay. He has now responded to the case with the following reply:

'The object was exactly as described when I sold it i.e. it was working perfectly. It has never displayed an error code. I sold the camera on 16th February and shipped it the next day but it wasn't until 15th March that the buyer contacted me to claim that the item had a fault. The buyer could have tried the item immediately after receiving it (or at least within a day or so) and have contacted me at that point if there was a fault. He/she did not and the length of time the buyer has taken to contact me suggests that there was no fault after first use. Furthermore, he/she could have damaged the camera or lens at any point between receipt and claiming the fault i.e. over the period of nearly a month. For the reasons above I would argue that the item did not have the fault when I sold it and don't believe it is reasonable to hold me responsible for one that developed a month later, possibly due to misuse over that time. For all these reasons I dispute the claim.'

from what i have read i am legally within my rights to request a refund. Both under consumer rights and the sale of goods act. I do not know a lot about law but after reading the acts and online advice i believe he is in breach of several parts of the sale of goods act.

Can somebody please advise me on what is the best way to proceed and what my rights to refund/replacement/repair are. If i am correct i believe if it is deemed to be out of the reasonable time i am still liable to receive a repair or replacement from the seller unless it is too costly and therefore another remedy should be followed. I also read that because it is within six months it is up to the seller to prove it wasn't faulty when shipped.

The item was described as in perfect working order. In my opinion the camera is faulty and unfit for the purpose in which i bought it which was to document my field work for my university course which will now be a pain because i will have no camera on Saturday.

Sorry this is so long, thank you very much in advance for any advice you can give me.

lodzor

I would like to add that in the other thread someone recommended going SNAD with paypal instead, is this advisable and should i close the ebay case first or run the mboth at the same time?

theonlywayisup

You have a case open so cannot have another, do not close any case or you will lose out. You can only have an Ebay OR a Paypal claim, not both.

What status is your eBay case? If it hasn't been escalated, do it, adding your comments as you have above. Explaining that the fault is evident.

You will have to wait for eBay to review the case but they will soon ask you return the item to the seller. You must do this with special delivery and NOT recorded.

Add the tracking to the case and once it has been attempted/delivered or refused you will get your full initial payment back.

Do not close the case at all, it will close when the seller refunds.

Edit - I am not sure if you have a case open or not? You have only 45 days to open a case, from the date of purchase.

Sazzarella

Also to add that private sellers on eBay do not comply to the SoGA, only businesses.

System

Note that Sale of Goods Act does not apply to purchasing from a private seller.
Quote from Consumerdirect

You have fewer rights when you buy privately, whether through a small ad in a newspaper or at an internet auction. In a private sale, the goods must be as described, but a seller who is not acting as a business is not covered by the rules on satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose.

theonlywayisup

Forget SOGA for the moment. Every buyer - regardless of the sellers status- has protection for 45 days on eBay and Paypal. Use that first.

Sambucus_Nigra

Error code 99 is usually generic error.

Either the lens is isn't in position properly, or the batteries aren't in properly or it needs to be rebooted....take the battery out and the lenses off. Clean the contacts of the batteries. Pop them back in and turn it back on. Pop the lens back on [try another lens if you have one] and see if it disappears. I used to get it all the time when I first got my DSLR as the lens just needed an extra bit of turning to the final click.

squeaky

Morning

I see that you have opened another thread on the ebay board, so I'll move this thread across there to avoid the possible confusion that can arise from having duplicate threads.

Good luck

Forum_Team wrote:

Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: I’ve asked Board Guides to move threads if they’ll receive a better response elsewhere (please see this rule) so this post/thread has been moved to another board, where it should get more replies. If you have any questions about this policy please email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com.

soolin

In case anyone is confused..I have merged two threads here.