BigValueInc - Ad claim of Canon USA Warranty is blatant lie, buyers beware!

[PackLight]

Sorry but I think you are all incorrect.

No where do I find in Canon's warranty that it will not warranty an item from an unauthorized reseller.
There are benifits of buying an item form an authorized seller, but it doesn't have anything to do with the enforcment of the warranty;

An quote from the 5D III's warranty;

"Canon U.S.A., Inc. and Canon Canada Inc. (collectively "Canon") warrant to the original end-user purchaser, when delivered in new condition in its original container"

A reseller that is not authorized is not the end user, and the warranty does not end or start with him. He would not meet the legal definition of the end user.

Here is the warranty link, I am at work now so couldn't go over it with a fine tooth comb but I find nothing that limits this;

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/eos_slr_camera_systems/eos_digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#ServiceAndSupport

If there is other information about Canon not honoring a warranty from an unauthorized reseller then please provide it. I do mean printed material released from Canon, not forum hear say.

[skitron]

Both the buyer, the authorized dealer, and the customer are winners.  Canon also sells a few more cameras and keeps workers employeed in Japan.  Its hard to identify a loser.

Not if you do the math:

BigValueInc current price = $2886 + $299 for 1yr warranty = $3185 for body plus warranty from a proven offender of deceptive trade practice laws.

Meanwhile B&H has $3299 for body plus warranty plus $146 of useable accessories = $3153 from a proven legit dealer. Adorama has a similar deal.

And whoever didn't get the several hour only "special deal" is hosed when they bought thinking they got a Canon USA Warranty and their camera breaks...

All just my opinion of course....

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Sorry but I think you are all incorrect.

No where do I find in Canon's warranty that it will not warranty an item from an unauthorized reseller.
There are benifits of buying an item form an authorized seller, but it doesn't have anything to do with the enforcment of the warranty;

An quote from the 5D III's warranty;

"Canon U.S.A., Inc. and Canon Canada Inc. (collectively "Canon") warrant to the original end-user purchaser, when delivered in new condition in its original container"

A reseller that is not authorized is not the end user, and the warranty does not end or start with him. He would not meet the legal definition of the end user.

Here is the warranty link, I am at work now so couldn't go over it with a fine tooth comb but I find nothing that limits this;

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/eos_slr_camera_systems/eos_digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#ServiceAndSupport

If there is other information about Canon not honoring a warranty from an unauthorized reseller then please provide it. I do mean printed material released from Canon, not forum hear say.

Did you read the original post?  He called Canon and they consider Big Value to be the original buyer.  Canon is the one who intreprets their contract and decides if it qualifies for service.
 
You might spend $250,000 in a law suit in a attempt to prove your point, but most people wouldn't want to spend $300, since they can buy a warranty for that.

[skitron]

If there is other information about Canon not honoring a warranty from an unauthorized reseller then please provide it. I do mean printed material released from Canon, not forum hear say.

The language refers to the "original end user". I called Canon a few hours ago and specifically asked them about this situation and they told me it is a used camera as far as warranty goes because they consider BVI to be the "original end user" since they are not an authorized dealer. The number is toll free and they answer pretty quickly if you want to call them.

Again, I have no issue with Canon on this.

[PackLight]

Sorry but I think you are all incorrect.

No where do I find in Canon's warranty that it will not warranty an item from an unauthorized reseller.
There are benifits of buying an item form an authorized seller, but it doesn't have anything to do with the enforcment of the warranty;

An quote from the 5D III's warranty;

"Canon U.S.A., Inc. and Canon Canada Inc. (collectively "Canon") warrant to the original end-user purchaser, when delivered in new condition in its original container"

A reseller that is not authorized is not the end user, and the warranty does not end or start with him. He would not meet the legal definition of the end user.

