Ebay problems

I've sold a high end camera lens for my dad recently on ebay. This lens worked perfectly well, in fact my dad has exhibited some pictures he took using that very lens. Anyway about 18 days after a successful sale on which I was left feedback that said "well packaged, as described" etc. I've just received an email from the chap complaining that picture quality isn't very good. He says he's taken it into a shop and the bloke has found some fungus and dust (not that uncommon) in the lens. He is now saying that it was recieved in a condition not as descriped and wants a full refund!! My dad and me looked at the lens for dust as we knew this can be a common problem and we couldn't see any when we sent it.

Now my problem is all the feedback has been done, positive by both parties and he's now bringing this up over 2 weeks after the event. Does anyone have any experience or suggestions with this sort of thing?

Thing is myself and my dad examined the lens very carefully and found no faults with it at all. My dad has used this lens alot and displayed pictures in art exibition that used this particular lens. If there was anything wrong I'd have listed it in the decription. I'm very honest on ebay as I've been done before when buying stuff myself and found it to be "not as decribed" when I receive it. The problem here is, is this guy has has it for nearly 3 weeks and this is the first time he's contacted me about it since saying on the feedback and a email afterwards that he was happy with it and it was AS DESCRIBED.

I'm thinking of ignoring it for a few days and see what he does as I honestly believe either he has buyer remorse or it is infact him that has damaged the lens. Alot can happen in 2-3 weeks after all. I would never knowingly sell any faulty / damaged goods due to some of my past experiences.

I think my dad kept a note of it.

Well thats it, he's gone and opened a case against me now. What a t*** It makes me so angry. I know ebay will side with him even though there is no proof from him, photographic or from an independant!!! I've now responded to him putting forth my side but I don't think it'll do any good. Great stuff just before chrimbo!

This now begs the question of what to do with the lense when ebay side with this dick and he returns it and I have to give a refund. Where is a good place to sell second hand photography equipment?

Jim

Thanks for that. To add to my woes I've had the bill through from ebay for using them........£41.00!!!!!! Thats on top of the £27 odd that paypal took. Safe to say I've now learnt my lesson and I'll not be selling one more item through those robbing b*****ds. This is putting a real crimp on my run up to xmas.

I forwarded that link on to my dad but to be honest I've not really had chance to look at it, hopefully find time today. I didn't realise DPreview had a for sale section either. I'll have a gander as well. Thanks again for your help and suggestions in all of this .

Now agreed to give a full refund on reciept of the lense being returned and inspected by my dad, I just can't be arsed with it all now. I know which ebay will fall. Atleast if he returns it soon and I can refund the money before the 26th I don't have to pay ebays mental fees.

Sorry to hear about this, Stu.
http://www.canon-fodder-forums.com/forums/
could be a useful way to sell it.
It is a UK forum.

Beware of entrance to a quarrel, but being in,
Bear't that the opposed may beware of thee.

Hamlet. Act 1, scene 3.

...Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice;
Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgment.
Hamlet Act 1, Scene 3.

Well this has been fascinating! I’ve been following this thread since the start and am just amazed at what I’m reading and even more so at the stupidity of the comments and the lies that have been told.

How about Stu you actually tell us what the buyer said? Actually why don’t I tell you what the buyer actually said: I can do that because I am he.

Yes, the lens did arrive safely, well packaged etc. Once again thanks for that. My first comments were that it appeared to be in good condition although it being a very dull day I didn’t get a chance to check it properly.

My test shots of the moon appeared at first sight to be OK but on closer inspection were not as sharp as they could be.

I carried on testing it in the following week or two but could never get anything like the results that I expected.

Finally, I happened to be in a very reputable shop (Stu knows who they are) looking at various things, including other lenses, when I asked the assistant to have a look at it: he immediately told me that it had fungus on the internal elements.

That evening I wrote the following to Stu:

Dear subseastu,

I've been having some trouble getting sharp pictures from the lens that I bought from you and recently took it into a shop where it was examined. The shop assistant took a look at it and said that it had fungus on the internal elements.

This consisted of one spot visible from the object end of the lens and an overall hue visible from the rear.

