[Rondec]

As poorly done as this lawsuit seems to be, with guessing and very little research, I'm still on the side of consumers versus corporations. I have emailed both contact addresses listed in the filing and advised them the defendants should be Ricoh Imaging USA, not Ricoh USA, to at least get the ball rolling correctly.

The appropriate thing for Ricoh to have done was to admit that the aperture block was an issue and have extended warranty coverage for it, say, up to five years out. The cost of the fix to them should be something like 40 or 50 dollars between parts and labor.

It sounds as though they have done that in some isolated situations.

That said, I really don't want Ricoh to feel that they should abandon the SLR market due to this sort of thing. It isn't as though their SLRs are lucrative. They are making money on GR and Theta cameras and using those to feed the K mount line, but it does feel a bit tenuous at times.

[ThorSanchez]

The cost of the fix to them should be something like 40 or 50 dollars between parts and labor.

My guess is that the cost would be at least two or three times that. Even if the tech is really good, it's going to take him a half hour or so to fix it and do all the paperwork. He's going to have to do some kind of pre-check and post-check to verify the camera was working (except for aperture) before, and that the fix worked. So, something like an hour. The loaded labor rate of the tech is going to be at least $40-50 an hour. Then you pay a bit for the guy doing shipping and receiving and packaging. Say, half an hour. That's another $20-30. The part costs what... $10? Plus $5-10 for random, ancillary hardware like a screw or some wire that breaks, boxes and tape. Then a bit to cover overhead and management, say 8%, so another $8. And then you probably add another 10-20% on top for the inevitability of the fix not working, the camera not working, other random things going wrong. Oh, and does Ricoh pay for the shipping? That's probably another $20-30 round trip with insurance.

I'd say it's more like $150 per fix. And I didn't even account for the fact that Precision is the only US repair facility for Pentax, and they're a for-profit business and would probably build in some kind of fee to Ricoh on top of the actual costs.

[Rondec]

My guess is that the cost would be at least two or three times that. Even if the tech is really good, it's going to take him a half hour or so to fix it and do all the paperwork. He's going to have to do some kind of pre-check and post-check to verify the camera was working (except for aperture) before, and that the fix worked. So, something like an hour. The loaded labor rate of the tech is going to be at least $40-50 an hour. Then you pay a bit for the guy doing shipping and receiving and packaging. Say, half an hour. That's another $20-30. The part costs what... $10? Plus $5-10 for random, ancillary hardware like a screw or some wire that breaks, boxes and tape. Then a bit to cover overhead and management, say 8%, so another $8. And then you probably add another 10-20% on top for the inevitability of the fix not working, the camera not working, other random things going wrong. Oh, and does Ricoh pay for the shipping? That's probably another $20-30 round trip with insurance.

I'd say it's more like $150 per fix. And I didn't even account for the fact that Precision is the only US repair facility for Pentax, and they're a for-profit business and would probably build in some kind of fee to Ricoh on top of the actual costs.

I got my daughter's K-S1 fixed (not at precision) for 100 dollars, including shipping back to me. I think you are overestimating what their contract with Precision is for. But both of us are shooting from the hip with regard to estimation of the prices. Considering that not all of the cameras failed and there were only a few thousand of them sold, I don't know how much of a deal it would have been to extend the warranty for this specific part an extra three or four years.

[Parallax]

In reality, repairs ultimately cost the manufacturers close to nothing. The consumers of future releases foot the bill through increased prices.
If the next model whatchamacallit is scheduled to wholesale for $100.00 with 5 million units produced but the company lost 5 million dollars in unexpected repairs on the current model whatchamacallit the new one will wholesale for $101.00 instead of $100.00.
They may lose some sales on the new one from jumping ship, but there's also the possibility of that being offset by the other guy's customers jumping to them due to similar issues elsewhere.
The basic premise here is very simple. Ultimately it's the end consumers (known also as the de facto QC department) who take the loss.

[monochrome]

The only reason to file a Class Action lawsuit in the United States to to arrive at a significantly large “Settlement” on which the attorneys can asses a 40% contingent fee. The objective is to cause the court through a jury trial to arrive at a settlement of multiple tens of millions of dollars, each ten of which yields the attorney $4,000,000. The threat of such a judgement will often cause a company to settle before trial for a sum the justifies the attorney’s time.

The ultimate parties to the Class Action - the consumers - are a secondary consideration.

[reh321]

I got my daughter's K-S1 fixed (not at precision) for 100 dollars, including shipping back to me. I think you are overestimating what their contract with Precision is for. But both of us are shooting from the hip with regard to estimation of the prices. Considering that not all of the cameras failed and there were only a few thousand of them sold, I don't know how much of a deal it would have been to extend the warranty for this specific part an extra three or four years.

If you got the "California fix", you should be aware that some of them are reported as failing later also.
If Precision fixes it, they will just use another 'green' solenoid which may fail again also.
I believe the only 'fix' for this problem would be for Pentax to go to the K-3/KP stepper-motor at this time.

[Rondec]

The only reason to file a Class Action lawsuit in the United States to to arrive at a significantly large “Settlement” on which the attorneys can asses a 40% contingent fee. The objective is to cause the court through a jury trial to arrive at a settlement of multiple tens of millions of dollars, each ten of which yields the attorney $4,000,000. The threat of such a judgement will often cause a company to settle before trial for a sum the justifies the attorney’s time.

The ultimate parties to the Class Action - the consumers - are a secondary consideration.

I always thought that big awards usually came because of things like loss of life and pain and suffering -- none of which should really be at issue here, although of course the lawyers will try to make it sound as terrible as possible.

If you got the "California fix", you should be aware that some of them are reported as failing later also.
If Precision fixes it, they will just use another 'green' solenoid which may fail again also.
I believe the only 'fix' for this problem would be for Pentax to go to the K-3/KP stepper-motor at this time.

I did do the California fix and it has held up for about 4 years so far. I paid 240 for my daughter's K-S1 and I wouldn't sink more money into it at this point.

[monochrome]

I always thought that big awards usually came because of things like loss of life and pain and suffering -- none of which should really be at issue here, although of course the lawyers will try to make it sound as terrible as possible.

Big is relative. 12,000 cameras x $600 + punitive damages = $7,200,000 + punitive damages, which is surely a big number to Ricoh Imaging USA.

The real risk is you don’t know what a jury is going to do; and you don’t know the litigation cost for Ricoh to defend itself. Often companies quietly settle for a decent sum just to manage the risk*. Unfortunately a “decent sum” could be enough to cause Ricoh to withdraw from the US market altogether.



* which in a groundless case like this is surely the goal of the plaintiff attorney.

[Larrymc]

As poorly done as this lawsuit seems to be, with guessing and very little research, I'm still on the side of consumers versus corporations. I have emailed both contact addresses listed in the filing and advised them the defendants should be Ricoh Imaging USA, not Ricoh USA, to at least get the ball rolling correctly.

Ian, I certainly hope your attempt at helpfulness doesn't contribute to Ricoh/Pentax withdrawing sales of Pentax cameras from the North American market as a result of excessive awards. Where is your dog in this fight? I'm not sure if you are aware of the litigiousness of United States society right now. For example when my wife I and sit down to dinner with the television on we are inundated with commercials for attorneys touting how much money they might win for their clients, its getting sickening to me. One can't watch 15 minutes of television without hearing about the "Largest Personal Injury Law Firm in the US". Quite a boon for the local television stations but is total pollution of the airways in my opinion.

This woman who is the original Plantiff in this action probably stands to get very little in compensation for her troubles while the attorney stands to reap a nice tidy sum, Hmmmmm.

[Larrymc]

Let a judge see if there's merit, I reckon. We take it as read that Ricoh don't have much money to spend on legal stoushes, well the customers have even less.

Not quite most of the cases like this in the U.S. are Pro Bono where the attorney collects if the case is won, so in essence the "customers" are not really out a bundle. Some cases like this have merit, but some don't.

[Rondec]

Big is relative. 12,000 cameras x $600 + punitive damages = $7,200,000 + punitive damages, which is surely a big number to Ricoh Imaging USA.

The real risk is you don’t know what a jury is going to do; and you don’t know the litigation cost for Ricoh to defend itself. Often companies quietly settle for a decent sum just to manage the risk*. Unfortunately a “decent sum” could be enough to cause Ricoh to withdraw from the US market altogether.



* which in a groundless case like this is surely the goal of the plaintiff attorney.

I guess it depends on what data really shows and how many people would actually sign up for the lawsuit. My impression, based on this thread, is that ThorSanchez is on board and most of the rest of us (including me), even if we have had aperture block failure, probably aren't interested in it. But I don't really know how these sorts of suits work.

I see them all of the time for medications. "Did you take 'x' medication and get 'y' side effect? Call this number..." I can't say I like it or that I think it adds a lot to our society, but I suppose the lawyers get enough out of it to continue fishing for similar cases.

[Parallax]

most of the cases like this in the U.S. are Pro Bono where the attorney collects if the case is won,

That would be a contingent fee agreement. Pro bono is shorthand for pro bono publico ‘for the public good’; If a lawyer takes a case pro bono there is no charge for the representation. I'ts something lawyers do on occasion, usually for indigent persons but sometimes as a favor to someone.

[stevebrot]

The only reason to file a Class Action lawsuit in the United States to to arrive at a significantly large “Settlement” on which the attorneys can asses a 40% contingent fee. The objective is to cause the court through a jury trial to arrive at a settlement of multiple tens of millions of dollars, each ten of which yields the attorney $4,000,000. The threat of such a judgement will often cause a company to settle before trial for a sum the justifies the attorney’s time.

The ultimate parties to the Class Action - the consumers - are a secondary consideration.

Well put.

I have often suggested that aggrieved members here pursue their complaint in small claims court. Despite the difficulty in making a case (actually the same as a class action), the chance of realizing a reasonable reward is more likely due to the accused not showing. That said, one should expect a reward that reflects depreciation (probably straight line) on the effected camera and no reward for lenses and accessories (same as for class action).


Steve

[stevebrot]

If Precision fixes it, they will just use another 'green' solenoid which may fail again also.

My close friend had hers repaired by Precision and the fix has stayed good since February 2015 with no issues despite infrequent usage. Perhaps it was because they replaced both mirror and aperture control components?


Steve

[swanlefitte]

Did the k50 cause mesothelioma because it used a herniated mesh? 2 of the most advertised ongoing tv comercials in the US. If you have a tv in the US, i bet every citizen from age 7 up knows what I am talking about.