Need Ethical Advice Regarding Lens Purchase

DeadJohn · 08-26-2013, 07:07 PM

^ "Mislead" is a loaded word that suggests intent. I don't think it was intentional from what the OP said. If the seller tried to rip him off and didn't agree to pay for repairs the situation would be different. The seller was wrong in describing the lens condition, but accidentally missing haze or ignorance of how to check is not the same as being intentionally dishonest.

Keeping money for your time is trying to rationalize keeping the money.

Unregistered User · 08-26-2013, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by vagabond79

I bought a lens on ebay for $300ish. The seller described the condition of the lens as good with clean optics. The lens arrives and there is some sort of haze inside the elements. I got an estimate of $150 for repair which the seller refunded to me promptly through the ebay resolution system. She was very nice and I really don't think there was ever any sort of deception intended on her part.

So I send the lens off for repair and after looking at it, the technician quotes me for $60.

My question is this:

Should I paypal her $90 so we would essentially be even for the repair?

What if the estimate had come back at $200? I would have been out of luck. Could a case be made that I should send back something like $70 to compensate me for the risk involved?

Or should I not send back anything as it could have gone either way?

Do some research on the seller. Does her character suggest that she deserves this noble gesture on your part or not? Why does she state that the lens has clean optics when it doesn't? The majority of the sellers deserve no sympathy. Another option is to give 45 USD to charity and keep the remaining 45 USD yourself.

les3547 · 08-26-2013, 08:41 PM

Here's how I'd decide using a hypothetical situation.

Say that lens were advertised with the haze in the description, what would you have been willing to pay for it knowing you'd have to go to the trouble of having it repaired or live with the haze? It seems she likely would have had to lower the price considerably to sell it. If you feel you'd have paid more than $150 for a hazy lens, then you can decide if you want to refund some money because repairs didn't cost as much as estimated.

fuent104 · 08-26-2013, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by DeadJohn

Keeping money for your time is trying to rationalize keeping the money.

I don't think so. Here's why:

Originally posted by les3547

Say that lens were advertised with the haze in the description, what would you have been willing to pay for it knowing you'd have to go to the trouble of having it repaired or live with the haze? It seems she likely would have had to lower the price considerably to sell it

I'm not sure how a person can look at a lens and miss haze on it. Especially if one is inspecting it with the purpose of selling it. Stating that it has "clean optics" implies that it has been examined. Essentially, she had the buyer agree to a price for a product that was not in the condition that she described. Next the buyer put in the time and effort to have it restored to the condition the seller described. The buyer did the seller's work for her, and I think that is worth compensation.

Here's a question: what kind of feedback would you give the seller? At best, I would give her neutral feedback. I don't consider buying a lens based on a faulty description, then having to spend my time to have it repaired, to be a positive experience. But that's just me.

I should add that I live in Los Angeles, a city where one has consistently make efforts NOT to be ripped off.

Louicio · 08-26-2013, 10:54 PM

The "perfect condition" sale and then refund can be a way to get a buyer for an item which may not sell or sell for a much lower price in less than perfect condition and then give a partial refund, is a practice on eBay. The seller did write clean optics, and it doesn't take a photographer to see a haze and think a camera lens shouldn't look like this. Take a good hard look at how bad it is, get it fixed and then decide what and if you should return any money to the seller.

Rupert · 08-27-2013, 05:51 AM - **1 Like**

You come to a stop sign and can see in all directions that it appears clear, so you just cruise on through it. Why waste brake pads when the coast is clear?

You give the clerk at the Convenience Store a $10 dollar bill and she gives you change for a $20. Heck, why say anything, next time the reverse might happen, so now you are covered.

The old man gets up from his booth at Mc Donalds and limps out the door, but his wallet is still on the bench at his table. Lucky day! Heck, he is old and probably loaded with cash anyhow, but you can sure use the extra bucks.

Someone sells you a lens and............

If this is you, and if you ever sell anything in the Marketplace, you should be required to note that you have the equivalent morals of Otis the Squirrel, and we all know not to ever buy anything from Otis.