Obviously this is why I have been unable to get good results from the lens.

I hate having to do this because you have been very easy to deal with but I would like to return it to you for a full refund please. My grounds for this are that it wasn't as described. There is also a certain amount of dust (to be expected) inside the barrel which wasn't mentioned in your description.

Thanks,

Now, I can understand Stu being a bit disappointed about this but I broke it to him as gently and politely as I could. And folks, bear in mind that I have just forked out over eight hundred pounds for this item. I was a bit disappointed too – and eight hundred and twenty five quid down on the deal.

Just to be clear, the dust is not an issue, the fungus is. It eats the coatings and cannot be cleaned off. It ruins the lens. However, I think the dust should have been mentioned in the description (though I did not make an issue of it).

Having written the above and sent it I waited a week (whilst following everything on this forum). Nothing happened so I opened a case. Wouldn’t anyone?

Reading the posts here has been a real eye opener. I have been accused of all sorts of skulduggery and criminality. Kuya – sounds like a scam does it? Quick to judge aren’t you? (With you on Hitchens though).

Oss – Calling me a pratt (sic) are you? What do you know. I mean what the f*** do you know about this, eh? Nothing. What Stu has posted here. One side of the story. And you haven’t even read that properly. Hint: it is the mould that is the issue. You think I’m a prat – I think you’re an idiot.

I know you’re trying to help your mate find a place to sell the lens, fine but don’t get carried away and start dissing me when you don’t know me or the full story.

By the way I assure I do know how to use lenses, cameras too. The clients at my studio seem to think so anyway.

Stu.

You’ve been telling me that it’s your lens and that you’ve exhibited with it. In all your communication with me you have never mentioned that it was in fact your father’s lens. OK not the biggest porky the world has ever known but you have basically been lying to me. It’s not your lens; it’s your Dad’s. You haven’t exhibited with it; your Dad has. You haven’t “looked after it”; your Dad has.

For anyone who doubts that I’ve been perfectly civil and reasonable with Stu. Here is my last email written after Stu had asked for evidence:

Dear Subseastu,

Thanks for your reply. Firstly, please understand that I am not accusing you of dishonesty, you may or may not have known about the condition of the lens but that is beside the point.

The point is that the lens has fungus on it. I have attached a photo of it. It takes the form of a light spot within a darker spot in the centre of the first image. It is identifiable as fungus because it catches the light at certain angles, dust doesn’t do this. There are other photos.

The shop was XXXXXXX, the man in the shop was called XXX, he didn’t give me written report but would probably remember me if you asked him. I was in there with a friend for a good hour or so looking at lenses and cases on Tuesday 13th December.

As far as I’m concerned I have no problem with asking him about the lens. Needless to say XXX is not someone that I had met before nor have since.

XXXXXXX are about as reputable a retailer as you can get and are indeed Canon authorised dealers.

(their website)

I understand your disappointment at this and, as I say, do regret having to do this.

Regards,
XXX

And what have I got from you for this? You have called me a t***, you’ve accused me of fraud and you’ve called me a dick. Well Stu, thank you very f****** much.

And what have you got for it?

You’ve got this post because you’re so stupid that you’ve used the same name on ebay and in this forum (and everywhere else). Simply Googling your name took me straight here. Schoolboy error if I may say so. Basic stuff.

I wouldn’t have bothered about the postage (which you now have to pay) had it not been for your insults here. And I would have sent it back to in time to avoid your fees had your attitude been better. You told me that I could have the money by Christmas if I sent it straight away – but I knew that you were just trying to avoid the charges...so I waited. Well done.

I will also see to it that the serial number of this lens is posted to these sites:

http://www.canon-fodder-forums.com/forums/
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1056
http://www.merchantcitycameras.com/
http://www.fredmiranda.com/

and anywhere else that you might try to palm off this piece of junk.

OK, Here are the lens details:

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM

S/N 424760

Anyone who wants the eBay details can PM me.


Finally, a wise man once gave me this advice:

Before you criticise someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
That way you'll be a mile away when you do and you'll have their shoes!