Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/11/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I think the no return should be challenged based on the poor description. I've found that stores are likely to forget their no return policy rather then face irate customers especially when they (the store) are clearly at fault. Chris At 06:17 PM 11/13/2007, you wrote: >"Ex" can mean anything. There's no reliable, consistent system for item >descriptions. Many sellers do over-, some do underevaluate their items. > >Is the mark a cleaning mark or a damaged coating - or even a scratch? >Anyway Ebay is russian roulette for stuff like that. Especially with "no >return". >If he's already left the feedback you might give him a negative one for >dishonest description. >D. > > > > >I just received a lens from a reputable store that held a recent auction > >on > >the *bay. > > > >The lens was described as "EX" with a "slight mark" on the lens. > > > >I just re-read the description of the "slight mark" on the lens. > > > >The slight mark is a surface gouge that is over 1/8 inch long and is 1/2 > >inches from the rim - i.e. not close to the edge. > > > >And there are additional defects on the lens, particularly that the lens > >surfaces are full of cleaning marks and there is something loose inside > >the > >lens. In fact, it sounds like a lens element is loose. > > > >So is that "EX" to you? > > > >The auction states "no return". > > > >Is there any recourse? > > > >..Vick > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information Chris Saganich, Sr. Physicist Weill Medical College of Cornell University New York Presbyterian Hospital chs2018@med.cornell.edu Ph. 212.746.6964 Fax. 212.746.4800 Office A-0049