Here is the warranty link, I am at work now so couldn't go over it with a fine tooth comb but I find nothing that limits this;

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/eos_slr_camera_systems/eos_digital_slr_cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii#ServiceAndSupport

If there is other information about Canon not honoring a warranty from an unauthorized reseller then please provide it. I do mean printed material released from Canon, not forum hear say.

Did you read the original post?  He called Canon and they consider Big Value to be the original buyer.  Canon is the one who intreprets their contract and decides if it qualifies for service.
 
You might spend $250,000 in a law suit in a attempt to prove your point, but most people wouldn't want to spend $300, since they can buy a warranty for that.

Yes and he didn't say the word "end user" did he.

He called Canon, he didn't send an item in for service. He was told something. Show me it in writing.
I have read just as many reports that Canon honors the warranty claims of items like this. They tell you they wont but they do. If he were turned down then I that would be different.

And Canon will honor the warranty, why? Because they don't want to spend $250,000 in attorney fees on a class action suit over a $300 repair.

[PackLight]

If there is other information about Canon not honoring a warranty from an unauthorized reseller then please provide it. I do mean printed material released from Canon, not forum hear say.

The language refers to the "original end user". I called Canon a few hours ago and specifically asked them about this situation and they told me it is a used camera as far as warranty goes because they consider BVI to be the "original end user" since they are not an authorized dealer. The number is toll free and they answer pretty quickly if you want to call them.

Again, I have no issue with Canon on this.

What will void the warranty in this situation will not be because they are a reseller. More than likely this seller bought a 5D III - 24-105mm kit and broke it apart to resell. When they borke the kit apart and removed it from its origional packaging it voids the warranty to the next owner.

The ad says the 5D III was in origional packaging. Probably unlikely.

[skitron]

Yes and he didn't say the word "end user" did he.

He called Canon, he didn't send an item in for service. He was told something. Show me it in writing.
I have read just as many reports that Canon honors the warranty claims of items like this. They tell you they wont but they do. If he were turned down then I that would be different.

And Canon will honor the warranty, why? Because they don't want to spend $250,000 in attorney fees on a class action suit over a $300 repair.

Actually I did user the term "original end user" a number of times now.

That said, it doesn't make any sense to me to reason that "the unauthorized dealer issue doesn't matter" because Canon is going to go ahead and warranty it when both their legal warrany description indicates they won't and then they also confirm that they won't when you call them.

[PackLight]

CR recently ran a tip about Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body $2499. Go to the eBay link and the ad clearly states at the top for all to see "Canon USA Warranty" which is in fact a blatant lie.

I called Canon and asked them specifically about their warranty policy after reading their written legal warranty description. Despite the legal language not including a single mention of "authorized dealer", their stated policy is that they do not honor warranty on any item not purchased from an "authorized dealer", reasoning that non-authorized dealers are considered the "first purchaser", not the "reseller". According to Canon, that makes the buyer from BigValueInc the second buyer of a used camera. Yet the BigValueInc ad prominently lists it as "New" with "Canon USA Warranty".

BigValueInc is not on Canon's list of authoized dealers. In fact BigValueInc even states in their "about us" section that they are not an authorized dealer.

Yet there it is right at the top for all to see "Canon USA Warranty" and "New". Both of which are in fact a blatant lies.

It's also interesting that eBay is looking the other way on this matter.

I almost bit on one of these for $2886 after missing out on the $2499 deal...glad I looked into it closer...and felt this info was worth sharing.

Actually no, "original end user" is not in the origional post. But it is just symantics I udnerstand what you mean.

But I still have to disagree, if the camera comes in the origional packing as the seller claims then I see nothing in Canon's warranty that would void it. You can also go to Canon's website and read the link that explains the benifits of buying from a authorized dealer, it does not mention that if you do not buy from an authorized dealer it voids the warranty.

But, I wouldn't buy it from them anyway because as I said in the past post they have to have an angle to be able to sell it this cheap. Most of the time they are selling a broken kit, which would void the warranty.