Am I out of line???***WARNING!!! LONG READING AHEAD***

Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
146
Location
Bay Area, CA
I bought a D2h a few months back that was very rarely used (had 4k shutter actuations on it), previous owner didn't have any issues with the camera and I even asked if they had sent it in for the service advisory Nikon USA put out for incorrect exposure metering. He said it never had and didn't know anything about that issue. So I use it for a few days and notice the exposure metering is WAY off. I had a upcoming race in July so I hold off sending it into Nikon so that I had the camera for the race. Camera works great, besides the fact that I have to shoot everything in Manual mode (not entirely bad since it pushed me to learn how to set it up properly).

A couple weeks ago I send it into Nikon for the service advisory and I asked if they could do a overall check up to make sure it didn't also have the AF issue which they have another service advisory for. Few days later I receive an email acknowledging that the communication metering (exposure meter) is incorrect and that it'll cost $432.50 to fix it. I immediately get on the phone with a rep and question him why I'd be charged for something Nikon USA has a service advisory out for. He says Nikon never has and never will do free repairs on items without a warranty. I explain to him once again about the service advisory and even show him exactly where the service advisory is on the Nikon USA website. He puts me on hold to speak to his supervisor and comes back about 5-10mins later and tells me he is going to forward my info to the Nikon Service Department for a further investigation. I tell him I don't understand why there's an investigation for something as black and white as Nikon putting a service advisory out and stating a complimentary repair will be done for any D2h experiencing this problem. He says there's nothing he can do and he will contact me via email. Few days go by and I haven't heard a thing, so I call in and get ahold of another Nikon rep. I explain everything to her and she seems to actually want to help me, unlike the last guy. Once again I'm put on hold for 10mins and she tells me the exact same thing the last guy told me. I then ask her, "How long is this going to take? You've had my camera for a week and not an inch of progress has been made and your telling me your going to do the exact same thing the last rep said he'd do." She tells me there isn't any notes left by the other rep showing he was going to do what he said. She tells me she's going to handle this herself and will notify me herself. The weekend passes and Monday comes along, still haven't heard from her.

I get home Monday evening and I have a piece of mail from Nikon. Its the service acknowledgement estimate for the work to be done on the camera. Once again the only repair stated is for the incorrect exposure metering only now there's no charges. Sweet! I call up Nikon to make sure everything is good and he tells me the repairs are being covered by Nikon because of the service advisory and that it'll take 7-10 business days for the repair. Sounds great to me :) The next day I get an email from the rep I spoke with last week saying the service advisory will cover the repair for the incorrect exposure metering but now there's a new repair, bent CF card contact pin. I check out the service estimate and what do you know, the cost to fix the bent pin is the exact same as what they wanted to charge me originally for the exposure metering. Coincidence? Possibly but I'm doubting it. Not to mention I never had any other issues besides what I sent it in for.

Back on the phone with Nikon to see what the hell is going on. I explain to the rep that I've never had any issues with CF cards and the camera and don't understand how all of a sudden there's a bent pin and the repair cost is exactly the same as the other repair. She asks if I want to approve the repair and I tell her no, I never had a CF card issue before so I shouldn't have one when I get my camera back. She then tells me that Nikon doesn't do partial repairs. So I can either pay for them to fix this "bent pin" and have the service advisory done, or I don't pay and nothing is fixed. I tell her I feel the service advisory should be taken care of regardless, I didn't break the camera, it was Nikon's fault which they have acknowledged and came up with a solution. She continues to tell me they don't do partial repairs, so she's no help anymore. I ask to speak with a supervisor because she can no longer assist me. She tells me the supervisor will tell me the same thing, and I tell her that's fine but atleast a supervisor can make a proper decision something she apparently cannot do. She bables on about the repair and I tell her I just want to speak with your supervisor. I'm put on hold for 15-20mins until she finally comes back on the line A LOT calmer (over that time frame I also cooled down aswell :)) She tells me that her supervisor is dealing with another customer but informed her that they will process my request for a partial repair. She says that they don't always do the partial repairs but that she can put in a request if I'd like to. I tell her yes I do, and she says she'll be in contact with me via email. 3 days have passed and I haven't heard a word. I've been trying to call them today and everytime I call (used different phones even) I'm getting nothing. The phone doesn't even ring. I don't know if their powers out, switching phone lines or what. I check my status online and it says they're waiting for for estimate approval.

What do you guys think I should do? I know for a fact I didn't have any CF card issues before sending it in. So I can't justify shelling out almost $450 to replace the CF card reader. Nikon has had my camera for 2 weeks now and it appears that nothing has been done to it. It seems like the only thing that has been done, is me going in circles. Do you think Nikon should repair my D2h per request and the service advisory without having to do the CF card reader repair? My gf says I should write a letter and send it to both Nikon USA and the Better Business Bureau, and I am highly considering this. I understand the no partial repair policy Nikon has, but I didn't send the camera in for a repair I caused. I sent it in for an issue I had which is covered by Nikon USA's service advisory. I would think Nikon would take care of this regardless. Do I seem like I'm out of line in this situation??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,184
Location
Glens Falls, NY
No, you're not out of line. And FWIW, I don't understand this no-partial-repair policy either. When you bring your car for service, does your mechanic insist on installing new brakes when all you want/need is an an oil change?

