Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Brand New M3 for the price of a M6
From: "Bryan Willman" <bryanwi@seanet.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 10:36:18 -0700

actually, it's not clear the courts would consider
it new either.

there was a case in which a "new" meaning
"unused" car (a bmw or mercedes, I think)
sat in a lot for more than 18months and was
then sold as "brand new" to a customer who
later sued, and won (claiming that it was
misrepresented.)

(i am not a lawyer and am reporting from
 memory, but you get the idea.)

bmw


- -----Original Message-----
From: Chris Bitmead <chrisb@ans.com.au>
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 12:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Brand New M3 for the price of a M6


>Eric Welch wrote:
>
>> >I think most of us are content to just buy them, and will use the
>> >word "new" accordingly :-)
>>
>> The question is more important to people who are buying them and don't
want
>> "demos" or "returned" cameras. I for one when buying a NEW Leica want a
>> truly new one. Leica is protecting people with such desires.
>>
>> >Now I wonder what leica would say about warranty if there really
>> >was a "new" M3 forgetten about in the back of some dealer's
>> >warehouse...
>>
>> If it could be proved, I bet they'd honor it. After all, aren't they the
>> best built Leicas?
>
>If I wanted a new M6, and a dealer had a 10 year old - albeit
>"new" one, I'm not sure I'd consider that new myself. I'm not
>sure I could apply the word "new" to a 10 year old camera, no
>matter what Leica says.
>