Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Lens Sale Dispute - Please Help

Aaron Schnobrich

Aaron Schnobrich

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
205
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
California - Abroad
I recently sold a Cooke Technovision 18-90. My description of the lens to the buyer was 6, maybe 7 out of 10. I felt it operated in a technically correct fashion and shot 3 specifically requested tests with the lens. We agreed to terms and I shipped the lens. Upon the receipt of the lens the buyer said he noticed dust inside the lens - which I believe is perfectly reasonable for a lens of that age. I however wanted him to be happy and agreed to refund him 500 for a internal dust removal.

I have now been informed that his lens tech has found an "internal scratch" and he is demanding a full refund.

Am I oblidged to make a full refund after a lens as been dissasembled? Whether or not the lens tech was a professional how would I assert that there were no accidental mistakes made during his shipping process to the tech or during the techs overhall of an essentially older lens?

I want to be fair but I'm not quite sure this is something I should refund and would like some sage advice. Recap - lens was sold as used in a quality described as 6 out of 10 - perhaps 7. Never was dust asked about by the buyer before purchasing and not being a technician myself I nor the buyer noticed dust elements in any of the tests I shot and shared with him.

Please Advise !! :crying:
 
sounds like bullshit. The only way to sell lenses is in person. I actually had someone pull the same kind of shit on ebay and now I don't have an ebay account because of it. Tell him he had it disassembled and now he has to keep it. Scam artistry at its finest.
 
It'd be interesting to see if new footage from the lens shows the scratch. If it does, then the scratch is new. If it doesn't then who cares?

Either way, though, IMHO if the buyer wanted a a perfect lens, then he should have bought a new lens. I think you've already been more generous then you needed to be.
 
Colin Sheldon said:
It'd be interesting to see if new footage from the lens shows the scratch. If it does, then the scratch is new. If it doesn't then who cares?
Click to expand...

exactly. if it doesn't show up in you're footage, it doesn't matter. for all intensive purposes it's optically fine. if nobody can see it's there, than it's not there right? and I'm with Dan, the guy voided any chance of a refund now that it's been taken apart. it's no longer the lens you sold, you don't kno what's happened to it. You have no obligation to refund it. Just like you take apart a laptop, the warranty is voided. the damage could have been done by the lens tech for all you know.
 
Thank you for the replies thus far. I appreciate and trust your opinions. If there is anyone who feels I SHOULD give a full refund I would also like to hear their argument for the buyer. I want to be a trustworthy member of this community.
 
Last edited:
Hi Aaron,

In California with most purchases a "hidden defect" is considered discovered when found, he could sue you years later when discovered if you did not disclose the condition of the item with that defect.

Selling a item "WHERE-IS AS IS" means you do not fully understand or warrant the items condition because even you, yourself do not know the TRUE nature of the item whatsoever.

Dust is always in a lens even if you cannot see it, I feel you should have stood your ground on that matter because the lens was used but, I do understand you wanted to be fair.

Ask the lens tech to give you the details of the class of element, contact a regrinding company like http://www.venturablvd.com/lao/ultraflat/ ask for Bob, or other re-grinder, and get a quote, weigh in if you wish to regrind the element and ask the client if you wish to proceed, but have the client sign a settlement agreement and have him remove the element and install the element at his own cost, this would be way more then fair.
 
I've done what I thought was resonable even now after he placed a dispute on my paypal account and asked for the name and number of his lens tech and he has responded by saying:

"what is the point of calling him?" and "it won't change the fact that I want it returned"
 
I hope you pulled the money out of your paypal account. This guy wasn't perhaps located in New York and uses the name MKPhoto or something like that was he?

That's the guy who tried to rip me off.
 
Well, let me play Devil's Advocate.

You sold a lens to a fellow who had it inspected and tested, and found a flaw.

It's fair to have an even exchange return- he just has to return it to you in the same condition it was in when you shipped, or improved in some way. Since you paid to have it serviced it should be improved (by cleaning) over its "as shipped" condition.

OK ... that's the other POV, but I really think the other advice you have gotten here is very sound.

Still, it is fair to offer a return- but given the circumstances you should demand tests etc. as guarantees that the buyer did not damage the lens.

