Nikon Inc.

Review: I bought a Nikon D600 in Dec/Jan 2012. In September 2013, I noticed that the camera had spots while shooting under certain conditions (a well-documented defect in the D600). I sent the camera in October 2013. The camera was returned after repair. It turned out that within 2000 shots, the problem returned again. In Feb 2014, I returned the camera for repair again. This time, I also requested that the camera be replaced with a D610 (a model that Nikon released to fix the issue in D600) or refund my money. The request was ignored and the camera was returned. The [redacted] in the Customer Service department stated that the camera had been fixed based on the latest service bulletin that Nikon had released (on or about Feb **, 2014) and that the shutter had been replaced. Additionally, they also stated that the camera considered for replacement (witha D610) or refund if the problem manifests again. After some trial shots, the problem manifested again. I requested Nikon to refund my money. After some back-n-forth with the [redacted], it became evident that the shutter had NEVER been replaced during the second service. Nikon lied about the issue (there are records for this). I do not trust Nikon to fix this camera anymore given that this is a known manufacturing defect and that I have provided them multiple opportunities to fix it and they just cannot seem to (or do not have the will to). At this point, all I will settle for is a refund.Desired Settlement: Refund-Check

Business

Response:

Nikon publicly acknowledged an issue of excessive dust with some customers' cameras (including this customer) and announced a "Service Advisory. " This advisory covers free shipping and replacement of parts, even outside of the warranty term, for all customers. Nikon regrets that [redacted] had to send his camera in for service but we do not offer refunds or upgrades.

Review: On September **, 2015 I placed an order with Nikon Inc. thought their website nikonusa.com. Upon ordering the lens I was sent an email confirming my order, at this point I realized the lens being sent and the lens listed were incorrect. I immediately tried to contact Nikon via telephone to cancel the order, but they were closed and were only available via phone mon-fri.

I immediately sent a support ticket to their customer support team regarding the issue and the urgency to cancel the order. Nikon's online support team is only available mom-fri as well.

On Monday morning I contacted Nikon requesting to stop shipment as the product being shipped is incorrect.

I was told that it was too late to stop the order as it was currently too far into processing, if I did not want the lens and wanted a refund that I was to refuse delivery and the package would be returned and I would then be reimbursed once they have received the product back.

Nikon Inc. received the product on October *, 2015.

I spoke with a Nikon representative by the name of Ian, he assured me that the lens was received and they have processed my refund and I should be credited around 24 hours to a couple of days.

October *, 2015 my credit bank has never received any reimbursement coming from Nikon Inc.

A representative from my bank contacted Nikon to find out what was happening and why no reimbursement has been sent. Upon speaking to the Nikon Inc. representive "Joshua", I was informed by him that Nikon would not release my refund for up to 2 billing cycles as he stated were 2 to 3 business days by my bank. This information was untrue, my banks billing cycle is monthly not 2 or 3 days.

This means that Nikon will not refund my money even after receiving their product that I have never even touched as it was incorrect and I refused delivery as instructed, and later being told I would receive a refund within a couple of days.

With support tickets sent regarding this issue I have had to make contact via phone as support tickets online have proved to be ignored for up to a week.

I have informed Nikon to please contact their merchant bank about expediting my refund as instructed by my bank, as the time that this amount remains as a charge this balance will reflect against my available credit as well as accrue interest fees for the amount of the purchase for the amount of time it remains on my account.

Nikon representative told me that they would escalate this issue to higher authority but informed that this is likely to stay an active charge to my account for 2 whole billing cycles from my credit bank.

This is horrible business practice and ethics displayed by Nikon as no where during my order was I ever informed that refunds will take 2 billing cycles according to the bank in which I use to place the order.

Nikon Order # [redacted]Desired Settlement: If Nikon is not going to release my refund to my bank then I would like to receive the lens that was advertised online in which I Originally ordered.

The lens shown on their website was a AF-S 70-300mm zoom lens. Price online is price Nikon has charged me and currently has.