Regards!

debmalya · 08-27-2013, 02:33 PM

This is an interesting thread. Every response here is based on some logic or argument. But there is one response that was just not words but in an example: your repair guy. He quoted you $150 and based on that quote you asked for and received your refund. But after looking at it he only charges you $60. This guy set an example. If he would have charged you the $150 I guess you would have paid him that much, but he didn't. I think what he did as a professional and as a person is honorable and dignified and sets a very good example that reckons us to follow. But which ever way you decide will still be perfectly legal and I am no preacher.

les3547 · 08-27-2013, 07:10 PM

Originally posted by debmalya

This is an interesting thread. Every response here is based on some logic or argument.

Good point, and to be accurate, if it were me in the situation, I'd go by how things felt. If I felt the seller made an honest mistake, and if I felt seller's refund was too much, then I'd share the savings. I really love logic, but when it comes to ethics and such I trust how things feel to me far more than logic.

**arnold** · 08-27-2013, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by les3547

I really love logic, but when it comes to ethics and such I trust how things feel to me far more than logic.

Not good policy. Emotions are not tools of cognition, and unchecked are the cause of much grief. To be logical is to obey the laws of nature - and that is always good policy. Logic says that if you want to be treated well, that it would be contradictory not to extend that to those you expect to treat you well. I would send the money back with due regard to expenses - quite logical..

les3547 · 08-27-2013, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by arnold

Not good policy. Emotions are not tools of cognition, and unchecked are the cause of much grief. To be logical is to obey the laws of nature - and that is always good policy. Logic says that if you want to be treated well, that it would be contradictory not to extend that to those you expect to treat you well. I would send the money back with due regard to expenses - quite logical..

I understand that most people equate the word "feeling" with emotion, but it isn't what I meant. Emotion involves not just feeling, but conditionng and body chemistry. I am referring to something deeper, purer, before how conditioning and chemistry affect judgement. For example, when someone is telling me one thing, but the way they "feel" to me doesn't jive with their words . . . I trust how they feel to me no matter how logical the construction of their words are. I've had such good success with that I've extended it to other areas of my life I've learn to similarly "feel."

vagabond79 · 08-28-2013, 05:57 AM

Thanks to everyone for your thoughts. I'd like to add a few things...

A picture of the haze with an LED light shining through the optics: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5465/9446913895_1971d79b80_b.jpg

In the description of the lens, the seller admitted that she is not a "professional photographer" and only used this lens to photograph flowers for her business. I got the impression that she might not be very savvy when it comes to lenses. Like I said before, I do not feel like she intentionally misled me.

In the Q&A section someone asked her the following:

Q: Hello The lens has no fungus, scratches or dents? Is fully functional? Thank you for answer.
A: Thank you for the inquiry. The lens has no scratches, fungus or dents. It has been in my closet for a few years; I no longer have the Pentax camera that it went with so I cannot test functionality now. But the last time I used it, it was fine and to the best of my knowledge it remains so.

vagabond79 · 08-28-2013, 05:59 AM

Originally posted by les3547

Here's how I'd decide using a hypothetical situation.

Say that lens were advertised with the haze in the description, what would you have been willing to pay for it knowing you'd have to go to the trouble of having it repaired or live with the haze? It seems she likely would have had to lower the price considerably to sell it. If you feel you'd have paid more than $150 for a hazy lens, then you can decide if you want to refund some money because repairs didn't cost as much as estimated.

Shortly after I got the lens, I found an ebay auction for the same model lens advertised with haze. It sold for approximately $160.

