M8 shutter fault - get Leica to repair it for free

[glenerrolrd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, yes, a premature shutter failure would of course be of concern, but there may be a reason for this failure - an impact, excessive heat, whatever. Assuming that its simply an endemic premature failure based on the number of posts about shutter failures here is not a terribly objective view IMHO because it is the percentage of failures which would allow us to asses their significance and we cannot determine this from posts here.

 

Complaining publicly is also IMHO a way of letting off steam which actually achieves very little - I would be extremely doubtful if it will alter Leica's attitude one iota - I suspect that they will (quite rightly and legally) assess each shutter failure on its own merits, and there are plenty of posts here to indicate that they deal with some problems very graciously.

 

Paul

 

Regardless of the merits of the individuals claims ..it is pretty well known that in the USA ..complaining publicly works many times better than talking to customer service. It is fair to ask if the company has had an opportunity to resolve the dispute but after that visibility of the issue is often the only avenue open to an individual . Most customer service functions that deal with any volume of complaints are set up to grant the "no or low cost " complaints and refuse the larger claims. e.g. Leica will give you a black dot but for a shutter its over $1000.

 

Anyone that reads any of the forums knows that Leica has had trouble with the shutter. It has been an unreliable part of M8 ownership. Not unlike a car ...new models expose certain design or manufacturing weaknesses over time...frequency of repair would highlight the M8 shutter and show that the new shutter used in the M8.2 and M9 is much improved. I thought they did a good job in offering the shutter upgrade and extended warranty to improve not only customer satisfaction but also reduce warranty claims. But they charged quite a lot especially for cameras that were still under warranty.

 

The original posters issue is a fair one although Leica can not be expected to recall the M8 s for free repairs....perhaps a shutter count could be used as the limiting factor.

[glenerrolrd]

That's your opinion rather than fact. Many of us seem to doubt that and also to have reservations about the OP's approach and motives.

 

How can there be much reservation about his motives.....he is unhappy about his M8 shutter failing and he wants to find a way to have it repaired under warranty?

 

The more point counter given ..the longer the post stays in play.

 

The discussion of legal action for an dispute of $1000 ? But getting people to say "yes I ve had the same problem" in a public forum sends a far stronger message.

 

Doesn t matter whether you agree with his position or not ...he is happy to hear from you.

 

The comments about writing the CEO or Stephan Daniels imply that they would and should look at the request. Nonsense . This type of letter would and should be redirected immediately to customer service. This is not to say that an appeal of the initial quotation wouldn t be a better first step .

 

If you want to help him just keep posting ..that your M8 works well and implying that he has other motives.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

Interestingly enough we haven't heard from a lot of people who have said "I've had this problem". Perhaps my impression that this was too common was incorrect.

 

Could I ask that those who you have had this problem with their M8 perhaps post here to say so. This post will be extremely useful for any users who have this problem in the future as a reference point.

 

Maybe we could get a sticky entitled "The Official Shutter Failure Thread"? ;-)

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

Did lawyers fees drop suddenly in the UK?

Seriously you would stand a good chance to win a case like this in France (inherent vice) but in the UK i don't know.

 

I may be able to use the small claims court. My legal advice has been provided by Which? who have a legal service at a very reasonable price.

[uptong]

One aspect that you do not appear to have taken account of is the aspect of 'Reverse Burden of Proof'

To quote a response to query on a consumer forum relating to the Sale of Goods Act and faulty goods.

 

"If the product is over 6 months the retailer has the right to ask the purchaser to prove by independent report that a part has caused the failure due to the part being faulty when manufactured, or that the build of the item has caused the product to fail, the purchaser has to pay for this report, if the company undertaking the investigation is unable to establish these facts the retailer does not have to refund, replace,contribute to the customer,this process is under the tile "reverse burden of proof",which is fully supported by the Trading Standards Office.

Should the purchaser be able to prove the above the Retailer is still not liable to replace or fully refund, they may offer a contribution towards the repair, or pay for the repair, or not do any thing, from my understanding an offer of a contribution towards repair most likely will hold up in Court in favour of the Retailer.

I can not state who I work for but find this request cropping up more and more, due to such consumer advice, which I do not disagree with, but please tell the whole story as people tend to believe every thing they hear upon T.V.

The reverse burden of proof is difficult for the independent advisor to proove with many unable to do so,how ever big their company is, all the reports I have read write of a fault but are unable to establish that it was faulty or contributed to a fault when manufactured.

