Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: Nikon did offer me a discount on a refurbished product of my choosing Which I do feel a 30% discount is still very low considering they did completely break the camera I sent in to be fixed Along with the discount the item I purchased was to be shipped over night air I ordered my camera replacement on Friday and it was not delivered until Wednesday of the following weekOf course this was not within the agreementNo compensation was given for that either Also the product arrived with no Manuel Needless to say, Nikon makes good products and I will continue to use them However, I will not send in a camera to be fixed by them again After further research and talking to other photographers, I have learned that Nikon has a poor reputation in customer service and fixing cameras Sincerely, [redacted]
We have been in contact with the customer to advise that the refund has been submittedAt this time, we will continue to work with the customer to ensure that he is satisfied
The customer was contacted by phone on 12/*/16 and offered a replacement scope. He appears to be satisfied with the resolution and a tracking number was sent to him.
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolvedNikon has issued a camera replacement Sincerely, [redacted]
RevDex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolved. Sincerely, [redacted]
The Dcamera was released in and the part needed for this repair is no longer available. Customer Relations contacted this customer today via email and offered a discount coupon for a new product. Customer should contact his bank for pending funds. Customer Relations
representative responded to inquiry on 3/*/and 3/*/via email
A representative did speak with the customer earlier today and stated her issue would be researched and she would get a return call before the end of the day A check in the amount of $was issued and mailed to this customer on 1/**/ We have left a voice message informing her
that the reimbursement has been processed
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and
the matter has been resolved.But it took days to reverse $6,of overcharges on my credit cardThat was a terrible experience, especially at Christmas time
Sincerely,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your
Answer Here]they only sent an email with a shipping label not an actual scope still waiting on a new scope or full refund not accepting until this is resolved not just as an email with a shipping label
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your Answer Here]
This action to the Revdex.com concerns deceptive marketing of and a defect in the shutter mechanism of the “pro-level” Nikon Dcamera (“D600”), which ruins photographs with consistent and pervasive oil and dust spottingNikons failure to properly advertise the Dand/or take responsibility for the defect and fully repair or replace the Nikon D600, such that it may be used for its most basic and warranted purpose has left me damaged and loss of memories and loss of value. Nikon has shown the shutter cannot be repaired permanently resulted in damage to myself.February 20, 2013In response to voluminous consumer complaints, Nikon attempted to mislead consumers into believing that the Dwas not defectiveNikon told complaining customers, including in a February 20, Service Advisory, that the problem was simply a result of a “natural accumulation of dust” affecting “some cameras” in “rare instances,” and that if the problem persists, the camera should be sent (at the consumer’s expense) to be serviced for an indefinite periodConsumers report that even after being serviced, however, the problem continuedThe Nikon Service Advisory to the public addressing the much publicized Doil and dust spotting problemUnfortunately, in it, Nikon stated: (1) that only “some Dusers have reported the appearance of random spots on their images”; (2) that spotting was “generally attributed to the natural accumulation of dust”; and (3) that noticeable spotting was only an issue in “rare cases.”March 25, 2013The complete text of the advisory, which was updated on March 25, 2013, stated: Thank you for choosing Nikon for your photographic needsSome Dusers have reported the appearance of random spots on their images which are generally attributed to the natural accumulation of dustWhile understanding that dust will occur over time, and steps may be taken to reduce the occurrence, the complete elimination of these dust spots may sometimes be difficult.It has come to our attention that, in some rare cases, they may be reflected noticeably in images and removal may be difficult using measuresTherefore, Nikon is informing users of a service to reduce this issue.Resolution: Resolution: As a first step, please follow the guidance from the DUser's Manual (pages 301-305) related to the Clean Image Sensor function and manual cleaning using a blower bulbIf these measures do not remove all dust particles and you are still experiencing problems, then please consult your nearest Nikon service centerThe technicians will examine the camera thoroughly, and service it as needed.The advisory failed to inform the public that the Dharbored a serious, material defect in the shutter mechanism, which consistently and repeatedly splattered oil and dust onto the image sensor, resulting in the poor picture quality experienced by customers. Nikons advisory expressly misled consumers into believing the accumulation of dust and oil was not the result of a defective product, but was rather a routine maintenance or user-error issue, and that the camera simply needed to be cleanedIn fact, simple cleaning and maintenance could not remedy the fundamental product defectRelying on this misrepresentation, I and most people never did not immediately seek repair or replacement of their defective cameras.Importantly, despite refusing to publicly acknowledge any defects in the D600, Nikon released a replacement Nikon D(“D610”) model on October 8, 2013, only a year after the DreleaseThis was a much more rapid release cycle than has been typical of Nikon’s camera releases to dateThe D600’s apparent predecessors, the Nikon D3X, D3, D3S, D4, D4S, D700, D800, D100, D300, and D300S were all on the market for at least two years, and often more, before updated models were released.Moreover, immediately after