08-26-2013, 07:12 PM	#17
Unregistered User Guest	Originally posted by vagabond79 I bought a lens on ebay for $300ish. The seller described the condition of the lens as good with clean optics. The lens arrives and there is some sort of haze inside the elements. I got an estimate of $150 for repair which the seller refunded to me promptly through the ebay resolution system. She was very nice and I really don't think there was ever any sort of deception intended on her part. So I send the lens off for repair and after looking at it, the technician quotes me for $60. My question is this: Should I paypal her $90 so we would essentially be even for the repair? What if the estimate had come back at $200? I would have been out of luck. Could a case be made that I should send back something like $70 to compensate me for the risk involved? Or should I not send back anything as it could have gone either way? Do some research on the seller. Does her character suggest that she deserves this noble gesture on your part or not? Why does she state that the lens has clean optics when it doesn't? The majority of the sellers deserve no sympathy. Another option is to give 45 USD to charity and keep the remaining 45 USD yourself. Last edited by Unregistered User; 08-26-2013 at 07:22 PM.

08-27-2013, 07:48 PM	#25
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Originally posted by arnold Not good policy. Emotions are not tools of cognition, and unchecked are the cause of much grief. To be logical is to obey the laws of nature - and that is always good policy. Logic says that if you want to be treated well, that it would be contradictory not to extend that to those you expect to treat you well. I would send the money back with due regard to expenses - quite logical.. I understand that most people equate the word "feeling" with emotion, but it isn't what I meant. Emotion involves not just feeling, but conditionng and body chemistry. I am referring to something deeper, purer, before how conditioning and chemistry affect judgement. For example, when someone is telling me one thing, but the way they "feel" to me doesn't jive with their words . . . I trust how they feel to me no matter how logical the construction of their words are. I've had such good success with that I've extended it to other areas of my life I've learn to similarly "feel." Last edited by les3547; 08-28-2013 at 07:15 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lens purchase decision, need advice...	jsm0372	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	02-11-2013 03:20 PM
Need some advice on an eBay purchase	miltona580	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	09-26-2011 01:28 PM
I need advice on Macro lens purchase.	mrjamesabels	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	11	09-06-2010 07:15 PM
HELP! In need of some advice on lens purchase	Amy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	03-13-2008 09:17 AM
Need advice on lens purchase	George Lama	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-29-2007 09:54 PM

08-26-2013, 07:07 PM	#16
DeadJohn Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: New York Posts: 4,834	^ "Mislead" is a loaded word that suggests intent. I don't think it was intentional from what the OP said. If the seller tried to rip him off and didn't agree to pay for repairs the situation would be different. The seller was wrong in describing the lens condition, but accidentally missing haze or ignorance of how to check is not the same as being intentionally dishonest. Keeping money for your time is trying to rationalize keeping the money.

08-26-2013, 08:41 PM	#18
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Here's how I'd decide using a hypothetical situation. Say that lens were advertised with the haze in the description, what would you have been willing to pay for it knowing you'd have to go to the trouble of having it repaired or live with the haze? It seems she likely would have had to lower the price considerably to sell it. If you feel you'd have paid more than $150 for a hazy lens, then you can decide if you want to refund some money because repairs didn't cost as much as estimated.

08-26-2013, 09:02 PM	#19
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	Originally posted by DeadJohn Keeping money for your time is trying to rationalize keeping the money. I don't think so. Here's why: Originally posted by les3547 Say that lens were advertised with the haze in the description, what would you have been willing to pay for it knowing you'd have to go to the trouble of having it repaired or live with the haze? It seems she likely would have had to lower the price considerably to sell it I'm not sure how a person can look at a lens and miss haze on it. Especially if one is inspecting it with the purpose of selling it. Stating that it has "clean optics" implies that it has been examined. Essentially, she had the buyer agree to a price for a product that was not in the condition that she described. Next the buyer put in the time and effort to have it restored to the condition the seller described. The buyer did the seller's work for her, and I think that is worth compensation. Here's a question: what kind of feedback would you give the seller? At best, I would give her neutral feedback. I don't consider buying a lens based on a faulty description, then having to spend my time to have it repaired, to be a positive experience. But that's just me. I should add that I live in Los Angeles, a city where one has consistently make efforts NOT to be ripped off.