Once the Purchaser has handed over the report stating the Manufacture is at fault, the Retailer will have the opportunity to have the item reviewed again by an independent Authority, so the purchaser should not expect an immediate answer, if the purchaser independent review can not establish the Manufacture to be at fault(I have never seen a report that does)the Retailer does not need to proceed further.

Manufactures advise of known issues and extend warranties on the faulty part, this is confirmed on Mfg Web sites or when contacting them concerning the item in question, web sites decrying products are not accepted"

 

I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the above information as I am no legal expert but having happened across it would suggest it worth looking into further and seeking further advice on especially given the possible age of the camera, bought secondhand with the original 2 year warranty expired and now the dealers own six month presumably further warranty. I would imagine a lot will depend on how old the camera actually was and how long further out of the dealers warranty it was when you experienced the problem, this is not clear from any of your posts, in any event it would be a greater period of time than 6 months.

 

You may wish to look further into this especially as you are now doubting the commonness of the problem. You may well find that you may need to incur unexpected costs in obtaining reports to support your case and I would doubt they would be cheap !

[bill]

If Leica won't repair the camera free of charge then my next step will be to ask my dealer, Ffordes in Aberdeen, who are not my regular dealer, to pay for the repair under the Sale of Goods Act.

 

This is completely arse about face and will harm any subsequent claim against the dealer.

 

Aside from what the law states I do think that Leica should repair the camera rather than expect one of their dealers to foot the bill just because that is what is legally correct.

 

That is your subjective opinion and will not stand a celluloid cat in hell's chance in a court of law.

 

Has it not occurred to you that a) the dealer may have a reciprocal arrangement with Leica, and carry insurance for just this eventuality?

 

It will be far easier for me if I can just send the camera in to Leica and have it repaired without having to go through my dealer which is why I have initially approached them directly.

 

So your chosen course of action is dictated by convenience rather than by law?

 

It now smacks as if you are making a lot of noise and going after the entity that you think is most likely to cave to the pressure of public opinion AND be able to afford to do so.

 

Interesting. And distasteful.

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bill

 

Why are you taking this so personally and being so rude?

 

All I've asked is that the guys who made the camera, fix it... it's not that crazy a notion, is it?

 

Of course, if Leica say no, I will approach the dealer but at this point I want to give Leica the opportunity to do what I think is the right thing.

 

And as for doing what is most convenient for me, why not? If Leica are going to repair the camera even if I go to my dealer surely it is more simplistic to not have a middle man?

 

Thanks for your input.

 

Daniel

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

Forgive me if I recap - after 5 pages (approximately 20% of which appear to be taken up with Daniel's signature)

 

And just to show that somebody is listening to you, Bill..........

 

Just one question though - do you even own an M8?

[lct]

...Leica markets the M8 as a camera for a lifetime and in many user's cases, including mine, this has proven not to be the case. My camera has been very well cared for and has not been used excessively (probably only 10,000 shutter actuations if I was to guess)...

Leaving legal questions aside, and assuming this is true, a shutter fault at 10,000 actuations is not acceptable at all IMHO and i'm somewhat surprised that Leica did not fix it for free already.

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

Leaving legal questions aside, and assuming this is true, a shutter fault at 10,000 actuations is not acceptable at all IMHO and i'm somewhat surprised that Leica did not fix it for free already.

 

I'm sure they will, I chased for a response - sure I'll hear something tomorrow or the next day.

[Julian Thompson]

I don't know what this world is coming to.

 

What is the point of a company offering a warranty anymore at all, if everyone is going to expect the manufacturer and retailler to warrant everything even when the warranty is expired?

 

I buy NEW equipment so that I have the full 2 year warranty. I have to spend more money to get this but there you go.

 

Without sounding rude why should someone who has spent less than I have and rolled the dice on a second hand product be entitled to more than the 6 month warranty that you accepted when you left the shop?

[lct]

There is no reason why we should be satisfied to get a shutter fault at 10,000 actuations when we buy a Leica.

[bill]

Trust me, Daniel, I don't take these things personally. And you would know if I was being rude. I am being blunt.

 

You are choosing to ignore relevant legislation - which is there specifically to protect your rights as a consumer - and instead take a pop directly at the manufacturer of a product that you have bought secondhand. You cannot honestly say how the camera was treated up to the day it arrived in your hands. When you buy from a dealer part of their markup is to handle the occasional return and to deal with people like you.

