To be fair to all parties, go and file this case at the tribunal tuntutan pengguna. Name Nikon as one of the party in this case.

The tribunal can then rule :-

1. Whether seller should refund buyer.

2. Whether third party (ie salvator) should refund seller.

3. Whether warranty void or not.

4. Whether Nikon is right in saying they deny warranty.

And a bunch of all other questions. Having it here is like a bunch of kids arguing in a playground, you carik geng, I carik geng, then all geng gaduh, you get bruised, battered but issues are not settled. Have in in a legal proceeding that only cost you 5 bucks, where you can force the Nikon guys to come and give evidence heard and judge by an impartial party.

And any judgement out of the case is enforceable. Then you can bring in the police if either party refuses to pay. Squabbling all day long here is not going to solve anything. How about it?

There is such a thing as third party claim. As you have every right to claim against the seller, seller has every right to claim from the supplier. Remember, refund or not will necessitate you guys meeting and returning whatnot.

As for those who says TTPM is time consuming, etc etc, you have probably never tried filing any case at TTPM. I went and sue NAZA for a sum of more than RM7k++ and it took me about a month to settle, and the only thing I spent on Naza was about 4 bucks for the AR registered post.

As I have said, just file at TTPM. No, you don't need a police report, you can do it online if you don't want to go to to the offices. No, there is no need of a police report, heck, it'll probably be stamped with a "Tindakan Sivil Sahaja". This is clearly a civil case, and your avenues of settling this is already present.

If you are in the right, you are in the right. Document you rightheousness? by doing it in from of a Tribunal President.

Is he your friend or not? Either way, when you are buying something with the intention to sell it later, be responsible for it. Worse comes to worse, sue the guy that send the lenses to Nikon the first time around. I'm pretty sure Nikon must have some kind of contact number or something.

Aiseh. Step one brother, find at least his full name and address. That is the basis for a strong suit, you need at least those two before filing your statement of claim. Be reminded that a judgement by the Tribunal is binding, so having the correct name is very, very important.

Remember, you also need to serve officially the statement of claim therefore please search first before filing.

---

Added on August 7, 2012, 11:54 amCorrect place of filing important, to ensure that it is fair. Check the list of TTPM offices, and select the one nearest and most convenient to you. Again, worse comes to worse, my suggestion is to sue Nikon directly.



This post has been edited by mfitri77: Aug 7 2012, 11:54 AM

Why not? All this brouhaha wouldn't have happened without their paperwork, their receipt and most importantly their warranty service. I can bet you that they would probably never bother to turn up and give evidence if they weren't a party to this whole thing. Anyways, the most important part here is that Nikon has denied warranty because of previous reports regarding the lens and quoted quite an exorbitant price to repair it. At least you can ask them directly why that is so.

The tribunal can then rule whether or not Nikon's action in denying warranty is correct or not in the circumstance, whether it is obligated to assume warranty under the circumstance, why the repair fee seems to be more that the retail price etc etc. Heck, sitting here I'd probably be able to dream up a multitude of questions I want to query Nikon as well, such as what happened when warranty was denied in the first place.

After all, buyer bought the lens under the impression that Nikon is providing the warranty, right? Did Nikon provide a way to check warranty? Is warranty voided by change of ownership.

Don't forget, the Tribunal's role is resolving what is fair. Do you think that repair bill is fair? Yes? No? Maybe?

Let me just give you an example of my car's story. I didn't win because of what it is the warranty booklet. I won because the Tribunal ruled that the car sold to me WASN'T UP TO QUALITY, as per the Consumer Act, regardless of warranty.

No, I am not. Your right to question the cost of repair is a consumer right. More so when you are talking about a single provider, ie Nikon.

Yes, I do know. More question to Nikon then. Say for example, the repair quote was paid, is the warranty still valid? In any case, let them explain lar, for it seems that they know more about this whole thing than either Izwan or Silverfire.

People here are more interested in their own interpretation of what Nikon says. Why don't you get the Nikon guys to answer each and every single question, instead of presuming this and that? The best place is the Tribunal, no?