08-26-2013, 10:54 PM	#20
Louicio Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Melbourne Posts: 432	The "perfect condition" sale and then refund can be a way to get a buyer for an item which may not sell or sell for a much lower price in less than perfect condition and then give a partial refund, is a practice on eBay. The seller did write clean optics, and it doesn't take a photographer to see a haze and think a camera lens shouldn't look like this. Take a good hard look at how bad it is, get it fixed and then decide what and if you should return any money to the seller.

08-27-2013, 05:51 AM - 1 Like	#21
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	You come to a stop sign and can see in all directions that it appears clear, so you just cruise on through it. Why waste brake pads when the coast is clear? You give the clerk at the Convenience Store a $10 dollar bill and she gives you change for a $20. Heck, why say anything, next time the reverse might happen, so now you are covered. The old man gets up from his booth at Mc Donalds and limps out the door, but his wallet is still on the bench at his table. Lucky day! Heck, he is old and probably loaded with cash anyhow, but you can sure use the extra bucks. Someone sells you a lens and............ If this is you, and if you ever sell anything in the Marketplace, you should be required to note that you have the equivalent morals of Otis the Squirrel, and we all know not to ever buy anything from Otis. Regards!

08-27-2013, 02:33 PM	#22
debmalya Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: NJ USA Photos: Albums Posts: 209	This is an interesting thread. Every response here is based on some logic or argument. But there is one response that was just not words but in an example: your repair guy. He quoted you $150 and based on that quote you asked for and received your refund. But after looking at it he only charges you $60. This guy set an example. If he would have charged you the $150 I guess you would have paid him that much, but he didn't. I think what he did as a professional and as a person is honorable and dignified and sets a very good example that reckons us to follow. But which ever way you decide will still be perfectly legal and I am no preacher.

08-27-2013, 07:10 PM	#23
les3547 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Sebastopol, California Photos: Albums Posts: 2,020	Originally posted by debmalya This is an interesting thread. Every response here is based on some logic or argument. Good point, and to be accurate, if it were me in the situation, I'd go by how things felt. If I felt the seller made an honest mistake, and if I felt seller's refund was too much, then I'd share the savings. I really love logic, but when it comes to ethics and such I trust how things feel to me far more than logic.

08-27-2013, 07:39 PM	#24
arnold Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,295	Originally posted by les3547 I really love logic, but when it comes to ethics and such I trust how things feel to me far more than logic. Not good policy. Emotions are not tools of cognition, and unchecked are the cause of much grief. To be logical is to obey the laws of nature - and that is always good policy. Logic says that if you want to be treated well, that it would be contradictory not to extend that to those you expect to treat you well. I would send the money back with due regard to expenses - quite logical..

08-28-2013, 05:57 AM	#26
vagabond79 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Greensboro, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 147 Original Poster	Thanks to everyone for your thoughts. I'd like to add a few things... A picture of the haze with an LED light shining through the optics: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5465/9446913895_1971d79b80_b.jpg In the description of the lens, the seller admitted that she is not a "professional photographer" and only used this lens to photograph flowers for her business. I got the impression that she might not be very savvy when it comes to lenses. Like I said before, I do not feel like she intentionally misled me. In the Q&A section someone asked her the following: Q: Hello The lens has no fungus, scratches or dents? Is fully functional? Thank you for answer. A: Thank you for the inquiry. The lens has no scratches, fungus or dents. It has been in my closet for a few years; I no longer have the Pentax camera that it went with so I cannot test functionality now. But the last time I used it, it was fine and to the best of my knowledge it remains so.

08-28-2013, 05:59 AM	#27
vagabond79 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Greensboro, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 147 Original Poster	Originally posted by les3547 Here's how I'd decide using a hypothetical situation. Say that lens were advertised with the haze in the description, what would you have been willing to pay for it knowing you'd have to go to the trouble of having it repaired or live with the haze? It seems she likely would have had to lower the price considerably to sell it. If you feel you'd have paid more than $150 for a hazy lens, then you can decide if you want to refund some money because repairs didn't cost as much as estimated. Shortly after I got the lens, I found an ebay auction for the same model lens advertised with haze. It sold for approximately $160.