Broken camera, out of warranty and retailer not responding

WTFH

And what exactly is the problem with the lens?

earthstorm

I still use a Nikon F5 SLR with various lens as i like to mess around in the darkroom when i get the time.

I remember 2 years ago my Nikkor 70-300mm lens become damaged in that you could bend it, both Nikon and Greys stated it was unrepairable, but i was going on a holiday to HK a few weeks later, so i packed my camera and also the Nikkor 70-300mm lens ( habit i guess), was walking down one of these back streets in HK and saw a shop/shack saying camera repairs. so just curious i took the Nikkor 70-300mm lens in and when i showed in he stated no problem then vanished into a back room with my lens and then come back and told me to come back in 1 hr. when i called back he brought the lens out and it was fixed as new and it only cost me the equiv. of £10, since then i have used this lens many times and it works perfect.

Fosterdog

If it's just the lens then again I wouldn't expect much from the kit lens, most people hardly use the kit lens anyway because they are much lower quality and range than others you can buy.

I haven't looked for Nikon because I'm a canon user but there are usually loads on eBay, usually less than £30.

Again what exactly is the fault? How often is the lens swapped over?

WTFH

frugal_mike wrote: »

I'm not sure we have enough information to say that for sure. If the fault is inherent and the camera is deemed to have not lasted a reasonable time then the op certainly is due a free repair, replacement or partial refund. Only the engineers report can confirm that.

Mike, the thing is, he's wanting a refund/replacement of camera and lens, when there's nothing wrong with the camera (although the cynic might say that it's an old model that he might like to replace with a new one).

Put it another way, say you spent £500 on a TV which came bundled with a seperate DVD player. 3 years after you bought it, the DVD player stopper working. Do you therefore have the right to a newer model of TV because yours isn't made any more, even though your TV works perfectly?

...I don't think so.

Hintza

The lens is about £60-£70 so based on linear and six years depreciation the OP is due in the region of £30-£35 if an inherent fault and not misuse.

OP was rather disingenuous suggesting it was the whole camera.

henrygregory

Hintza wrote: »

The lens is about £60-£70 so based on linear and six years depreciation the OP is due in the region of £30-£35 if an inherent fault and not misuse.

OP was rather disingenuous suggesting it was the whole camera.

It is clearly mentioned in my correspondence with both Nikon and Currys that the lens and camera came bundled together. I have not been disingenuous at all, trying to be economic with the facts in the OP initially so that people would actually read the post. You make it too long, people complain, you make it too short and all of the professional photographers come out to have a moan because I have not mentioned that the lens was part of the camera. Can't win.
I have gone to the trouble of finding you the part of my post which was anything but disingenuous:

The lens in question is the 18-55mm, whilst the body is fine, I bought it as a set so presume if I am to pursue matters, I must consider both items together as a whole.

I purchased it as a camera and lens. The lens would have been useless without the camera and vice versa. I am more than happy with the body and like I have already stated, it has seen very little use and is certainly not fit for the bin.

I spent a great deal of money on this camera and it took me a long while to save the £500.
I take what some of you mention about getting replacement lenses etc, but I am not prepared to spend yet MORE money on something I have looked after very well.
When I consider the money I have spent on bags, pouches, memory chips, batteries etc, it comes to £100's. I don't see why I should now be expected to buy a replacement lens because it has clearly not been built very well and has already failed within its warranty for the same fault.

The fault is it's zoom jams at around 35mm. You just can't move the lens and the AF will not work making it absolutely useless. If you disengage AF you can get some movement from the zoom but the lens does not feel right and you just can't use it correctly. Images are out of focus and no good.

I do not want a full refund, but find it very frustrating that as yet, Currys have neglected to get back to me. I bought it online on their site, I have logged two tickets on their site and still nothing. A chargeback was a last resort but it seems that is not possible. In a way I suppose I am slightly disappointed with the lack of customer service I appear to be receiving for what I perceive as an expensive purchase for me. Quick to take the money, once a problem arises, you can't get hold of anyone for love nor money.

WTFH

OK, so you've got a faulty zoom lens and it's out of warranty, you don't want to call Currys but you think they should do something.

Currys: 0800 0234701

But given that the lens is out of warranty, I'd suggest you contact Nikon or their repair agents:

Lehmanns: 01782 413611
Nikon: 0330 123 0928

The 18-55 is the cheapest (in all senses of the word) zoom lens that Nikon do. If it was me, I'd find out how much a repair would cost, then go to a second hand shop and buy a different lens - try London Camera Exchange or MPB Photographic.
Finally, sell the old lens on eBay for spares.

mattyprice4004

Over 3 years for a debit card chargeback?
You'd be better shouting down a toilet for help, the Visa scheme is nowhere near 3 years in it's protection.

It's the 1 reason I use a credit card

henrygregory

mattyprice4004 wrote: »

Over 3 years for a debit card chargeback?
You'd be better shouting down a toilet for help, the Visa scheme is nowhere near 3 years in it's protection.

It's the 1 reason I use a credit card

Maybe if I purchased the toilet in under 3 years I could have them for sales of goods as the toilet was not doing what it was designed for. If I shout down it and get no response, it is clearly not fit for purpose.

rainio

Many people on these forums would say don't purchase an extended warranty, save your monty instead (or use a credit card), but in this case if the op had bought one, he could have used it to repair the problem, one would think.

Is this reason enough to purchase an extended warranty? I had a similar situation where a 3 year old camera failed and the CC wanted an independent opinion (cheaper/less hassle just to fix it in that case).