problems after resale of a CL

[cirke]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Dopaco said:

If you think the buyer seems to be an honest person and you want to be too.
Supposedly get on the other side, you have been the buyer and now you have the same problem. How would you like the seller to treat you? ... What you feel at that moment, put it into practice, even if it leads you to be harmed, sometimes honesty and the peace of mind of having done it well costs, sometimes work and other times a financial loss.

Greetings

That’s exactly what I think , and I believe him to be honest , I just don’t understand why he didn’t report the problem let’s say one month later 

 

thanks to all 

Edited September 5, 2021 by cirke

[lct]

You owe nothing to the buyer. Therefore, i would make no commitment as long as you don't know the cost of the repair. If such cost happens to be reasonable, and only in this case, i would begin to think that perhaps a refund could be possibly acceptable provided the buyer pays for the shipment of the camera and a full insurance for it. Just my ugly lawyer's 2 cents.

[pfoto]

sold in april, now a problem? not your business any more

[wda]

There is so much scope for unknown, or undeclared, damage suffered by the camera in the months of new ownership, that I consider the buy-back advice and option very unreasonable indeed. What a damaging precedent it would set. I would politely explain that the delay in reporting the fault, invalidates any obligation to share repair costs.

[Driften]

I expect the issue is new and nothing you should be responsible to help correct. From doing computer tech support a life time ago, my instinct is he is doing something he isn't telling you about. Like the problem is only with non-leica lens or it only gets bad battery life with 3rd party junk batteries. Or the problems all started when he used a bad battery and fried something in the camera. I know I would want to help a buyer, but not this long after a sale.

[earleygallery]

Hmmm, this person bought the camera in April and has only just now contacted you to say it's broken?! Furthermore he wants to wait until November to send it for repair.

If it had been a few weeks after the sale perhaps, but not this long. I suspect they've done something and are trying their luck.

[Le Chef]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In America health insurance companies used to talk about “Pre-existing Conditions”. I suspect that if your camera had a pre-existing condition you would not have sold it to this person, but would have gotten it fixed before any sale.

I don’t think it’s for us to speculate what he might have done with the camera since he received it and since he didn’t complain within the first 30 days you can be pretty sure there was no pre-existing condition. You can also add that if he’s not prepared to get it fixed until November he’s obviously not that concerned.

I suggest letting him get the camera repaired on his own nickel and for Leica to send you the repair report along with the cost of repairs. At that point if you feel you should make a contribution to the repair you can do so. But until then I think the buyer should pay to fix the problem.

 

[cirke]

48 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

In America health insurance companies used to talk about “Pre-existing Conditions”. I suspect that if your camera had a pre-existing condition you would not have sold it to this person, but would have gotten it fixed before any sale.

I don’t think it’s for us to speculate what he might have done with the camera since he received it and since he didn’t complain within the first 30 days you can be pretty sure there was no pre-existing condition. You can also add that if he’s not prepared to get it fixed until November he’s obviously not that concerned.

I suggest letting him get the camera repaired on his own nickel and for Leica to send you the repair report along with the cost of repairs. At that point if you feel you should make a contribution to the repair you can do so. But until then I think the buyer should pay to fix the problem.

 

It’s what I think , if the price is correct I’ll propose to pay 50%

and I can show him the answers from the community  if he wants to discuss 

Edited September 5, 2021 by cirke

[wda]

12 hours ago, cirke said:

I sold a CL that worked perfectly at the beginning of April, I ....

He phoned to Wetzlar and was told by Leica that the CL was definitely broken and had to be sent for repair, he asks me to participate in the price of the repair 
....

What would you do in this case?

thank you all

I find this very strange, that Leica would diagnose a distant camera and conclude it needed factory servicing. Possible? Well, maybe. Inspection? More likely. I would have expected some questioning of the user's operating procedures and brand of batteries used. None of the evidence given in this thread resembles any CL user experience, previously shared on this forum. Perhaps you know more than has been revealed here.

Edited September 5, 2021 by wda

[cirke]

47 minutes ago, wda said:

 Perhaps you know more than has been revealed here.

I only know what the buyer told me on the phone

I cant imagine that it only works in P mode , same for 40 frames by battery

[MarkP]

2 hours ago, cirke said:

It’s what I think , if the price is correct I’ll propose to pay 50%

and I can show him the answers from the community  if he wants to discuss 

This is a Leica repair. It may prove to be very expensive.

So he takes it away on his trip in November, gets lots of use from it, maybe suffers more damage and you'll be up for 50% of holiday damage?

Edited September 5, 2021 by MarkP

[Mute-on]

This screams either user error or user induced damage, which is conveniently undisclosed. The protracted notification delay only confirms this. Not your responsibility at this late stage.  Just too many unknowns, as others have identified. 
 

[oldwino]

What happens when you buy it back, send it to Leica, and they say “unrepairable due to water damage” , or something similar? 
 

This sale is well beyond a reasonable “warranty” period. 

[FrozenInTime]

The other single link in the chain that may be faulty is the battery charger.

Buyers problem now.

[250swb]

On 9/5/2021 at 9:01 AM, cirke said:

 

- he can only take pictures in P mode (when I was using exclusively M mode)

 

As a wild long shot does the CL have an 'idiot mode', I know Olympus cameras do when first switched on and you have to delve into the menu to unlock everything to make you a pro photographer. And maybe ask how long he's leaving the camera switched on, check for yourself any situations that could lead to undue battery drain. After that walk away, there are too many unknowns to get involved further.

Edited September 6, 2021 by 250swb

[cirke]

59 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

The other single link in the chain that may be faulty is the battery charger.

Buyers problem now.

Good idea ! I sent an email to the buyer to check it 

thanks 

[jankap]

4 hours ago, oldwino said:

What happens when you buy it back, send it to Leica, and they say “unrepairable due to water damage” , or something similar? This sale is well beyond a reasonable “warranty” period. 

That is true of course. In my first reaction I did not check this.

[tom0511]

Am 5.9.2021 um 10:01 schrieb cirke:

I sold a CL that worked perfectly at the beginning of April, I only did a menu reset before selling it (it is no longer under warranty)
at the beginning of September the buyer calls me and tells me that he has always had problems with it :

- he can only take pictures in P mode (when I was using exclusively M mode)

- any new batteries make only 40 photos (I was making 200 or 250 if i remember well)

He phoned to Wetzlar and was told by Leica that the CL was definitely broken and had to be sent for repair, he asks me to participate in the price of the repair 
He seems very sincere and honest and I don't want to be dishonest either

What would you do in this case?

thank you all

I am one of those who say buyer waited too long and that the damage probably came up after it was in his possession. The camera worked when you owned it.

He decided to buy a used camera without guarantee and save money for the price. This is a risk if you buy used without gurantee. It is not your fault if some weeks later the camera has a problem/needs repair. This would be different if he contacted you directly after receiving the camera.

I might maybe bear 100 or 200 Euro of the repair cost, but not more.

[Jake]

Blah. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[earleygallery]

On 9/5/2021 at 10:24 PM, MarkP said:

This is a Leica repair. It may prove to be very expensive.

So he takes it away on his trip in November, gets lots of use from it, maybe suffers more damage and you'll be up for 50% of holiday damage?

This is a good point. Regardless of what the issue may be Leica don't just do localised repairs as we know, they totally refurb the camera replacing pretty much anything that might possibly need replacing even if it functions, as well as a new covering etc.

Adding another 6 months wear and tear onto the camera from when you sold it.................