If Nikon agrees to ship me the AF-S 70-300mm lens with fast shipping them I would greatly be glad to continue to business with Nikon.

If they do not want to ship me the correct lens requested I simply ask for a 2-3 guaranteed reimbursement of the funds charged and I will end all business and use of Nikon Inc. Procducts.

Business

Response:

Customer has been issued a refund for this product on 10/**/15.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is most is minimal satisfactory. I accept the refund of finances sent back to my bank, but will soon discontinue use of their equipment and all future plans of being a Nikon consumer. The way in which they falsely advertise, do not disclose full details of their refund guarantee policies are not a business practice I feel comfortable with making any future purchases from, nor will I suggest Nikon as reliable and trusting business to anyone who has interest in purchasing from their company.

Sincerely,

Review: I contacted Nikon about a lens error with my 5 month old, still under warranty, Nikon Coolpix L830 on 9/**/2014. They determined a warranty repair was necessary and I was to send my camera to their authorized repair center, [redacted], in Connecticut. I contacted the repair center by phone and email. I still haven't received any emails back. However, last week, on 10/*/2014, I was able to speak to someone at extension [redacted] at [redacted] after calling their 800 number that is posted on their website and on Nikon's. She explained that I needed to send my camera, with my contact info, serial # of camera, copy of original receipt to [redacted]. I insured the package and according to the USPS tracking, they received it at 11:51 a.m on Friday, 10/*/2014. As of 10/*/2014, I hadn't received phone or email updates regarding the status of my camera's repair. I called yesterday and couldn't get to speak to a human at any time, during multiple times of the day. Today I called again only to find the phone number WAS DISCONNECTED!!! I called Nikon and they were completely unaware that their authorized repair center had either shut down or disconnected their phones. I have no way of getting my $200 camera returned to me, or even to find out what is going on. Nikon said they could attempt to contact [redacted] through email, but couldn't guarantee anything. I find this to be HORRIFIC business practice! I cannot believe that a company as reputable as Nikon would be involved with a company that perhaps is now defunct and has ultimately stolen people's cameras!Desired Settlement: Nikon either needs to get my camera back to me, repaired, as promised or I expect a full refund so I can replace my camera!

Business

Response:

Customer has been contacted today and left a voice message. The camera has been repaired and delivered to her on 10/*/14 at 10:38 am. [redacted] phone lines were out of service on 10/*/14 and we apologize for any inconvenience to the customer. They are now back in service.

Consumer

Response:

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,

Review: I've purchased a Nikon D750 on 11/**/2014 and experiencing un-natural cut off flare issue with the camera. I've contacted the reseller and have it exchanged and thought it might be the camera I got is defective. I received the replacement on 1/*/2015 and am experiencing the same issue. On 1/**/2015, Nikon issued a "Service Advisory" to all the owner of D750 camera whom experiencing un-natural flare issue to send in their camera. I immediate created a service request and sent in my camera for the repair with my sample image. On or about 2/**/2015. I received my camera back from Nikon and according from Nikon the issue has been corrected. But in fact is has not been corrected. I contacted their technical support with another set of sample images. After they examined those images, they ask me to send back the camera for service. I shipped it out on 2/**/201. Nikon received the camera the very next day. I received an email from Nikon on 2/**/2015 saying the camera has no issue and it is shipping back to me. I contacted their service department and they ask me to wait until I receive my camera back and take some pictures and see is the problem still exist. I received my camera on 2/**/2015 and once again, the problem is still the same as it was before. I contact Nikon and they then telling me the picture I took was in a controlled situation and want me to take some picture outdoor. After I return home, I took a picture outdoor which indicting the problem and then send the picture to Nikon again. On 2/**/2015 I receive an email saying nothing wrong with my camera. I call their support and the supervisor said nothing wrong with it and claim all camera has that issue. I ask if that is the case, what is the "Service Advisory" (recall) for and he said it is for un-natural cut off of flare. I said that is exactly the issue I am having and he said it isn't. I ask in this case, I want some pictures from Nikon to show me what is the problem they are reference to the recall and picture that is taken after the fix and still exhibit the un-natural flare cut off so I can see and understand what they mean by with in the spec. I then received an email saying they cannot provide any image.