In your case, how is fixing the exposure problem related to a (supposed) faulty CF card pin? If the CF cards stop being read by the camera, I'd then re-send the camera in for THAT repair, but not before. In other words, "If it ain't broke (and you verify whether or not it is), don't fix it!"
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
2,113
Location
Canada
Are you out of line? I don't know, because I didn't read a single word. :frown:

Looking at one big block of text is actually depressing. If you break it up into smaller easily digestible paragraphs, it will be more inviting and easier to read.
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
146
Location
Bay Area, CA
No, you're not out of line. And FWIW, I don't understand this no-partial-repair policy either. When you bring your car for service, does your mechanic insist on installing new brakes when all you want/need is an an oil change?

In your case, how is fixing the exposure problem related to a (supposed) faulty CF card pin? If the CF cards stop being read by the camera, I'd then re-send the camera in for THAT repair, but not before. In other words, "If it ain't broke (and you verify whether or not it is), don't fix it!"

Thanks! That's exactly how I feel. CF card reader worked perfect before I sent it in, then all of a sudden they find this problem. I would think if I had a bent pin it wouldn't be able to read a single CF card, but it does. I would also think the cost of a CF card reader is no where near the cost of the part that determines how much light is needed for a proper exposure. Although I could be wrong. I did ask the rep's to break down the pricing, I wanted to see what exactly made it cost $400+ to replace a card reader.

Are you out of line? I don't know, because I didn't read a single word. :frown:

Looking at one big block of text is actually depressing. If you break it up into smaller easily digestible paragraphs, it will be more inviting and easier to read.

hahahaha Yeah its a handful, I'll be editing it now so its easier on the eyes.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
2,113
Location
Canada
hahahaha Yeah its a handful, I'll be editing it now so its easier on the eyes.
LOL! Okay, now I've read it, thanks. No you're definitely not out of line on this one. Looks like these Nikon people you've talked to is giving you the runaround. I've never heard of denying a "partial service" before either. It sounds really fishy.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
1,416
Location
Sacramento
I would write a letter and mail it to the CEO
Hideo Fukuchi
1300 Walt Whitman Road
Melville, NY 11747-3064, U.S.A.
+1

Since you received an email with the estimate of $432.50 to fix the meter and then they sent you an email for the same exact amount for a fix that wasn't needed, you should be able to forward both emails as evidence to the Nikon CEO as well as the State Attorney General if necessary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
9,532
Location
Pittsburgh, Pa.
+1

Since you received an email with the estimate of $432.50 to fix the meter and then they sent you an email for the same exact amount for a fix that wasn't needed, you should be able to forward both emails as evidence to the Nikon CEO as well as the State Attorney General if necessary.

Yes, keep the letter short and to the point, maybe 1/4 of a page.
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
623
Location
San Diego, CA
Let me be the voice of dissent over here. Nikon warranties (and consequentially service advisories) apply only to the original buyer. Yes, this is a scam that too many manufacturers engage in, but it is legal and we know about it upfront. So technically, Nikon is not obligated to cover this free of charge.

I had a similar situation with a used D200 I purchased here. Asked the seller whether he had experienced banding and was told not. Received the camera and within a day saw banding. Contacted Nikon and they stated that they will cover this free of charge, but only if I am the original buyer and can provide the warranty paperwork.

As to the second part of the message, it is suspicious that the cost of a bent CF pin is that high. On the other hand I would be shocked if they were engaging in such a transparent scam. They may be inept in the marketing department, but they are not stupid.
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
146
Location
Bay Area, CA
I would write a letter and mail it to the CEO
Hideo Fukuchi
1300 Walt Whitman Road
Melville, NY 11747-3064, U.S.A.

Thank you, I will definitely be sending him a letter. I don't want to take things further than they need to go, but I am willing to go that extra step. I've been thinking I should send out a letter regardless so that Nikon USA can know of my experience with their staff.

LOL! Okay, now I've read it, thanks. No you're definitely not out of line on this one. Looks like these Nikon people you've talked to is giving you the runaround. I've never heard of denying a "partial service" before either. It sounds really fishy.

Thanks! Yeah I'm feeling the same way. Like they're not too excited about eating the $432.50 bill for a Nikon error so they "found" something they could charge me for.

Maybe its time to let them know that you don't want to have to have your lawyer involved...

The next time I call in and I start to get the feeling they're giving me the runaround or haven't decided to complete the service advisory, I will definitely be speaking with a supervisor of some sort. And mentioning my lawyer will be getting involved, notifying the BBB and the head of Nikon along with various other high-seniority Nikon staff should get them to understand I am very serious about what is going on.

+1

Since you received an email with the estimate of $432.50 to fix the meter and then they sent you an email for the same exact amount for a fix that wasn't needed, you should be able to forward both emails as evidence to the Nikon CEO as well as the State Attorney General if necessary.

