Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
  
Pentax Fa 400mm F5.6
Posted By: grzesiek, 04-03-2014, 06:15 PM

Used from B&H 899.95 Used Pentax Telephoto SMCP-FA 400mm f/5.6 ED IF Autofocus 24580


Views: 5,209
04-15-2014, 02:32 PM   #31
Pentaxian
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,560
A sale of goods over $500 is UCC. In the U.S., common law doesn't come into the equation. This is something they teach in the first day of Contracts class here in teh US.

Also, in the state where I took the Bar (NY - also where B+H happens to be located), a false statement that "tends to injure another in his or her trade, business or profession" is considered libel per se, and malicious intent and actual damage are presumed.In such cases, the burden of proof is on the libelor (hey, that's you!).

Guess I know more about US defamation law than you do.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Taking a $900 sale gone wrong due to vendor error and offering a 320% substitute product is neither good biz nor "reasonable" under any common law legal standard I know. Usually you compensate new the same price point. Not doing so invites bait and switch finger pointing because this is precisely how bait and switch operates. It's all about misrepresenting.

And if you knew anything about US defamation you would know the onus is on the subject to prove. So B&H would have to demonstrate that a 320% return offer could not be seen by a reasonable person as a bait and switch tactic. Good luck with that.

It's poor customer service to mess up a $900 sale and then offer a discount on a $4,000 product. In the whole transaction that offer was B&H compounding the error, not making it better. For a company with a "pro" designation in their motto, that is not professional service in any way.


---------- Post added 04-15-14 at 02:37 PM ----------

A sale of goods over $500 is UCC. In the U.S., common law doesn't come into the equation. This is something they teach in the first day of Contracts class here in teh US.

Also, in the state where I took the Bar (NY - also where B+H happens to be located), a false statement that "tends to injure another in his or her trade, business or profession" is considered libel per se, and malicious intent and actual damage are presumed.In such cases, the burden of proof is on the libelor (hey, that's you!).

Guess I know more about US defamation law than you do.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Taking a $900 sale gone wrong due to vendor error and offering a 320% substitute product is neither good biz nor "reasonable" under any common law legal standard I know. Usually you compensate new the same price point. Not doing so invites bait and switch finger pointing because this is precisely how bait and switch operates. It's all about misrepresenting.

And if you knew anything about US defamation you would know the onus is on the subject to prove. So B&H would have to demonstrate that a 320% return offer could not be seen by a reasonable person as a bait and switch tactic. Good luck with that.

It's poor customer service to mess up a $900 sale and then offer a discount on a $4,000 product. In the whole transaction that offer was B&H compounding the error, not making it better. For a company with a "pro" designation in their motto, that is not professional service in any way.


04-15-2014, 02:58 PM   #32
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 180
I want to thank everyone for their comments, but going at each other wasn't the intent of this post. I just wanted to voice my dissatisfaction with B&h. I was hoping they would make it right, but that hasn't happened and now they are on break for the Passover, so I will respect this important time for them an not continue this discussion until they reopen.

I guess my refund will be delayed as well.
04-23-2014, 09:39 AM   #33
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 180
Henryp you out there???

Called today and still no help. Henryp if you are out there, anything you can do to assist. I am willing to accept a DA*300mm f4 and Pentax 1.4x teleconverter as substitutes for a discounted price.

PM me if you are out there and can do anything Henryp or B&H.
04-23-2014, 12:09 PM - 2 Likes   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,434
isn't this just a case of caveat emptor, ie purchasing blind over the internet?

the company makes a good faith effort to represent a product for sale and the buyer purchases that product. however, if the product does not meet the buyer's expectation, the only requirement is a full refund of the purchase price?

obviously had this been a POS transaction, this whole situation would not have occurred, but to infer malicious intent on B&H's part is a little inflammatory.

also, we don't have the transcripts of the phone call to B&H, but perhaps the Sigma 500 was offered because there is NO 400mm k mount lens out there as a replacement, and the OP wanted 500mm reach.

we can speculate why maybe a 50-500 wasn't offered, which would have been on par with the 150-500 he used to own, maybe he insisted on a "pro" level lens and that's all the poor flustered customer service rep could come up with after being berated.

