Re: [Leica] Leica's woes(?)

["Dan S" <dstate1@hotmail.com>]

So, you got a replacement of a 2000+ dollar camera on request.  I'd say that 
is pretty good service. Try that with Nikon...

I have not seen your original note to the company, but by her response I 
would guess that you were strongly accusing them of selling you a used 
camera...Now lets just say that YOU were at the company, and that you KNEW 
the customer was accusing you falsly.  Wouldn't you respond in a similar 
way?



>In light of the recent discussions on the LUG regarding screwed-up R8s and
>the incompetence of Solms, I thought I would mention my own problem.  I 
>just
>got an R6.2 in March.  It had signs of use right out of the box (faint but
>unmistakable tripod marks on the bottom, signs of motor-drive/winder use in
>engagement sprocket), but I needed a camera to use immediately and my 
>dealer
>had special-ordered this one for me, so I didn't complain about it.  Well,
>exactly 2 weeks after I bought it, one of the mirror hinges broke during a
>job, and I sent it in to Leica USA in May.  I also sent a letter to Brenda
>Olesin detailing what happened and what I wanted done (I was so angry that 
>I
>wanted a full refund or a replacement camera).  Here is her reply, with [my
>own comments] thrown in:
>
>----Original Message Follows----
>From: Olesin@aol.com
>To: simontart@hotmail.com
>CC: RTLEICAUSA@aol.com
>Subject: service transaction # 28780
>Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 12:21:34 EDT
>
>Mr. Tsang:
>We are in receipt of your e-mail dated 6/23/99 and would like to respond to
>several of your statements.
>We must take exception to your claim that s/n 2178948 left our premises 
>with
>tripod and motor marks on the base plate.
>
>[So she is either accusing me of lying or calling me an idiot-- that I 
>can't
>tell used from new.  Gee I wonder which it is?]
>
>  We sell only new, factory
>inspected Leica merchandise. Further, [dealer name edited out] has
>verified that the camera was only in his inventory for one day: it was
>pristine when sold,
>
>[How would she know?  She wasn't there!]
>
>and at no time in his possession was it mounted on a
>tripod or otherwise "used".
>
>[This I concur-- my dealer is a personal friend, and has a flawless track
>record-- besides, I know he didn't have an R6.2 in stock and I picked it up
>the day he got it from UPS.]
>
>For the cameras mirror to have jumped its' housing in the manner which we
>received it, the unit must have sustained a significant jolt or drop,
>perhaps
>in the display box or other bag.
>
>[A thinly veiled accusation that I am attempting to defraud the company]
>
>Returning the camera to good operating condition would be a simple matter
>for
>our service department-however, you are quite specific about your
>"requirement" of a new replacement camera.
>  We have therefore decided that in this instance we will replace the unit
>under the terms of our passport coverage.  The warranty will run from the
>date of your original purchase and will be registered here at Leica Camera
>Inc.
>"Quality control" has no bearing on this situation:
>
>[Oh, I think it has everything to do with "quality control"-- and she was
>the one who put it in quotes, not me!... how appropriate!]
>
>fortunately, Passport
>Warranty encompasses all damages excluding fire or theft, allowing us to
>comply with your request.
>Sincerely,
>Brenda Olesin
>Manager, Technical Service Division
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________
>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com