 

If I were Leica I would treat you as a vexatious litigant and point you straight back at the dealer with whom you should be raising your issue in the first place.

 

To paraphrase the words from your original post - Frankly, I think that it is unacceptable for a purchaser of a secondhand product to expect Leica to pay for these repairs.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Julian Thompson]

It's not a question of that.

 

Look - if you buy a new car and it has a two year, 50000 mile warranty it says in the warranty terms that whichever comes sooner is the trigger to end the warranty.

 

If you sit the car in the garage and do only 10000 miles then when two years ticks past that's it - the warranty's out and you're on your own.

 

Camera's lead different lives - some get beaten to death, have a life of international travel, constant vibration, humidity change and abuse and others sit in a camera cupboard all week until the owner gets time to use it at the weekend.

 

Total frames shot might be the same but the 'tool' camera in the above example just isn't going to last as long as the 'toy' camera in the above - and when you buy used you don't know what you're buying.

 

If I could have got used equipment with an indefinite warranty rather than buying new what the heck was the point? Why would any of us ever buy new again? Just because something is made well from a top manufacturer doesn't mean your 'on cost' to run it will be completely covered from now until an unspecified point in history somewhere when you think it's fair.

 

You buy a camera that cost £4000 new - you expect service costs to be proportionate when you're out of warranty.

 

A Porsche costs a lot more than a Fiesta to service and run and still only has a 2 year warranty - and once it's out - it's jolly well out - boom - otherwise, what's the point in Porsche offering an extended warranty package? Everyone would say 'nah - I'll just say it's not reasonable for my electronics in the gearbox to go at 60k/3 years'

[Julian Thompson]

PS My post above in reply to LCT - Bill we both replied at the same time!

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

It's not a question of that.

 

Look - if you buy a new car and it has a two year, 50000 mile warranty it says in the warranty terms that whichever comes sooner is the trigger to end the warranty

 

If you sit the car in the garage and do only 10000 miles then when two years ticks past that's it - the warranty's out and you're on your own.

 

Frankly, I think that it is unacceptable for a purchaser of a secondhand product to expect Leica to pay for these repairs.

 

 

 

To use your specific analogy do you think Toyota should be taking this stance currently? Perhaps they should only fix the faulty accelerators and brakes on those cars that are with their original owners?!!

Edited February 7, 2010 by PhotoWebb.co.uk

[stunsworth]

All I've asked is that the guys who made the camera, fix it... it's not that crazy a notion, is it?

 

Of course, if Leica say no, I will approach the dealer but at this point I want to give Leica the opportunity to do what I think is the right thing.

 

Well, not a crazy notion, but as Bill rather colourfully puts it an arse about face one. As people have said again and again, you first contact should have been with the dealer, that's who you have a sales contract with. If that fails then you should then have approached Leica.

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

Trust me, Daniel, I don't take these things personally. And you would know if I was being rude. I am being blunt.

 

You are choosing to ignore relevant legislation - which is there specifically to protect your rights as a consumer - and instead take a pop directly at the manufacturer of a product that you have bought secondhand. You cannot honestly say how the camera was treated up to the day it arrived in your hands. When you buy from a dealer part of their markup is to handle the occasional return and to deal with people like you.

 

If I were Leica I would treat you as a vexatious litigant and point you straight back at the dealer with whom you should be raising your issue in the first place.

 

To paraphrase the words from your original post - Frankly, I think that it is unacceptable for a purchaser of a secondhand product to expect Leica to pay for these repairs.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Thank God you're not the head of Customer Services then eh!

[andybarton]

How far is Dunfermline from Inverness? A couple of hours drive provided it's not snowing? (Edit: 3 hours, 5 minutes, according to Mr Google) The same time it would take me to drive to my Mum's house. But with MUCH better scenery all along the way. )

 

Why not drive up there and speak with Messrs ffordes face to face? Would make it much easier.

Edited February 7, 2010 by andybarton

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[stunsworth]

To use your specific analogy do you think Toyota should be taking this stance currently? Maybe they should only fix faulty brakes and accelerators on those cars that are with their original owners?

 

Toyota have established that there is a manufacturing fault. You have not. You have looked at an Internet forum and decided there is a problem. That's not the same thing.