My complaint is if they claim the un-natural cut off flare is normal, why would they recall for service. And after their repair, my camera still having the same issue and they said it is perform normal but can't proof me any images. I have lost my opportunities to return my camera for a refund due to their repair. It is not fair for a consumer who paid over $2900 for a camera which Nikon issue a recall but still can't get it fix.Desired Settlement: I would like have 100% refund from Nikon or I am willing for return this camera and purchase a different model such as "D810" from them. As of 2/**/2015 the Nikon D810 with the kit lens is $3,696.95 and I paid $2996.95 for my D750

Business

Response:

3/*/15 [redacted]s camera has been serviced under the D750 Technical Service Advisory. The camera has been tested and is working within factory specifications. It has been explained to the customer that all digital SLR cameras may experience flare when backlit scenes are being captured especially when shooting directly into the sun. His camera is working within specifications.

Consumer

Response:

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:

My complain has nothing to do with the normal "Flare" that happens on camera. My complain is specific on the "Service Advisory" issue as on your website reads "We have received indications from some users that when photographing scenes in which a bright light source, such as the sun or high-intensity lighting, is at a certain position along the top border of the frame, flare with an unnatural shape may sometimes occur in images captured with the D750 digital SLR camera."And that is what happens to my picture. "Unnatural shape" on the top border of the frame. I have provide my picture to proof the point and they are still saying it is within the spec.When I request for sample images from Nikon in regard what is their definition of "Unnatural Shape" as well as what is suppose to be appear on the image considered "Within Spec", They are failed to do so.Therefore they can claim what is within the spec and what is not on their own without needs to provide any proof. And if all Nikon cameras within the Spec and still exhibit the issue, consumer have the right to know before purchase and decide do we still want a camera like it.Also if Nikon believe my camera is normal, why they have me sent it in for repair the second time? If they told me that nothing they can do about it or the camera is normal back then, I would have a chance to return this camera and get a full refund. But instead they looked at the picture I sent to them and told me to send in the camera for repair the second time. That cause me not able to return my camera for a full refund because of the length of time.

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,

Business

Response:

[redacted]s camera was evaluated by Nikon and is working within factory specifications.

Consumer

Response:

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 still in-capable to provide any proof and/or sample image of their definition other than keep saying "camera was evaluated by Nikon and is working within factory specifications." is counter productive. If Nikon cannot/will not provide any proof and sample images of what they means by within factory specification, what is the point to answer the complain.There is not different than I say the world is like a round sphere and Nikon says the world is a flat land without proof.

Sincerely,

Review: Under nikon D600 SERVICE ADVISORY AS OF MARCH **, 2014 there was a recall on shutter assembly of the camera. I have sent the camera to Nikon repair center for shutter replacement under the recall, however the camera was returned to me without any job done on it. The reason was " moisture damage"I am using the camera every day and I didn't send it for any kind of repair except the recalled shutter replacement. They find something completely unrelated to the recalled part as a reason not to replace it. You can imagine if the car industry was doing same thing like Nikon does, what would happen. For example: I have a airbag recalled on my car. I go to dealer to replace the airbag. The dealer says we can't replace the recalled part because you have some moisture in your engine. This is exactly same situation. Now, Nikon don't allow me to use my fully functional camera because of the problem with oil on the CCD. That was the reason to make a recall. If I as the end user didn't have a problem with moisture, why they just didn't replace the recalled part and let me continue to use the camera. This is outrages. Most likely my last Nikon purchase for the rest of my lifeDesired Settlement: I need a shutter replaced

Business

Response:

We contacted and spoke with this customer today. He did send a sample image and we offered a prepaid shipping label to send the camera in for an evaluation which he agreed to do. Once we evaluate the camera we will contact him again with the findings.