I think this "tantrum" is an overreaction. I definitely don't see this as bait and switch. I can understand the panic and the disappointment, so the OP has my sympathies for that. however the demand for compensation for being aggrieved is a tad overzealous.

as a last resort, there's always lens rental for a short period until a replacement for the 150-500 can be purchased. will he find a $1500-2000 lens for 900? maybe, maybe not, but to hold B&H soley responsible and to insist on punitive damages seems a bit vindictive.


Last edited by nomadkng; 04-23-2014 at 12:15 PM.
04-24-2014, 12:56 PM   #35
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,913
QuoteOriginally posted by nomadkng Quote
isn't this just a case of caveat emptor, ie purchasing blind over the internet?



the company makes a good faith effort to represent a product for sale and the buyer purchases that product. however, if the product does not meet the buyer's expectation, the only requirement is a full refund of the purchase price?



obviously had this been a POS transaction, this whole situation would not have occurred, but to infer malicious intent on B&H's part is a little inflammatory.



also, we don't have the transcripts of the phone call to B&H, but perhaps the Sigma 500 was offered because there is NO 400mm k mount lens out there as a replacement, and the OP wanted 500mm reach.



we can speculate why maybe a 50-500 wasn't offered, which would have been on par with the 150-500 he used to own, maybe he insisted on a "pro" level lens and that's all the poor flustered customer service rep could come up with after being berated.



I think this "tantrum" is an overreaction. I definitely don't see this as bait and switch. I can understand the panic and the disappointment, so the OP has my sympathies for that. however the demand for compensation for being aggrieved is a tad overzealous.



as a last resort, there's always lens rental for a short period until a replacement for the 150-500 can be purchased. will he find a $1500-2000 lens for 900? maybe, maybe not, but to hold B&H soley responsible and to insist on punitive damages seems a bit vindictive.

Caveat emptor only applies if the description is accurate. If the vendor misrepresents it is caveat venditor.
04-24-2014, 02:03 PM - 1 Like   #36
Pentaxian
Mike.P's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South Coast .. UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,753
QuoteOriginally posted by kraigg007 Quote
Your example of a DA 60-250 for $12 instead of $1200 is not even relevant. I paid $900 for a used lens that original sold new for $1200. Why is that such a great deal? That is about right for a used example. It isn't like a purchased it for $12 or even $120. To my knowledge the lens doesn't come up frequently enough to established a secondary market price. So it irritates me that you are soooo off base with your comments.
From this very site LINK the average used price is $1,750.00 so I would suggest that maybe you are soooo off base with your comments. Either that or (dare I say it) you jumped at the chance of getting what you thought was a decent lens at a very cheap price and didn't stop to give it some thought first incase someone else beat you to it.
04-24-2014, 03:06 PM - 2 Likes   #37
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 273
QuoteOriginally posted by Mike.P Quote
From this very site LINK the average used price is $1,750.00 so I would suggest that maybe you are soooo off base with your comments. Either that or (dare I say it) you jumped at the chance of getting what you thought was a decent lens at a very cheap price and didn't stop to give it some thought first incase someone else beat you to it.


I am the one who posted that comparison and actually deleted the posts because I felt it was worthless to try and get anything through to this person. He whines about not getting that killer deal and mopes over B&H not giving him something for nothing. He was NOT intentionally mislead but yet then figures he is owed something for nothing. Typical entitlement thinking.
04-24-2014, 03:46 PM   #38
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 180
QuoteOriginally posted by rwingsfan Quote
I am the one who posted that comparison and actually deleted the posts because I felt it was worthless to try and get anything through to this person. He whines about not getting that killer deal and mopes over B&H not giving him something for nothing. He was NOT intentionally mislead but yet then figures he is owed something for nothing. Typical entitlement thinking.
Whining and moping...entitlement thinking... Strong words to describe my post and my intent. I was very upset and the post was in immediate response to finding out I no longer have what I thought I bought.

