PC World / Nikon Camera Repair Issue

wealdroam

cheddar wrote: »

I used a Visa debit card.

OK.

It won't help you this time, but it might be worth considering using a credit card for larger purchases in future, if possible of course.

cheddar

Well, no reply from Nikon yet so I reckon I'll be going in to PC world tomorrow. Just need to clear a few things up, let them get a better report from Nikon and ask them to assess the actual damage the camera went in for as I notice they don't even mention the LCD screen which is why it was sent in in the first place.

I will of course make it very clear to them that this is their responsibility to sort, not mine.

I know writing is best but I'd rather get this sorted in days rather than weeks/months.

Fosterdog

Don't forget it's a bank holiday weekend so you are most likely wasting your own time going to the store today or tomorrow, they will probably be very busy and Nikon will be closed until Tuesday so nothing they can chase up for you until then. The best you'll get is a promise that they'll chase it up on Tuesday and even then it will be a few days for Nikon to respond. You'd probably save time by calling or emailing customer services, get a complaint logged higher than store level and hopefully they will push the store to sort it out quicker.

DaftyDuck

If you write rather than go in, it's worth stating truthfully,

"... no damage was noted on inspection in the store by PCWorld staff, and the camera was sent on by them to Nikon....."

Puts the onus more on them, maybe.

pvt

Grrrr. This is another case of a company trying to use "warranty" terms to obfuscate their liability to repair faulty goods under the SoGA.

First tack is to insist the camera was not damaged, or noted as damaged, when you returned it for repair. That may well hinge on how obvious the damage is, which I guess you do not know yet. Then if that fails, suggest to PCW that you will submit the camera for independent examination and assessment as to whether the cosmetic damage could be the cause of the LCD failure.

As noted, Nikon have not said the failure is due to the damage, just that the damage voids their warranty. It may well do, but that's a problem for PCW, not you.

NotRichAtAll

while i read your post i picked up on something that made me think maybe it had been fiddled with, and please this is no way meant to be a finger pointing, blame throwing accusation.
in one of your replies you say " The bf (who uses the camera) has a good idea what's actually wrong with it"
are you sure he has not had a sneaky fiddle with the camera and left a tell tale mark on it?

cheddar

Fosterdog wrote: »

Don't forget it's a bank holiday weekend so you are most likely wasting your own time going to the store today or tomorrow, they will probably be very busy and Nikon will be closed until Tuesday so nothing they can chase up for you until then. The best you'll get is a promise that they'll chase it up on Tuesday and even then it will be a few days for Nikon to respond. You'd probably save time by calling or emailing customer services, get a complaint logged higher than store level and hopefully they will push the store to sort it out quicker.

That's a good point!

DaftyDuck wrote: »

If you write rather than go in, it's worth stating truthfully,

"... no damage was noted on inspection in the store by PCWorld staff, and the camera was sent on by them to Nikon....."

Puts the onus more on them, maybe.

Yup and I can prove it with the form on which they stated there was no damage.

pvt wrote: »

Grrrr. This is another case of a company trying to use "warranty" terms to obfuscate their liability to repair faulty goods under the SoGA.

First tack is to insist the camera was not damaged, or noted as damaged, when you returned it for repair. That may well hinge on how obvious the damage is, which I guess you do not know yet. Then if that fails, suggest to PCW that you will submit the camera for independent examination and assessment as to whether the cosmetic damage could be the cause of the LCD failure.

As noted, Nikon have not said the failure is due to the damage, just that the damage voids their warranty. It may well do, but that's a problem for PCW, not you.

Very true, we just need to know more about this initial inspection, it's too vague.

NotRichAtAll wrote: »

while i read your post i picked up on something that made me think maybe it had been fiddled with, and please this is no way meant to be a finger pointing, blame throwing accusation.
in one of your replies you say " The bf (who uses the camera) has a good idea what's actually wrong with it"
are you sure he has not had a sneaky fiddle with the camera and left a tell tale mark on it?

Nah, he thinks there's something wrong with the USB port which he looked at with his eye and a torch. I was sat across the room from him when it failed, he packed it back up and it wasn't touched until we took it into PC World. It's never been tampered with ever, he knows better than that and is also slightly obsessive over caring for technology.

cheddar

Well I've been in today, explained that we need a better report than "case is damaged". Guy couldn't ring there and then as not enough staff. Also said their technician who usually deals with these things is off until Monday so although he will try to ring Nikon and get information he's not sure if he can get the right info.....Seriously why is that so hard? You ring, you ask questions, you ring me with the answers. Sigh.

Marktheshark

This is why people buy canon, they would have just fixed the camera and very rarely cry off about repairs under warranty, however Nikon are the opposite as the evidence supports.

cheddar

Marktheshark wrote: »

This is why people buy canon, they would have just fixed the camera and very rarely cry off about repairs under warranty, however Nikon are the opposite as the evidence supports.

So Nikon is known for this? Do you have a link to this evidence? It would be helpful to see what people have experienced and gone through. I did some searching but only found a couple of people complaining.

Thanks.