Regarding Revdex.com Complaint # [redacted] of Dec. [redacted] from [redacted] I would like to update my reply from today. After reviewing the customer’s sample photos it was discovered that the serial number on these photos does not match the serial number on the camera from his service order # [redacted] which refers to this case. We have contacted the customer and asked for sample images from the camera in question and will not send a prepaid label until he provides them. I can’t update the complaint because I had sent a prior one today and I am awaiting a response. Regards, [redacted]

Consumer

Response:

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

The camera was used on a daily basis. When I got it back from Nikon it had developed a problem that wasn't there before. Which is constantly moving screen in live mode. So they didn't just refused to replace the recalled part, but they broke the part that was working before. Just the fact that this business is not accredited by Revdex.com tells you that they can't stand behind they products. The camera was shipped back to them again.

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,

Business

Response:

Customer's camera was received in on 12/**/14 for a re-evaluation. The shutter has been replaced for the TSA and camera is working to full specifications. It was shipped back to the customer on 12/**/14 and the tracking number has been provided to the customer.

Review: we sent our camera in to be fixed, we only had it for 2 months and 15 days, first the rubber piece was coming off and then the zoom would go in and out on its own and then it wouldn't take pictures. we got a letter in the mail stating that the warrenty would cover it and then I got a email saying that there was water damage and it would cost us 109 dollars to get it fixed, my son babied that camera and if water did get into it it was because of the rubber piece that started to come off. my son never took it by any type of water because he loved that camera, if you get a letter stating that the warrenty will cover it I think they should keep their word

Product_Or_Service: nikon coolpix l820 cameraDesired Settlement: DesiredSettlementID: Refund

I wanted them to fix my camera but they refused and told me 2 different things so I think they should give us some compensation for all the trouble they put us through because they refused to fix it after they sent this letter to us saying it was covered now we have to wait for the camera to get back to us and send it to walmart service and wait even longer.

Business

Response:

Customer repair for a Coolpix L820 was not covered under terms of warranty due to water damage to camera.

Consumer

Response:

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:

[Your Answer Here]

it took you long enough to respond and we had it fixed on our other warrenty they did not say it was from water damage all they said was a foreign body and my son took really good care of that camera and never took it in the rain so I dont see how there was water damage in it at all

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,

Review: Nikon D600 DSLR camera body- a worldwide product defect- faulty shutter assembly depositing oil on the image sensor. Sent my camera body back twice for this issue. Internet research reveals some D600 owners were given an exchange camera body to rectify the problem with the improved D610 version. The D610 does not exhibit the oil spot problem. Nikon service claims to have replaced the shutter in my camera,on the first occasion of the problem. The oil spots returned(second time)- promting me to beliive the original shutter assembly was not replaced,instead,only an economic(for Nikon)service production "workaround" of the problem. Nikon service(second time)told me they will not replace the D600 body, but to use the camera now. It only had a sensor cleaning this second time. Nikon service rep said,"If the spots return,we'll investigate further options." This is absurd. A world class corporation(Nikon)should stand up,and recall the D600's legitimate product failure,that the worldwide photographic community knows about. Fact- the D600 is a fiasco. I can't sell my camera for a reasonable price because of the known defect.I can't recover any loss.In my opinion,IF the shutter had actually been replaced,then the problem would have been resolved. Not so.I believe a low level of fraud(if that's possible)is being conducted under corporate direction to cut it's repair overload losses. How would I know if the shutter were not replaced. Actually,I believe I can- the oil spots on my $1400 camera body did not get fixed. The basis of this complaint is to get the camera body repaired(with a garantee)that the problem was properly corrected,or replace it.Desired Settlement: Return my D600 camera body to Nikon at their RTA expense,for a replacement D610 camera body. If necessary,I will accept a Nikon factory refurbished D610(with a zero shutter count)sent to me at Nikon's expense.I believe this to be fair and equitable for all.

Consumer

Response:

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.I must sign the Qualifying Statement, Short Form Release, and Confidentiality Agreement attached and send my D600 back to Nikon per their instructions. I fully expect this transaction will be completed in a timely manner.

Sincerely,