Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/27

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: Re: [Leica] B&H Should Respond To This Message
From: John Hoang <johnhng@pacbell.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 08:58:32 -0700
References: <B5F76995.22F6%john@pinkheadedbug.com> <39D20291.4F617B92@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
 
Mark Rabiner wrote:

> I've dealt with B&H for decades and this ain't them.

I've also dealt with B&H for a while and been pretty happy with them.

UNTIL THIS MONTH, I ordered 2 B&W filters for my boss: 55mm and 60mm MC polarizers. I
received the 60mm in new condition, 55mm with scratches and cleaning marks. I called
them and were asked to send back for replacement. One week later, they sent me the
same filter with scratches and cleaning marks! To avoid hassles, I decided to keep
the filter for my self and bought another one for my boss.

This is by no mean to hurt B&H. But to alert its management team to check and clean
its house once in a while.
Replies: Reply from Bill Satterfield <cwsat@cyberhighway.net> (Re: [Leica] B&H Should Respond To This Message)
Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> (Re: [Leica] B&H Should Respond To This Message)
Reply from Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net> (Re: [Leica] B&H Should Respond To This Message)
 In reply to: Message from John Brownlow <john@pinkheadedbug.com> (Re: [Leica] B&H Should Respond To This Message)
Message from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com> (Re: [Leica] B&H Should Respond To This Message)