Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed New Topic New Poll

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Complain against Silverfire, Help me settle guys :(

shahru98
post Jul 19 2012, 07:55 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(Izwan898 @ Jul 19 2012, 03:26 PM)
New update. Nikon just called me and I talked with Mr. Wong. He just gave an information that this lens already sent to them TWICE inclusive mine. The previous owner also quoted the same amount of RM1.2K+ by Nikon service centre. Same with my case here. Already missing 2 screws. The previous owned refused to repair the lens. That explains why he sold the lens. Mr. Wong said he cannot give the previous owner's name since it's P&C. He advised me to make a police report to get that information. I will make a police report and get his info. This case just got interesting.
*
at the moment i'm rather interested in the story saying that the lens had been sent for repair once before TS does.

Nikon is the one that hold the verdict right now.

opinion reserved.

This post has been edited by shahru98: Jul 19 2012, 07:58 PM
shahru98
post Jul 20 2012, 11:02 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


people, in this case you cant really take sides lah.
if the claim that the lens were sent to nikon before and the previous owner refused to repair, means the one at fault is the previous owner lah.
silverfire has part to blame for not checking thoroughly, and TS also has part to blame for not checking thoroughly.
so let's just wait and listen to what nikon will have to say.

i'm a dslr user myself and i have bought 3 second hand lenses. never once i checked the back of the lens and counted all the screws.
i mount it to my camera and if it works, it works then.
this could just be a pure bad luck.

This post has been edited by shahru98: Jul 20 2012, 11:06 AM
shahru98
post Jul 30 2012, 04:16 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(Izwan898 @ Jul 30 2012, 03:24 PM)
Yeah...very embarrassing... blush.gif
*
well, it is indeed embarassing
shahru98
post Jul 30 2012, 07:15 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(MakNok @ Jul 30 2012, 05:51 PM)
so with evidence in hand.

Silverfire should be strip of "safetrader" as he knowingly buy from his friend and resell as a "Trader" (claim not selling on behalf of friend).

tongue.gif


Added on July 30, 2012, 5:52 pm
too much detective imagination!!

Please do refund ASAP...
*
He'll probably try to not go for that solution.
This also means that the lens is not covered with Nikon warranty to begin with.
I'm not trying to be smart, but as a seller you should know what you are selling.
Safe Trader tag is for him to lose now.

This post has been edited by shahru98: Jul 30 2012, 09:48 PM
shahru98
post Jul 30 2012, 11:46 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(Quantum_thinking @ Jul 30 2012, 11:36 PM)
I did not see that he have the full responsibility to follow up EVERYTHING.

Yes, to an extent of explanation etc, but there would be a limit for the responsibility part. Any excess is up to the seller to provide.

Now, since it is proven that the screws are missing, i just wonder if there is a proper reason to actually refund in full or not.

The point is, it is never being covered by personal warranty at all. Even if it is covered, it won't be that long. It is between Nikon and buyer as stated in the thread.

Imagine if seller sell something to one fellow with 3 days personal warranty, should the seller be responsible for something that is proven due to seller's fault after 1 month??

Imagine if a manufacturer have build something that have 1 year warranty,but the nature of the item like tendency to overheating that lead to auto shut down and eventually timed out after operate about 1.5 years due to the manufacturing design.  Can they be held liable?

Where is the exact ground of asking for refund in the first place? It is a faulty item as proven by now, but even new items have a time limit on such a claims.

If like this, after settling this issue (assume settle), then "new" fault comes out again, can seller be held liable like this FOREVER??? Like this, all 2nd hand seller can BANKRUPT or out of business!!!
*
On contrary, i would like to point out that it is very rare to find a case like this.
In fact this is the 1st time for me, after few years being here. (im not sure about you though)
And from what i see, there havent been a 2nd hand seller that went bankrupt as you previously assumed.
Most sellers know what they are selling.
In this case, buyer CANT even claim warranty from nikon.
And it is also proven that the lens is already damaged at the 1st place.
My assumption is seller's friend is taking advantage of his Safe Trader tag in order to get rid of it despite knowing
that the warranty is not applicable anymore.

This post has been edited by shahru98: Jul 30 2012, 11:50 PM
shahru98
post Jul 30 2012, 11:59 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(ClericKilla @ Jul 30 2012, 11:54 PM)
Not sure how both party solve this but Quantum just came up with a solution I guess.
If Silverfire did state then he should have refund in that time period I guess no seller will tell you PW for months...

REALLY GOOD LUCK IZWAN SETTLING THIS. My sympathy goes to you.
*
TS doesnt really care about PW for God sake.

-seller sold him a damaged lens and confidently stated that the lens is still under nikon's warranty.
-TS even traced a record of previous failed attempt to claim warranty.

How about that?
shahru98
post Jul 31 2012, 12:21 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(MakNok @ Jul 31 2012, 09:20 AM)
Yeah,
fail to notice that the warranty stated in your Sales Thread is VIOD to begin with.

THis type pf attitude means YOU intend to cheat in the 1st place.

Apis_LuaLua...Please take notice of this.
This Seller is just too much.

vmad.gif
*
This problem involves 3 party
1. Seller's friend that probably cheated at the 1st place
2. Seller, which is from my point of view is unable to accept the situation + a little bit of arrogance + SAFE TRADER
3. Buyer, who was sold on false information. EG: warranty.

Perhaps the seller is overprotective of his friend,
or he also didnt fully check the lens and bought from his
friend in order to make profit here (then refuses to admit that he was careless too),
Or he knew the lens was broken but decided to sell it anyway.

Nikon definitely proved that the lens was already damaged before it was sold, and the lens wasnt repaired.
What to do now? Seller's friend probably the one that knew everything right from the start.
So they should deal with him/her 1st to get further explanations.

Complicated.
shahru98
post Aug 2 2012, 10:07 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(Silverfire @ Aug 2 2012, 09:51 AM)
Then he should simply make a report, and when it comes back with nothing, I demand a public apology from Izwan. Along with that apology he will have to go back to tell police to tell them his mistake else I would report him for defamation and attempt of fraud.
*
i guess TS should just proceed with the police report then.
though it would be utterly stupid for TS if he uses another lens to frame you.
why would people look for trouble if nothing is wrong? what if he really did that and he was found guilty after that?
do you think someone that already has a job and has a monthly income would want to squeeze a student's money for no reason?
they better off doing it on the people that really have money to begin with.
people don't usually get angry for a mistake that they do, let alone unleashing it on those who are unrelated.
this loophole that you are trying to use, isn't gonna work.

if the name is revealed and it is your friend's name, what are you going to do? are you going to apologize and refund his money?

shahru98
post Aug 2 2012, 10:27 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(Silverfire @ Aug 2 2012, 10:24 AM)
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Previous report clearly states warranty is still applicable, and all the sudden when you submit its void due to impact damage? Oh please.
*
now you are really beating around the bush.
did it cross your mind that even though the warranty was applicable, the previous owner still have to pay the repair cost?
so what difference does it make in this case? same damage, same warranty, but not applicable?
the only thing that changed was the lens owner.

This post has been edited by shahru98: Aug 2 2012, 10:28 AM
shahru98
post Aug 2 2012, 03:10 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
85 posts

Joined: Aug 2009
From: Kota Kinabalu - Ipoh - Wangsa Maju - Kingarut


QUOTE(alibaba12 @ Aug 2 2012, 02:49 PM)
Nose like pig nose..no wonder behave like pig...
*
Bro, there's no need to go that far.
Such offensive statement is not gonna help.
Although I understand how you're feeling.

Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0281sec    0.22    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 30th November 2025 - 06:48 AM