If they are being honest this will pose no problem to them.

So ... back to your actual situation.

Based on the person's reply when you asked to speak to the lens tech I think it is perhaps a scam.

By the way, I do NOT transact business with Paypal. I find that company to be very disreputable. I don't think they are intentionally evil, but rather that they are incredibly lazy and jump to whatever conclusions support the least effort on their behalf.

For example, in a case like this where is their effort to guarantee that both parties are treated fairly? With a frozen account and no lens you have no satisfaction from this deal.

The effect is the same- so I don't use them for any business. I even stopped using them for trivial transactions. Paypal is a complete deal breaker for me.
 
Andrew J. said:
In California with most purchases a "hidden defect" is considered discovered when found, he could sue you years later when discovered if you did not disclose the condition of the item with that defect.

Selling a item "WHERE-IS AS IS" means you do not fully understand or warrant the items condition because even you, yourself do not know the TRUE nature of the item whatsoever.
Click to expand...


Private sales are not covered by any Implied Warranties and are not subject to the Uniform Commercial Code. Unless you fraudulently advertised a specific provable fact, you actually are not required to refund anything. You are also not required to disclose any defects even if you do know of them. It is the buyers responsibility to do their due diligence when making the purchase. You just can't claim something that you know to be untrue. If dust and scratches were a concern the buyer should have inquired specifically about it and gotten your response. Also, giving an arbitrary rating number such as a 6 out of 10 is of no use in legal terms. The rating is totally arbitrary and depends on the individuals subjective interpretation of what the given rating is. There is no way to dispute that you committed fraud by giving such a rating.

Implied warranties and what is required by way of remedies when defects are discovered apply to retail entities. Private sales are not.

It sounds like this guy is trying to back out of the sale. If there is evidence of the scratch and dust in the test shots it would actually make your case stronger in that he agreed to purchase the lens even after seeing the test footage that contained evidence as to the condition of the lens.

Unless you made some other agreement as to how you would handle it if he found some other defect, IMO you don't have to refund his money. I'm not a lawyer so this isn't legal advise but I would research your state laws a little if you are in doubt.

-Garrett
 
He gets you on the hook for $500 then demands more, expecting that you won't have the fortitude to fight it, and he will more often than not be right. If you take it back you are out the $500 plus freight, and have to answer questions like "Why did the prior sale fall through?" You might expect doubts about you and the gear to influence bidding the next time around. Odds are fair that denying him is a lose:lose for you. That is what he is counting on.

Next time don't dick around. He takes it as is or returns it... And he pays the freight. As long as you are willing to take it back he has no beef with you.

Stay off the hook.
 
In my opinion, if you are accurately representing the transaction, this buyer is scamming you. He is attempting to have you pay him $500 for the privilege of spending a lot of time doing his due diligence. It is even possible that he had a lens with an internal scratch, and he's just had you donate a new element and pay for the repair. I've had deals over the Internet with people where I've trusted them completely and sent a cashiers check with nothing but the word of a person I believed to be trustworthy, but I've had several deals that were attempted scams. Here's the litmus test: if you refund his money and he returns the lens, he has a $500 profit.

If I were in your shoes, I'd I would offer him this, and NOTHING more:

If he returns the lens in the condition you shipped it, offer to refund his money LESS THE AMMOUNT YOU PAID FOR HIS INSPECTION, and less any money you have spent for shipping.

DO NOT agree to anything less. This way, if he returns the lens, you are in exactly the same place you were before the sale, except for having wasted a lot of time. My guess is that he will ask you several times for a deal that makes money for him, and then disappear.

And do not, under any circumstances, send him money until you have the lens, in it's original condition, in your hands.

Good luck.
 
I have bought many used lenses off Ebay over the last couple of years. For the prices I paid I expected them to be as represented for condition, but I did not expect them to be like new. All of my zooms could use a routine cleaning and lube job at the least, but this was expected.
I would not give this guy a cent if the lens has been disassembled or altered in any way from its original condition when you sent it. If the guy was really unhappy he should have returned it for a refund without tampering with it.
Even if you only refund the original purchase price at this point you may still lose out as you may not get the lens back in as serviceable condition as you sent it. It could have been seriously damaged by an incompetent lens tech.
 
