Be Careful !!! ..

[azzo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

.. when making a Deal and get it in writing.

 

To cut a long story short, I made a Deal with a renowned shop that sells both new and second hand Leica goods amongst other things.

The Deal was to part exchange 2 of my lenses plus cash against a second hand 35mm Summilux in Chrome finish which I had been wanting for a long time.

 

This 35mm Summilux gets lost or stolen or whatever during shipment.

After approx five weeks, I get my money back.

So, what exactly is my argument you might be asking!

 

The whole point is that, I did not sell my 2 lenses for cash but to get this 35mm Summilux. I sacrificed 2 good lenses for a little bit of money considering I could have sold them for more.

I would not have sold these lenses for that amount of money but I was okay with the Deal as I wanted this 35mm Summilux.

 

"Sorry, you have sold your lenses to us and the lenses are sold." I was told when I wanted to pay back the amount of money for my lenses on what I had originally agreed upon as a Deal.

"This was a Deal and not a Sale, my 2 lenses plus cash for the 35mm Summilux which I did not recieve!" was my reply and to no avail.

 

I regarded like many of you here, very highly this particular shop. ..

.. definitely, not any more but, this is not the point here.

 

The point here is that, such things can in fact happen!

[aesop]

...hey, Azzo, sorry it didn't work out, but it sounds to me that there are two separate transactions here:

 

a) sale of lenses X and Y to fund the purchase lens Z, and;

purchase of lens Z.

 

I know it sounds tough, but if you view things strictly from the shop's perspective, these two transactions are really not related. Sucks, huh?

[azzo]

It sucks indeed.

 

The Deal was on a part-exchange basis from the beginning.

X and Y plus cash for thier item Z.

I did not sell them my 2 lenses then decided to get the 35 Summilux after.

[aesop]

...please don't beat me up, Azzo, but your Deal was made up of two component transactions, a) and - and they are separable, rather than linear. It's a tough one, and I would be rather miffed if it happened to me. On the upside, I strongly believe in karma.

[andybarton]

The shop should have insured the lens it was sending to you and you should be put pack into the position you were before the insurable event happened.

 

IMHO, the exchange of your lenses, plus cash, for another lens, is all one transaction.

[aesop]

The shop should have insured the lens it was sending to you and you should be put pack into the position you were before the insurable event happened.

 

IMHO, the exchange of your lenses, plus cash, for another lens, is all one transaction.

 

...the insurable event would be the the purchase of lens Z, Andy - in other words, transaction . This is separate from Azzo's sale of lenses X and Y. IMHO.

[azzo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...please don't beat me up, Azzo, but your Deal was made up of two component transactions, a) and - and they are separable, rather than linear. It's a tough one, and I would be rather miffed if it happened to me. On the upside, I strongly believe in karma.

 

Bam Bam

 

It was a Deal on a Part-Exchange Basis from the start !

[azzo]

The shop should have insured the lens it was sending to you and you should be put pack into the position you were before the insurable event happened.

 

IMHO, the exchange of your lenses, plus cash, for another lens, is all one transaction.

 

Indeed !

 

I stated that from the start.

[aesop]

...uh-oh, I'm beginning to sound like the bad guy, so I'll just shut up and quit. Life's too short.

[andybarton]

If you part exchange your car for a new one, it's one transaction. Same here. I'm sure that there will be paperwork to prove

 

Azzo has lost out big time by the retailer's failure and should recompensed.

[azzo]

They should have waited for the customer to recieve his lens and give him time to check it out before selling his 2 lenses, the way I see it and NOT, selling his 2 lenses thus making a profit and also get paid by the Insurance without a proper compensation to their customer !

[cliffp]

I think the whole thing is one transaction. I think the dealer should try and find a way to help you out either by finding an alternative lens at the same price (assuming same condition) or give you a good discount on something else. They should recognise that the profit they made on your two lenses would not have been achieved had this deal not been made. They could also give you the difference between what you were paid for the two lenses and what they sold them for. Leica gear is so expensive it would be shortsighted to alienate a good customer.

 

In any event, I hope you get a good outcome to this.

[RoRoRoPa]

Do I get you right? You just got the money back that you added to the two lenses you sent them?

[azzo]

@ cliffp, thank you but I doubt that very much.

 

@RoRoRoPa, I got back the amount of money I had already paid in cash plus the amount they had initially given me for my 2 lenses as part of the Deal we had initially agreed upon.

 

Please, understand that I didn't want to Sell my 2 lenses. I wanted and had agreed on a Deal.

The Deal was, my 2 lenses plus cash for their 35mm Summilux in Chrome finish which in the end didn't materialize as the 35mm Summilux got lost or stolen or whatever happened to it.

[andybarton]

They should give you two lenses identical to the ones you sent to them, plus your cash, to put you back in the same position you started. Giving you a trade in price for them, means you are severely out of pocket.

 

This is extremely shabby behaviour on their part, and if you don't get satisfaction, you should name and shame them.

 

Don't give up. There are laws in Europe that cover these things.

[azzo]

Andy,

 

I will probably name and shame them and honestly think it's only fair towards other companies that I do in fact name them if I'm not properly compensated as I feel I have been cheated/robbed, call it whatever you want by this particular company!

[Rolo]

IMO, the only way to keep a similar deal on track is to agree the PX price, but not to submit the original lenses until the new lens has been received and proved satisfactory. Obviously need to raise the cash in advance, but at least you stay in control during the process.

 

Happened to me with a mint 50mm pre-asph Lux, px'd for an Asph Lux that turned out to be faulty and went back, but as Azzo, my beauty had gone. Oh, how I wanted it back.

[UliWer]

@RoRoRoPa, I got back the amount of money I had already paid in cash plus the amount they had initially given me for my 2 lenses as part of the Deal we had initially agreed upon.

....

 

Then I don't see a reason to blame the shop. The money for the two lenses plus the amount you paid on top was their price to sell the summilux. You got that back. The fact that you might have got more if you had sold the lenses elsewhere doesn't really count. You cannot exspect them paying more for your lenses just because the Summilux got lost.

If they had insured the Summilux you would not get more.

[azzo]

Rolo,

 

I do not think that would have satisfied them. Reason being, they offer less for your goods and make a profit.

It wouldn't have worked out for them because had I to do as you say, they would lose their profit had something wrong cropped up !

 

Send in your goods (profit guaranteed), pay the difference, then we send you your lens, is the way they work. I'm okay with that as long as I recieve what I want and I'm happy.

 

Capisc Amico.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wattsy]

It's an unfortunate result but I doubt that the OP has been wronged in law. When you part exchange something you essentially agree to sell to the dealer your goods as part payment for something else the dealer is selling. That the OP now feels he let the lenses go too cheaply is hardly the dealer's fault.

 

One of the lessons brought home here is that part exchanging stuff, whilst convenient (I've done it myself when I've felt too lazy to ebay something), is essentially a mug's game.