Leica Rejects My 30% Discount Order; Screwed or Saved?

[hsw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Received my registered letter from Leica yesterday. Unfortunately it did not confirm my order of 50mm Summilux but rather claimed that I had missed the June 30th deadline. Mind you, I mailed on June 29th with return receipt. And my USPS receipt clearly has 6/29/07 marked.

 

I could fight it; I've got the documentation. But maybe this was a sign that I should save that money for something else. I already have a perfectly good Summicron....

 

'A penny saved is a penny earned'

 

Visoflex III with 75mm Voigtlander

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[marknorton]

Well, you know the reputation of the 50/1.4, it's an outstanding lens, but only you can decide whether you really want it. The fact that you delayed right up to the wire suggests not.

[hsw]

Well, I really delayed because I couldn't decide between the Summilux and the Noctilux. But now I think I just may get a couple more Voigtlanders. The 'Lux will show up on eBay soon enough.

 

Mainly was interested if anyone else had been inappropriately rejected because of postmark disputes.

[TimF]

Mainly was interested if anyone else had been inappropriately rejected because of postmark disputes.

Surely the date they received your registration is what counts, not when you posted it? I have to agree with Mark's unwritten implication.

[stunsworth]

Surely the date they received your registration is what counts, not when you posted it? I have to agree with Mark's unwritten implication.

 

That would be my understanding too. When did they receive it?

 

Still, if you want the lens it may be worthwhile calling them and explaining the situation to see if they'll give you the discount.

[Eoin]

IIRC if it was postmarked on or before the 30th that was the cutoff date. I have the terms and conditions somewhere but different letters were sent to different countries so perhaps your T&C's were slightly different.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Surely the date they received your registration is what counts, not when you posted it?

 

 

No. The terms and conditions of the offer were quite clear that the postmark date was the important factor.

[erl]

Henry,

 

Clearly you received the letter of offer which sets out the conditions. In mine it states "date postmarked". If yours is the same, you have a case, which you should be presenting to Leica rather than us. We can do nothing except debate pointlessly about it. However, You did have ample time in which to make your decision and had you done that with a good margin you would have avoided the 'situation'. Now you have to "put you case, or walk away". Maybe this is the real test of whether you want that lens or not.

[earleygallery]

Keep it simple, just write/e mail back with a copy of your postal receipt. If they are the conditions and you can show you have met them then there shouldn't be a problem?

 

What do Leica state was the postmark on the letter?

[gravastar]

I have had an instance of posting a letter in a small rural UK post office where it was not postmarked until the day after I posted it - that's a possibility.

 

Bob.

[hsw]

That's just it, they don't state what they believe the postmark is and sent back my purchase documents but not the envelope with the postmark on it. I actually posted it with a postal metered stamp @ the post office and the date was on the stamp as well.

 

All moot: I just ordered a chrome CV 35/1.2 from Steve Gandy. He's always been quite honest and helpful. I can wait for the 'Lux on eBay in a couple of years.

 

Thanks all

[earleygallery]

Hmm 29th was a Friday, maybe to post office hung onto the letter until the Monday which would be 2nd July........if this is the case I think all you can do is provide Leica with a copy of your receipt and see if they are prepared to make an exception for you.

[earleygallery]

Henry, another thought, maybe the person at Leica who returned your forms misunderstands the terms themselves? (they might have worked on the understanding that the date was date of receipt not date of posting?)

 

I've just had a telephone conversation with an insurance company who didn't understand their own small print (I was correct, their underwriter was wrong!). It happens.

 

Whatever, you'll love the CV lens.

[Rona!d]

It IS a sign. Forget the 30% discount and be happy to save even more money! You´ll never do that much better photos with the LUX instead of the Cron 50.

[bobtodrick]

This in my mind is pointless.

As someone above mentioned why not just take it up with Leica...it probably would have been solved by now and you'd be happy.

Instead of the endless go-arounds here.

[hsw]

That's exactly my conclusion Rona|d, thanks for the affirmation.

Bobtodrick, sorry to clog up your bandwidth with this, you can get back to work now...

[bobtodrick]

Quote...'Mainly was interested if anyone else had been inappropriately rejected because of postmark disputes'

 

The above states that you want others feedback. My feed back was that a quick email to your local rep would have likely cleared up the problem.

 

Would you perhaps like some cheese with that whine.

[Rona!d]

My feed back was that a quick email to your local rep would have likely cleared up the problem.

 

It would have, I´m sure. But it seems, that he does not really want another 50, so any discussion is obsolete (i.m.h.o. also starting this thread!)

[dseelig]

Fight it.Send themn a copy of your recipt David

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[leicabug]

Leica's rejection may be a blessing in disguise. You now have an extremely good and rare lens that will allow you to take photos at dimmer light than 50/1.4. And more cash in the bank!