On Thu, 24 Feb 2000, Garth Wood wrote:
|At 06:42 PM 2/24/00 +0100, Marko Vrabec (Kamnik, Slovenia) wrote:
|
|[snip]
|
|>What I would like to ask you is, what do you think of the "service" I
|>got? What would likely happen in your country in such a case? Am I
|>entitled to expect either a replacement of damaged lens elements or a
|>new, undamaged lens in exchange? The glass was in mint condition before
|>(save for the suspected fungus).
|
|Marko:
|
|In Canada, such a level of service is considered incompetent. At
|minimum, you should be able to demand monetary compensation.
|Usually, such idiocy results in the company having to replace the
|product with an example at least as good as the one you originally
|brought to them -- if no used items exist, a new one is supplied. If
|neither a used nor new one exists, monetary compensation. Don't
|settle for less, and if being polite doesn't get you anywhere, get
|obnoxious. Fast.
In other words, tell them you want a spanking new ZUIKO 180/2! ;-)
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|