the Drelease, Defendant officially discontinued the Dmodel, on or about October 25, 2013.Upon information and belief, the material difference between the Dand Dmodel is a non-defective shutter mechanism, which eliminated the dust and oil spotting defect inherent in the D600.The Ddefect has caused significant damage to myself and consumers across the country in the form of, among other things, a product that does not perform the basic functions for which it was designed, a product that does not meet the quality standards for which it was promoted, repairs and/or cleaning the image sensor, shipping costs expended for servicing by Nikon, and a drastic depreciation in value after the release of the nearly identical D610.The Nikon Dfailed to live up to these representations and warrantiesAdditionally, Nikon’s website touted the purported professional quality photographs one could take with the Dshowing numerous examples of pictures purportedly taken with the cameraIn fact, as described above, the Dproduces images consistently ruined by oil and dust spotting; rendering it unable to perform properly its most basic warranted and represented purpose.All Nikon Dcameras contain the defect complained of hereinThe only way for a solution was to replace the camera with a new model with a new shutterThe D-610.I chose the Din reliance on advertisements, testimonials, and other marketing materials touting the D600’s cutting edge technology, durable construction, and most importantly, its superior and professional picture qualityPlaintiff Hill would not have purchased the Dif he had known that Nikon’s representations concerning he D600’s picture quality were false.I learned that the problem still remains even for those who had their Dcameras serviced by NikonNikon settled a class action law suit Case3:14-cv-00764-LB DocumentFiled02/19/14.I entitled to a camera that operates and functions as represented and warranted and free from this issue in the foreseeable futureNikon replaced cameras for those in the class action law suit. There is no permanent fix other than replacement. Nikon is aware of this and settled the suit above. Those who do not sue Nikon only keep getting repairs when Nikon knows there is no permanent fix except replacement with a new model.I have suffered injury due to the misconduct described hereinI now own a Dthat has been significantly diminished in value, and cannot perform the basic function for which it was purchased reliability for the foreseeable futureI have spent considerable time attempting to clean the image sensor manually, now need to spend 100’s of hours to manually retouching images with photo-editing software.Nikons warranty policy states that any “Nikon Digital Imaging Product is warranted by Nikon, Incto be free from defects in material and workmanship for one (1) year from the date of purchaseDuring this period if this product is found to be defective in material or workmanship, Nikon Inc., or one of its authorized service facilities will at its option, either repair or replace this Product without charge….”The Dwas defective, and delivered to consumers as such was determinedTherefore, it was defective immediately upon purchase when it left the exclusive control of Nikon, and Nikon breached its express and implied warranties for me and all D-consumersNikon knowing and actively concealed and denied this defect.Nikon resolved the law suit by doing the following: “As a result of your involvement in the Nikon Dcamera lawsuit, Nikon has offered to immediately provide you with a new Dcamera in exchange for settling your individual claim.” If we were not part of that law suit Nikon will continue to service your camera with another defective shutter. We are we treated differently than those that sue? Nikon will not even answer.In consumer law there is a principle known as "diminished value." This comes up most often with automobiles, but is just means that someone has "fixed" something for you and yet left it in an undeniably less valuable state than beforeWhether it's a previously wrecked and subsequently repaired automobile or a Dwith a defective shutterThis decrease in value is legally owed by the party that did the damage to the party who suffered the damageIt is this diminished value that Nikon clearly owes to me or anyone whose item they have abusedIn my case that damage is the unknown when it will have to be serviced again, not if. Because that damage is difficult to measure in dollars, the only two obvious/reasonable choices are to either demand they buy back the camera or demand a replacement model
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolved
Sincerely,
*** ***
This customer purchased a Nikon D5300 camera from ***. This is an imported camera and it is noted on the *** product page "ImportComes with Full Year *** Warranty". Customer has been advised to contact *** for service
A repair discount has been processed which can take up to two billing cycles. A representative has explained our Nikon repair and refund policies to the customer
An email has been sent to this customer on with a prepaid shipping label We are requesting to see the rifle scope for an evaluation
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: Nikon did offer me a discount on a refurbished product of my choosing Which I do feel a 30% discount is still very low considering they did completely break the camera I sent in to be fixed Along with the discount the item I purchased was to be shipped over night air I ordered my camera replacement on Friday and it was not delivered until Wednesday of the following weekOf course this was not within the agreementNo compensation was given for that either Also the product arrived with no Manuel Needless to say, Nikon makes good products and I will continue to use them However, I will not send in a camera to be fixed by them again After further research and talking to other photographers, I have learned that Nikon has a poor reputation in customer service and fixing cameras Sincerely, [redacted]
We have been in contact with the customer to advise that the refund has been submittedAt this time, we will continue to work with the customer to ensure that he is satisfied
The customer was contacted by phone on 12/*/16 and offered a replacement scope. He appears to be satisfied with the resolution and a tracking number was sent to him.