Thank you, will make sure to include that. I also have the estimate showing that at one time they acknowledged the service advisory and weren't going to charge me for the repair. That way no one can say "The $432.50 is to fix both issues not just the bent pin in the CF card reader".

Very critical!

Attach the 2 emails. Good luck!

Thank you, didn't think of it before but glad you and 73Z1 mentioned it. Should really be beneficial if things need to go that far.


Let me be the voice of dissent over here. Nikon warranties (and consequentially service advisories) apply only to the original buyer. Yes, this is a scam that too many manufacturers engage in, but it is legal and we know about it upfront. So technically, Nikon is not obligated to cover this free of charge.

I had a similar situation with a used D200 I purchased here. Asked the seller whether he had experienced banding and was told not. Received the camera and within a day saw banding. Contacted Nikon and they stated that they will cover this free of charge, but only if I am the original buyer and can provide the warranty paperwork.

As to the second part of the message, it is suspicious that the cost of a bent CF pin is that high. On the other hand I would be shocked if they were engaging in such a transparent scam. They may be inept in the marketing department, but they are not stupid.

The not having a receipt was one thing I was worried about. The original owner believed he still had it just had to look for it, I haven't heard from him since. So far, a mention of a receipt hasn't come up. But I believe since this is a form of a "recall" its not required anymore and that Nikon wants to make things right with their customers that have spent good money on their product. Atleast thats what I believe, and I appreciate them for doing that.

WOW!!!!!

all i can say is WOW!!!

keep us posted on what happens, this just looks very shady to me.

hahaha Thanks! Yeah I'm amazed everytime I think about it too. I send my camera thinking things will go nice and smooth, might take a little longer for the repair since its an older camera so maybe all the parts aren't readily available. But I never in my wildest dreams thought this would be going on. Will definitely be keeping you guys posted.

Thank you to everyone who has passed on advice, information, and encouragement. It really is appreciated. I am hoping things will turn around in a positive manner so that this doesn't get dragged along. I don't want to have to complain to everyone at Nikon and beyond to get the service I should have received right off the bat. But if it comes to that I will and I will definitely be notifying the top people of Nikon so that they can see what atleast one of their customers has gone through.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,184
Location
Glens Falls, NY
The not having a receipt was one thing I was worried about. The original owner believed he still had it just had to look for it, I haven't heard from him since. So far, a mention of a receipt hasn't come up. But I believe since this is a form of a "recall" its not required anymore and that Nikon wants to make things right with their customers that have spent good money on their product. Atleast thats what I believe, and I appreciate them for doing that.

I agree with you 100% in your characterization of this as a "recall". FWIW, I just brought my car in on a minor recall this week. Although I'm the original owner, the instructions asked me to forward the name/address of the buyer if I had sold the car, so that the manufacturer could then contact them. ...And I certainly didn't need to bring my receipt for the purchase of the car.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
1,790
Location
Baltimore
From my own experience and what I have read from others Nikon Service is horrible. Obviously this was a defective product they sold, they put out an advisory saying they would fix the problem. A good customer service would have been yes sir sorry for the mistake on the charge we will fix it right away.

But not Nikon. And now they find a bent CF card pin that is going to cost $400+ to fix? Sounds beyond suspicious to me.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
550
Location
Austin, TX
FWIW, I just brought my car in on a minor recall this week. Although I'm the original owner, the instructions asked me to forward the name/address of the buyer if I had sold the car, so that the manufacturer could then contact them. ...And I certainly didn't need to bring my receipt for the purchase of the car.

FYI - sounds like that is more of a liability issue when car manufacturers do that (switches causing fires, brake pedals not working etc) - if they are keen to track down the current owner and fix it, either the NTSB has ordered them to do so, or their bean counters have concluded the cost of the recall is lower than the potential cost of the liability... If so, a service advisory on a camera isn't really comparable, since it is far less likely to cause a crash/injury/loss of life.
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
1,304
Location
Kitchener, ON
I agree with you 100% in your characterization of this as a "recall". FWIW, I just brought my car in on a minor recall this week. Although I'm the original owner, the instructions asked me to forward the name/address of the buyer if I had sold the car, so that the manufacturer could then contact them. ...And I certainly didn't need to bring my receipt for the purchase of the car.

Making warranties transferrable on cars helps protect the resale value. That's important to help with new sales, but also helps make lease programs competitive (biggest factor in leasing cost is the resale value at the end). Probably the biggest prospect base for new car purchases is someone who just bought one or two years ago. Having a transferable warranty allows them to provide a measure of security to the people who buy their cars, so the value is higher. That allows a person to flip cars quicker. In other words, a transferable new car warranty is a marketing decision intended to help sell new cars.

The photography market for new cameras and lenses isn't as dependent on resale value. Or, I should say, the resale value isn't as dependent on there being a transferable warranty. For that reason, at this point, Nikon hasn't felt the need to have that as a feature in their warranty.

Not defending them, though. I'm just laying out the reason why cars are different than cameras.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,476
Location
Lompoc, CA
This is Nikon in El Segundo right? I agree with everyone else: they are out of line, not you. Let us know what happens. FWIW my only experience with them (with a D2Hs) was very positive, but that was a few years ago.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom