Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-23-2016, 04:33 AM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 90
Pentax Camera from Japnaese ebay seller

I have found some Japanese camera sellers on ebay. If I buy a new camera from them, is there a warranty? Do you think I can get service here in the US as well? and is there any difference between US sold Pentax and those sold in Japan?

06-23-2016, 05:00 AM   #2
amateur dirt farmer
Loyal Site Supporter
pepperberry farm's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: probably out in a field somewhere...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 41,257
is the price that much better than US retailers?
06-23-2016, 05:34 AM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,381
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
"1. RICOH IMAGING products originally distributed by RICOH IMAGING AMERICAS CORPORATION and RICOH IMAGING CANADA and purchased through our authorized distribution channels, are warranted by RICOH IMAGING AMERICAS CORPORATION and RICOH IMAGING CANADA to the original retail purchaser for a period of one year from date of purchase against defects in material and/or workmanship."
Does this mean I can buy a camera from B&H and send it to the Canadian repairer if problems arise?
06-23-2016, 06:05 AM   #4
Moderator
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 10,510
See this thread

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/322997-okay-buy-...mera-ebay.html

06-23-2016, 07:08 AM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,948
Just to be clear a lot of state and provincial consumer protection laws supersede some of these warranty restrictions. What is important under most warranty law is you have a receipt.

Most consumers give up when a manufacturer says no, but I have seen (used to be part of my job) small claims cases against manufacturers where they gave in and repaired as if a domestic purchase. It all depends on local law and regulated consumer liability vs contract law. Some jurisdictions (Quebec, for example) have extremely strong, absolute liability for warranty. Others have contract only provisions.

The issue is whether it is worth the hassle.
06-23-2016, 10:22 AM   #6
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
Since the camera is being wholesaled by a non-North Amercian entity to a foreign reseller, Ricoh Canada/Ricoh Americas isn't involved at all.
Therein lies the key. The buyer is the importer of record and national/provincial/state consumer protection laws have no jurisdiction. As noted on the linked thread referenced in another comment, Ricoh NA will provide warranty service on out-of-country purchases for a fee ($50 USD IIRC).


Steve
06-23-2016, 10:32 AM   #7
CDW
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Big Island, Hawaii & Utah
Posts: 457
My experience has been that retailers in China/HK, Japan, Korea, are not competitive with US prices when it comes to new, current products. Used, exotic, harder to find items can be a different story. In terms of warranty issues, it's much easier to handle a situation in North America if the product has been purchased from a US or Canadian retailer.

06-23-2016, 10:56 AM - 1 Like   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,948
Just to be clear many state and provincial consumer protection and trade laws are very clear that if the purchaser is in the jurisdiction that is where the receipt and regulations are enforceable.

It makes no difference where the seller is located. The receipt is the executed contract in the purchaser's possession. Where the final product was delivered is what counts in almost all cases I've seen and experienced.

And almost all consumer protection regs vis-a-vis warranty specify BOTH the liability of the seller AND manufacturer. They've been written like that for over 100 years and is considered the pillar of manufacturer liability.

I know of no consumer protection statutes nor common law requiring the purchaser establish the wholesale chain nor provenance. All they need is the receipt and the product.

it's a lot of hassle, but I've seen it done, mostly at the B2B level. I used to write this type of law and attended numerous North American regulatory conferences on the matter.

Also, by definition a warranty is the repair or replacement of a defective product. It is not just a repair matter. The core of warranty is to make the consumer "whole" within a reasonable time for continued "use and enjoyment" of a product within the constraint that the warranty obligation degrades with time as wear and tear of use obviates original manufacturer responsibility.

I saw a consumer take Trane to small claims court over a part they obtained from a reseller and when the part failed the consumer claimed warranty which Trane denied due to the reseller maybe not being legit. Nevertheless Trane never denied they were the part's original manufacturer (they were the only one that could have manufactured it). Man walks into small claims court for $84 and gets a judgment which was non-contested. Trane ignores. Man hires lawyer and after considerable non-negotiation they lien a Trane delivery to a local supplier. The $600 part cost Trane about $20k in legal and delay costs. No long arm statute needed. Just a local judge in small claims court, a small fee, and a registered letter. As I said, each jurisdiction is different. In Canada, to avoid the plague of small claims on autos, almost all major manufacturers now have a government-monitored arbitration process (CAMVAP) because local law is absolute that a non-honoured yet common law and statutory warranty cannot be written out of any new product by consumer contract. In the 1980s there are something like 20,000 small claims against auto manufacturers per year in Canada (and similar issues in the US) leading to today's climate where most automobile companies are VERY responsive to avoiding those costs.


QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
Good luck enforcing them, though, when you buy gray market goods from a retailer, particularly a small one, located outside of your jurisdiction.

While they could technically be hailed into court via various long arm statutes, the effort and expense in doing so makes it an unrealistic option. Since the camera is being wholesaled by a non-North Amercian entity to a foreign reseller, Ricoh Canada/Ricoh Americas isn't involved at all. You'd have to go directly after the reseller first, and only after establishing where he got it from could you potentially go after whichever subsidiary of Ricoh sold it to them, and you'd still have to prove that the item was in the state it was in when sold to the Reseller and not used or altered in any way.

Either way, the best you could hope for, after a lot of pain and expense, would be to force a return. Warranty service in the USA is out of the question.
06-23-2016, 01:07 PM   #9
Veteran Member
pete-tarmigan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Conception Bay South, New-fun-land
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,272
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Just to be clear many state and provincial consumer protection and trade laws are very clear that if the purchaser is in the jurisdiction that is where the receipt and regulations are enforceable.

It makes no difference where the seller is located. The receipt is the executed contract in the purchaser's possession. Where the final product was delivered is what counts in almost all cases I've seen and experienced.
So you're saying that Ricoh Imaging Americas has to honour the warranty for a camera ordered on-line from a retailer in Japan that was shipped to a purchaser in the U.S.? Can Ricoh Imaging Americas still charge a $50 USD fee for a warranty repair on such a camera?
06-23-2016, 01:18 PM   #10
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 90
Original Poster
Thank you all so much. Pentax forum is soooo awesome.
06-23-2016, 04:30 PM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,948
Local courts have often found manufacturers liable for the implied manufacturer warranty regardless of origin of sale, just origin of manufacture. It's not Joe Average consumer goods where you see the action, but areas like third party auto parts, medical devices, and B2B equipment.

Pentax charges the $50 out of consumer goodwill so these contestations don't escalate and as compensation for the added burden of extraterritorial receipts. I know for a fact Nikon has honoured US warranties in Canada despite saying they will not because there is precedent in Canada of companies being forced to do so under local law. The judge doesn't care about Nikon's policy. They care about the consumer's right to a remedy under broad, 100+ year-old statutes....if they ever get that far. That's the catch.

Most of these restrictions companies place on warranty are sandpaper, making the cost of enforcement for the consumer higher than the value of the warranty service. How much do you want to spend in time and money on a small claims matter over a $300 camera? Most companies are now getting away from this nonsense and moving towards international warranties, especially international brands. Pentax's $50 fee might be seen as a reasonable compromise given Pentax's capacity to record sales worldwide. And there's no denying that tracking all those sales channels adds cost.

QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
Good luck enforcing them, though, when you buy gray market goods from a retailer, particularly a small one, located outside of your jurisdiction.

While they could technically be hailed into court via various long arm statutes, the effort and expense in doing so makes it an unrealistic option. Since the camera is being wholesaled by a non-North Amercian entity to a foreign reseller, Ricoh Canada/Ricoh Americas isn't involved at all. You'd have to go directly after the reseller first, and only after establishing where he got it from could you potentially go after whichever subsidiary of Ricoh sold it to them, and you'd still have to prove that the item was in the state it was in when sold to the Reseller and not used or altered in any way.

Either way, the best you could hope for, after a lot of pain and expense, would be to force a return. Warranty service in the USA is out of the question.
QuoteOriginally posted by pete-tarmigan Quote
So you're saying that Ricoh Imaging Americas has to honour the warranty for a camera ordered on-line from a retailer in Japan that was shipped to a purchaser in the U.S.? Can Ricoh Imaging Americas still charge a $50 USD fee for a warranty repair on such a camera?
06-23-2016, 06:03 PM   #12
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
It makes no difference where the seller is located. The receipt is the executed contract in the purchaser's possession. Where the final product was delivered is what counts in almost all cases I've seen and experienced.
Are you telling us that the Province of Nova Scotia is going to strong-arm Ricoh Japan and/or the Japanese seller on warranty issues? Remember that Ricoh already offers warranty to anyone willing to ship the camera across the ocean.

Pipe dreams...I didn't know that stuff was legal up there...


Steve
06-23-2016, 06:10 PM   #13
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Local courts have often found manufacturers liable for the implied manufacturer warranty regardless of origin of sale, just origin of manufacture.
...meaning that the courts can act if they have jurisdiction, which in the case of both the manufacturer and the seller, they don't.

It may not be clear, but Ricoh Imaging NA (both U.S. and Canada) is not an agent of Ricoh Imaging Japan and have no liability for product they did not sell. They are distributors and enjoy an arm's length relationship with the parent company.

That being said, your observation regarding the $50 fee for out of region product as a gesture of goodwill is well-put and accurate and a good example of a more generous approach by Ricoh Imaging NA than in the not so distant past.


Steve

(...check out the strict "no gray market" policy for Ricoh/Pentax Australia if you want to see stern language...https://pentax.com.au/support/parallel-grey-imports)
06-23-2016, 07:39 PM   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,948
Why would the Province do anything. These are civil court actions.

It has nothing to do with Ricoh Japan. It has everything to do with Ricoh having a business license registered under Joint Stocks in Nova Scotia and having a civil small claims action against them and consumer protection laws that gives consumers the right to a warranty on any good regardless of whatever language or territoriality Ricoh/Pentax writes on a card and puts in a box.

And if you want tough warranties, try Kansas...

QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Are you telling us that the Province of Nova Scotia is going to strong-arm Ricoh Japan and/or the Japanese seller on warranty issues? Remember that Ricoh already offers warranty to anyone willing to ship the camera across the ocean.

Pipe dreams...I didn't know that stuff was legal up there...


Steve


---------- Post added 06-24-16 at 12:11 AM ----------

Not accurate.

Ricoh Imaging NA is part of the conglomerate (wholly owned in fact) of its Japanese parent. They are Joint Stock registered in probably every Canadian Province with that info (and are here in Nova Scotia...just looked it up).

Ricoh is listed as an extraterritorial (non-Canadian) entity with a gent named KAZUO TOGASHI as the Director of ops from New Jersey, in fact, and a Canadian office in Mississauga. All of which is listed as a subsidiary of Ricoh (Tokyo, Japan) which is stated on the Ontario listing.

So, Ricoh has a domestic presence in the jurisdiction with a direct "controlling mind" (to use the legal term of art) right back to HQ. They are wholly owned. Ricoh International is the sole shareholder. Ricoh International is the sole supplier of their manufactured products. Here is Ricoh Canada's official blurb:
Ricoh Company Ltd., is an international leader in the document management and image communication industry. With a distinguished presence worldwide, our offices weave throughout the globe from Japan to the Americas and from Europe to Africa, the Middle East and Asia, employing 108,000 people in 390 locations.
Hardly "arm's length".

So your claim that Ricoh NA has "no liability" is not true at all. It is not whether they "sell" the item through whatever channels. It is dependent on whether they are part of the same company that manufactured it. Warranty law is primarily a manufacturer liability, not a sales liability. That is because a defect in manufacture can be a tort and not a breach of contract. That is precisely why companies print warranties along with receipts as separate documents, contingent upon the other. They incur different legal remedies based on different common law and regulatory burdens.

A lot of warranty law goes back to safety liability where one cannot simply transfer liability based on chain of distribution. Personal injury liability and torts go straight to the factory floor and ownership there. Witness Takata airbags and Toyota's CEO apologizing to the US Senate about a decade ago (necessarily, it turned out). This applies to everything from tainted blood to Tylenol to Chipotle. You'll see the term "safe use and enjoyment" nowadays. If it breaks imperilling either....well....it broke. I recall a ski binding case from decades ago where the company tried to argue that warranty did not extend to safety. Nope. It broke. Manufacturer defect. The consequences of whether it interrupted enjoyment ("Darn ski binding") versus safety ("It broke. My leg broke") starts with the factory warranting (guaranteeing) a functional, well-made, product.

I should point out that the joint and several liability for warranty between factory and seller is also to protect the sales office. It's a form of safe harbor for them to avoid being the last in the chain when the music stops. Many (many, many, many) times a reseller has sued a manufacturer as a third party to a consumer complaint against a manufacturer, riding the warranty (or negligence...often rolled together) claim. Auto dealers have sued their brands under such provisions because in those cases the relationship is of variable arm's length.

QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
...meaning that the courts can act if they have jurisdiction, which in the case of both the manufacturer and the seller, they don't.

It may not be clear, but Ricoh Imaging NA (both U.S. and Canada) is not an agent of Ricoh Imaging Japan and have no liability for product they did not sell. They are distributors and enjoy an arm's length relationship with the parent company.

That being said, your observation regarding the $50 fee for out of region product as a gesture of goodwill is well-put and accurate and a good example of a more generous approach by Ricoh Imaging NA than in the not so distant past.


Steve

(...check out the strict "no gray market" policy for Ricoh/Pentax Australia if you want to see stern language...https://pentax.com.au/support/parallel-grey-imports)
06-24-2016, 10:33 AM   #15
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,948
Almost all (I think Louisiana is excepted) warranty legislation under consumer protection laws requires no privity of contract. It is a manufacturer's liability. An implied warranty for a consumer good generally disregards the distribution chain and contract.

The inter- or intra-business or internal organization policies, arrangements, or contracts are irrelevant to the common and statutory rights on consumer under such legislation. The remedy is effectively joint and several.

The US Magnuson-Moss Act is explicit, for example, on who a supplier is, and the chain is always to the original manufacturer.

The Trane case I mentioned earlier had a part sourced from a non-authorized reseller. Didn't matter to the judge. Trane was liable regardless of their "independent" relationship. So their Canadian arm got stuck with the bill for a part manufactured by Trane but distributed outside their private chain. Too bad, so sad. Privity was no defence nor could it have been. Implied warranty and product liability do NOT require privity of contract. US Federal law (Moss) focusses on the "supplier" but not state nor provincial law. They go after both, and most Canadian Federal common law does as well (and Quebec).

As I've been trying to explain, product liability warranties under regulatory regimes are not contractually dependent. An implied warranty is a creation of statute and requires no privity of contract. Another way of putting it is it is not up to the consumer to verify warranty based on a supply chain they are unaware of. We know this because the warranties are buried in small print in the box, available ONLY after transaction and possession. All that "binding" you speak of below is not material to the consumer because they were not aware of it prior to opening the box after the sale is complete. Hence implied warranties being written into legislation and broadly, locally interpreted by the courts. In general the courts are very sympathetic to a local purchaser who can find a local target representing the original manufacturer. There's some interesting case law on the validity of whether those express, written warranties are even enforceable under many implied warranty statutes. A lot of them contain unenforceable and nonsensical puffery language.


QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
Ricoh Americas/Ricoh Canada and the parent Ricoh company who do the manufacturing are wholly-owned, independently constituted corporate entities with their own operations and service contracts. The warranty service contracts with Precision/whomever Ricoh Canada uses are negotiated by the subsidiaries themselves and bind only those subsidiaries.

Buying a good from a different independent subsidiary gives you no privity or right of action against your home market subsidiary, nor does it oblige the subsidiary with whom you have no business relationship to accept a return or provide warranty service under their service contract. Even under strong provincial consumer guarantees existing beyond the terms of the written warranty, the buyer's rights vis a vis a products liability case would exist against the parent manufacturer, not the independent local subsidiary with whom the buyer did not do business, and Ricoh (the parent manufacturer) would completely fulfill its obligations under both the sales contract warranty and the law by simply saying "for warranty service, return the item to the authorized repair center for the region in which the camera was purchased as indicated in the warranty," i.e. Japan. Which is exactly what they do in situations like this and what the OP is trying to do an end run around.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, camera from japnaese, company, dslr, ebay, factory, japan, law, manufacturer, manufacturers, pentax, pentax camera, photography, protection, province, retailers, ricoh, safety, warranty
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ebay: New DA 20-40mm limited for $650, seller: prodigital2000 seventysixersfan Pentax Price Watch 6 08-03-2015 11:50 AM
$2,500 U.S Ebay authorized seller: Pentax HD PENTAX D FA 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6 DC AW Stavri Pentax Price Watch 7 05-13-2015 06:33 AM
Handling a seller on eBay -- jadedrakerider Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 12 08-28-2014 01:26 PM
eBay seller prodigital2000 rparmar General Talk 44 09-01-2011 08:33 PM
123easyship eBay Seller omega leader Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 06-03-2010 12:30 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:32 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top