Please be advised that we have contacted the customer back with additional information on her caseThank you for bringing this matter to our attention
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolvedNikon has issued a camera replacement Sincerely, [redacted]
We contacted the customer on and offered a free shipping label to send back the cameraFor good customer relations it will be replaced
We have been in contact with the customer and have addressed his concerns and have resolved his issue
A customer service representative contacted [redacted] by phone on 316 and offered a resolution. This customer appears to be satisfied.
RevDex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolved. Sincerely, [redacted]
The Dcamera was released in and the part needed for this repair is no longer available. Customer Relations contacted this customer today via email and offered a discount coupon for a new product. Customer should contact his bank for pending funds. Customer Relations
representative responded to inquiry on 3/*/and 3/*/via email
A representative did speak with the customer earlier today and stated her issue would be researched and she would get a return call before the end of the day A check in the amount of $was issued and mailed to this customer on 1/**/ We have left a voice message informing her
that the reimbursement has been processed
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and
the matter has been resolved.But it took days to reverse $6,of overcharges on my credit cardThat was a terrible experience, especially at Christmas time
Sincerely,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your
Answer Here]they only sent an email with a shipping label not an actual scope still waiting on a new scope or full refund not accepting until this is resolved not just as an email with a shipping label
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***
Please be advised that we have been in contact with this customer directlyThank you for bringing the customer's concern to our attention
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
[Your Answer Here]
This action to the Revdex.com concerns deceptive marketing of and a defect in the shutter mechanism of the “pro-level” Nikon Dcamera (“D600”), which ruins photographs with consistent and pervasive oil and dust spottingNikons failure to properly advertise the Dand/or take responsibility for the defect and fully repair or replace the Nikon D600, such that it may be used for its most basic and warranted purpose has left me damaged and loss of memories and loss of value. Nikon has shown the shutter cannot be repaired permanently resulted in damage to myself.February 20, 2013In response to voluminous consumer complaints, Nikon attempted to mislead consumers into believing that the Dwas not defectiveNikon told complaining customers, including in a February 20, Service Advisory, that the problem was simply a result of a “natural accumulation of dust” affecting “some cameras” in “rare instances,” and that if the problem persists, the camera should be sent (at the consumer’s expense) to be serviced for an indefinite periodConsumers report that even after being serviced, however, the problem continuedThe Nikon Service Advisory to the public addressing the much publicized Doil and dust spotting problemUnfortunately, in it, Nikon stated: (1) that only “some Dusers have reported the appearance of random spots on their images”; (2) that spotting was “generally attributed to the natural accumulation of dust”; and (3) that noticeable spotting was only an issue in “rare cases.”March 25, 2013The complete text of the advisory, which was updated on March 25, 2013, stated: Thank you for choosing Nikon for your photographic needsSome Dusers have reported the appearance of random spots on their images which are generally attributed to the natural accumulation of dustWhile understanding that dust will occur over time, and steps may be taken to reduce the occurrence, the complete elimination of these dust spots may sometimes be difficult.It has come to our attention that, in some rare cases, they may be reflected noticeably in images and removal may be difficult using measuresTherefore, Nikon is informing users of a service to reduce this issue.Resolution: Resolution: As a first step, please follow the guidance from the DUser's Manual (pages 301-305) related to the Clean Image Sensor function and manual cleaning using a blower bulbIf these measures do not remove all dust particles and you are still experiencing problems, then please consult your nearest Nikon service centerThe technicians will examine the camera thoroughly, and service it as needed.The advisory failed to inform the public that the Dharbored a serious, material defect in the shutter mechanism, which consistently and repeatedly splattered oil and dust onto the image sensor, resulting in the poor picture quality experienced by customers. Nikons advisory expressly misled consumers into believing the accumulation of dust and oil was not the result of a defective product, but was rather a routine maintenance or user-error issue, and that the camera simply needed to be cleanedIn fact, simple cleaning and maintenance could not remedy the fundamental product defectRelying on this misrepresentation, I and most people never did not immediately seek repair or replacement of their defective cameras.Importantly, despite refusing to publicly acknowledge any defects in the D600, Nikon released a replacement Nikon D(“D610”) model on October 8, 