So many scammers

So many scammers

There are just so many scammers on eBay - we have had some great purchases and sales, but almost only with guys who were in the biz, complete with web sites and names I recognize... we have also lost other equipment through similar scams and bought stuff which turns out to be completely different to the items pictured and described.

Hopefully you pulled all of your cash out of your eBay/Paypal account at once - if not do it this instant! Our worst loss was sending the item back after complaining about it (per eBay's instructions and then him having no funds in his eBay account to repay - down camera and cash... they closed his account and when he posted the exact same item two weeks later and I sent eBay all the details of the case again they said they couldn't touch the guy or his newly found account cash because "the sign in name was different" - Yikes!!!)

Chris
 
David Rasberry said:
I have bought many used lenses off Ebay over the last couple of years. For the prices I paid I expected them to be as represented for condition, but I did not expect them to be like new. All of my zooms could use a routine cleaning and lube job at the least, but this was expected.
Click to expand...

ditto.

I would not give this guy a cent if the lens has been disassembled or altered in any way from its original condition when you sent it. If the guy was really unhappy he should have returned it for a refund without tampering with it.
Click to expand...

+1001

And as far as the dust goes, you guys agreed on the $500 settlement for cleaning. Or quite frankly, whatever he chose to do with that $500 is up to him. But it seems that would be a fair enough settlement for finding more dust than he wanted to see.

Even if you only refund the original purchase price at this point you may still lose out as you may not get the lens back in as serviceable condition as you sent it. It could have been seriously damaged by an incompetent lens tech.
Click to expand...

Have to agree here. He's had the lens disassembled, possibly damaged. It's his now. Done deal.

I've seen this sort of scam before with some medium format lenses I sold a few years back. Also with some various computer components. Buyer receives the product, then tries to get the seller to issue some form of partial refund or even full refund in advance of returning the product. The guy may have had a legitimate concern here with the dust, but as soon as he started taking the lens apart or sending it to some lens tech you don't know or any of that sort of business, it's now all his deal. Hope he can find a way to enjoy the lens.
 
I agree with everyone here. How would you even know about an "internal scratch" anyway, which I am pretty sure doesn't exist.

He asked for test shots, you did them. It's his lens and that should be the end of it.

Your main obstacle is more likely to be PayPal. Make sure you collect all of your communications with the buyer for evidence.

Most important will be ones pertaining to any lens tests you provided.
 
chris layhe said:
Our worst loss was sending the item back after complaining about it (per eBay's instructions and then him having no funds in his eBay account to repay - down camera and cash... they closed his account and when he posted the exact same item two weeks later and I sent eBay all the details of the case again they said they couldn't touch the guy or his newly found account cash because "the sign in name was different" - Yikes!!!)

Chris
Click to expand...

Had similar to this happen to me with a bunch of Arri lighting, only in my case the seller kept sending me updates saying he was really busy and was "going to send the lights tomorrow". This went on for 2 or 3 weeks, then he claimed he mixed up 2 sales and the lights were sent to the wrong address, and he was getting them returned and sent to the correct address. All of this went on until the day before the 40 (or is it 60?was a few years back) paypal dispute limit, then i had no word from him ever again.

Items were relisted the NEXT day, from the same ebay account, but with a slightly different description, paypal and ebay refused to do anything.

hence why i dont buy anything over a couple hundred bucks from ebay anymore.
 
Hold on, he took a lens apart and discovered a scratch that wasn't on either the front or rear element and naturally visible when just inspecting or putting the lens onto a camera? This is bullshit. The first thing a lens tech will do is put it on a projector. This would have shown up that there was a scratch or anything else on an element that was internal and difficult to see. Furthermore, I've never heard of an internal element being scratched full stop, how can you scratch an element other than when disassembling it or constructing it in the first place. If it's a decent cine lens then the element would never have been allowed to go into the lens.

Demand to know the name of the lens tech. It sounds like he doesn't want to give it to you because he's lying frankly.

I think he's lying about a scratch because he's decided he doesn't want the lens and simply wants to return it.

Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top