I find it funny that you give B&H the benefit of the doubt and not me the consumer. They didn't intentionally mislead, but I am the typical entitlement thinker.

Bottom line is I am just one consumer who may spend several thousand dollars a year. A drop in the bucket to B&H. The only thing I can do is share my experience. After all this time, I called back and still nothing. I haven't even received notice they received the returned less not to mention my credit being placed back in my account.

I am willing to take every word back and share my satisfaction if B&H makes it right, but to this point they have done nothing but "make it wrong." So I am using the power of the pen to share my experiences. This isn't my first issue either, rewards that never materialize then when you call them on it they say no rewards were offered on the day of your purchase.

I have no beef with rwingsfan, so I wish you all the best. I know you don't know me and have know clue about my character. Again this post was about fact, not accusations, so I will refrain from going at you.

Henryp or any B&H representative, if you are out there, I would love for you to chime in as you can't receive a pm.

04-24-2014, 04:15 PM - 1 Like   #39
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 273
QuoteOriginally posted by kraigg007 Quote
Whining and moping...entitlement thinking... Strong words to describe my post and my intent. I was very upset and the post was in immediate response to finding out I no longer have what I thought I bought.

I find it funny that you give B&H the benefit of the doubt and not me the consumer. They didn't intentionally mislead, but I am the typical entitlement thinker.

Bottom line is I am just one consumer who may spend several thousand dollars a year. A drop in the bucket to B&H. The only thing I can do is share my experience. After all this time, I called back and still nothing. I haven't even received notice they received the returned less not to mention my credit being placed back in my account.

I am willing to take every word back and share my satisfaction if B&H makes it right, but to this point they have done nothing but "make it wrong." So I am using the power of the pen to share my experiences. This isn't my first issue either, rewards that never materialize then when you call them on it they say no rewards were offered on the day of your purchase.

I have no beef with rwingsfan, so I wish you all the best. I know you don't know me and have know clue about my character. Again this post was about fact, not accusations, so I will refrain from going at you.

Henryp or any B&H representative, if you are out there, I would love for you to chime in as you can't receive a pm.
You know really I don't want a pi**ing match either, however the fact remains that even according to your statement B&H did not intentionally mislead you. Then why the heck do you continue to (whine) go on about how you have been wronged (mope) and should receive a considerable discount on like item even though it is clear that the market for such item was considerably more than you were going to pay (entitlement thinking) Honestly I do understand your DISAPPOINTMENT about not getting a great deal. I still cannot understand your thinking of how B&H owes you something other than a refund. The old saying "no use crying over spilled milk" seems to apply here. I am sorry if I come across a little harsh, but my nature is to call it as I see it and sometimes that can be grating, just ask my wife I wish you well also and hope you can find something to fill your void.
04-24-2014, 04:37 PM - 1 Like   #40
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
QuoteOriginally posted by kraigg007 Quote

I am willing to take every word back and share my satisfaction if B&H makes it right, but to this point they have done nothing but "make it wrong."
I guess I don't understand this. B&H takes the lens back and pays shipping both ways. You are out nothing. How is B&H "making it wrong"?
Closed Thread

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!
400mm, bait, content, customer, error, law, offer, pentax, pentax deals, pentax fa 400mm, product, sale, service, site, steve, switch, theory, warrant
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 645 400mm f5.6 FA and 1.4X? gurtch Pentax Medium Format 7 12-02-2013 04:06 PM
FA 645 400mm f5.6 Ray Pulley Pentax Price Watch 2 09-01-2013 01:04 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC FA* 400mm f5.6 Harmonica Sold Items 3 09-29-2012 04:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: SMC Pentax-FA 645 400mm F5.6 ED [IF] mah4ever Sold Items 2 06-03-2012 04:29 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:48 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