2013, only a year after the DreleaseThis was a much more rapid release cycle than has been typical of Nikon’s camera releases to dateThe D600’s apparent predecessors, the Nikon D3X, D3, D3S, D4, D4S, D700, D800, D100, D300, and D300S were all on the market for at least two years, and often more, before updated models were released.Moreover, immediately after the Drelease, Defendant officially discontinued the Dmodel, on or about October 25, 2013.Upon information and belief, the material difference between the Dand Dmodel is a non-defective shutter mechanism, which eliminated the dust and oil spotting defect inherent in the D600.The Ddefect has caused significant damage to myself and consumers across the country in the form of, among other things, a product that does not perform the basic functions for which it was designed, a product that does not meet the quality standards for which it was promoted, repairs and/or cleaning the image sensor, shipping costs expended for servicing by Nikon, and a drastic depreciation in value after the release of the nearly identical D610.The Nikon Dfailed to live up to these representations and warrantiesAdditionally, Nikon’s website touted the purported professional quality photographs one could take with the Dshowing numerous examples of pictures purportedly taken with the cameraIn fact, as described above, the Dproduces images consistently ruined by oil and dust spotting; rendering it unable to perform properly its most basic warranted and represented purpose.All Nikon Dcameras contain the defect complained of hereinThe only way for a solution was to replace the camera with a new model with a new shutterThe D-610.I chose the Din reliance on advertisements, testimonials, and other marketing materials touting the D600’s cutting edge technology, durable construction, and most importantly, its superior and professional picture qualityPlaintiff Hill would not have purchased the Dif he had known that Nikon’s representations concerning he D600’s picture quality were false.I learned that the problem still remains even for those who had their Dcameras serviced by NikonNikon settled a class action law suit Case3:14-cv-00764-LB DocumentFiled02/19/14.I entitled to a camera that operates and functions as represented and warranted and free from this issue in the foreseeable futureNikon replaced cameras for those in the class action law suit. There is no permanent fix other than replacement. Nikon is aware of this and settled the suit above. Those who do not sue Nikon only keep getting repairs when Nikon knows there is no permanent fix except replacement with a new model.I have suffered injury due to the misconduct described hereinI now own a Dthat has been significantly diminished in value, and cannot perform the basic function for which it was purchased reliability for the foreseeable futureI have spent considerable time attempting to clean the image sensor manually, now need to spend 100’s of hours to manually retouching images with photo-editing software.Nikons warranty policy states that any “Nikon Digital Imaging Product is warranted by Nikon, Incto be free from defects in material and workmanship for one (1) year from the date of purchaseDuring this period if this product is found to be defective in material or workmanship, Nikon Inc., or one of its authorized service facilities will at its option, either repair or replace this Product without charge….”The Dwas defective, and delivered to consumers as such was determinedTherefore, it was defective immediately upon purchase when it left the exclusive control of Nikon, and Nikon breached its express and implied warranties for me and all D-consumersNikon knowing and actively concealed and denied this defect.Nikon resolved the law suit by doing the following: “As a result of your involvement in the Nikon Dcamera lawsuit, Nikon has offered to immediately provide you with a new Dcamera in exchange for settling your individual claim.” If we were not part of that law suit Nikon will continue to service your camera with another defective shutter. We are we treated differently than those that sue? Nikon will not even answer.In consumer law there is a principle known as "diminished value." This comes up most often with automobiles, but is just means that someone has "fixed" something for you and yet left it in an undeniably less valuable state than beforeWhether it's a previously wrecked and subsequently repaired automobile or a Dwith a defective shutterThis decrease in value is legally owed by the party that did the damage to the party who suffered the damageIt is this diminished value that Nikon clearly owes to me or anyone whose item they have abusedIn my case that damage is the unknown when it will have to be serviced again, not if. Because that damage is difficult to measure in dollars, the only two obvious/reasonable choices are to either demand they buy back the camera or demand a replacement model
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me and the matter has been resolved
Sincerely,
*** ***
We emailed the customer on 10/**/and offered a complimentary one-time repair for good customer relations
This customer purchased a Nikon D5300 camera from ***. This is an imported camera and it is noted on the *** product page "ImportComes with Full Year *** Warranty". Customer has been advised to contact *** for service
A repair discount has been processed which can take up to two billing cycles. A representative has explained our Nikon repair and refund policies to the customer