Damaged 24-70 & Craigslist

Hi all,

I'm hoping to leverage the wisdom of your collective photographic genius for some help and advice.

I recently purchased a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 from Craigslist. The seller indicated on both the listing & in subsequent emails that the lens was free from any scrapes, scratches, etc etc. We met in a coffee shop, inspected, took several shots (at low aperture) and noticed nothing. However, once I got it home and under bright lights, I could clearly see a mark on the rear element - only that it appeared as though it was inside the lens! I also took some high aperture shots, and there was clearly distortion in the images. At this point, I emailed the seller and asked him to take the lens back, and I was even willing to compensate him for wasted time and potential lost sales. He basically told me to f-off.

Next, I did a little online research, and many signs pointed to the possibility that this mark (a thin, vertical line approx 40% of the diameter of the element) was a piece of hair. I took the lens to a local camera shop for a quick cleaning. After he inspected the lens further (and under magnification) it became apparent that this mark was actually a scratch on the inside of the rear element. This was a repair that he doesn't handle.

So, first, does anyone have any recommendations about where to send the lens for repair and part replacement?

And second, any recommendations about how to deal with the seller?

TIA!

You can send the lens to Canon and I'd wager a guess it wouldn't cost more than $300 to fix.

Unfortunately, you're SOL (so-out-of-luck) with the seller. There's probably some sort of legal maneuvers available to you, but you have little hope of getting anywhere. Offering him any sort of compensation to take the lens back makes you look flaky rather than someone who bought a lemon, but I expect the end result would have been the same regardless.

Good point about the compensation - he seemed to be a nice guy when we met, so I felt bad asking him to come all the way back out to take the lens back. My thoughts were that I could give him a few bucks for his time & gas. This was all before that I knew that it was a scratch and not just a hair in the lens.

TheBrick3 wrote in post #14492027
You can send the lens to Canon and I'd wager a guess it wouldn't cost more than $300 to fix.

Unfortunately, you're SOL (so-out-of-luck) with the seller. There's probably some sort of legal maneuvers available to you, but you have little hope of getting anywhere. Offering him any sort of compensation to take the lens back makes you look flaky rather than someone who bought a lemon, but I expect the end result would have been the same regardless.

I think you're completely out of luck when it comes to the seller. He gave you an opportunity to inspect the lens and then the transaction was completed. I'd think all sales like this are "as-is", so I doubt you even have any legal recourse (but what do I know ... I'm not a lawyer ).

If you've determined that the scratch actually makes a difference in image quality then send it in to Canon to replace the rear element. Test it thoroughly first though since you may find that the scratch is essentially a cosmetic defect and won't affect your images.

it too would say you have no recourse against the seller. whether he did it intentionally or was not aware, you had a chance to look at the lens and test it before you gave him the money...
If it were ebay and you had not had a chance to look at the lens before you paid, you may have some recourse with ebay/paypal; but not with CL.

Sorry to hear about it. I hope you got a good deal on it to off set some of the repair cost

If the seller knew the lens was damaged but said it wasn't then he committed fraud. The difficult parts are 1) it's a civil offense and 2) you have to be able to prove he knew it was damaged. It would be hard to prove the lens was damaged because it's easy for damaged lenses to pass inspection. This isn't a knock on the OP; a friend of mine has twice purchased used lenses from retailers (one a major local chain and the other a major national chain) with similar internal damage. He was able to return them mostly without issue, but obviously the employees of those major chains had no idea they purchased broken used lens and then resold them.

One potential legal remedy would be to sue him for fraud. It could be enough to scare him into a resolution or, if you're able to do it in small claims court he might not show and you'd win by default. Collecting payment might be difficult, but the gov't will care more once he's ignoring a court order and can garnish wages, etc. Even in real civil court you can file a law suit without a lawyer, but if he actually contests it you probably wouldn't have any chance of winning sans a lawyer. You could just drop the case at this point.

As I said before, you're in a bad spot with little hope. But fraud is a thing and the 24-70 probably cost at least $1,000, so it's not necessarily something that isn't worth your time to pursue.

if it doesnt effect image quality, just suck it up and use it.

I know that in the state of Kansas, such transactions are "as is". Consumer protections only apply to transactions between businesses an consumers. How ever nothing stops you from taking the individual to court. Good luck trying to prove that the item was misrepresented.

With respect to the lens itself, I guess that I'll send it in to Canon for a full repair. The marks doesn't appear in low light/low apertures, but it becomes more apparent the more that you stop the lens down.

With respect to legal action - I guess that there are no laws against being an *******. My trail of communications with the seller were such that I would have to have immediately brought the lens home, torn it open, scraped it, and emailed the guy. This, hopefully obviously, isn't what happened. As soon as I tested in my bright room, the damage was apparent and I emailed the guy.

Some of the points about pursuing it in civil court were helpful - it is likely that I'll try to pursue that route if the seller continues to be unwilling to work with me. At this point, I'd be willing to keep the lens, provided that he pay for the repairs.

This is why I never buy expensive lenses from someone on Craigslist. Years ago, I purchased an item on Ebay that was advertised as good but turned out to be damaged. The seller wouldn't respond or return my money. I complained to Ebay. Ebay immediately returned my money and took action against the seller. Things aren't as simple when you buy off Craigslist.

I hope Canon can repair the lens at a reasonable cost.

If he's not willing to deal with you now, I highly doubt he'll be willing to pay for repairs. If he was willing to take the lens back, he could just sell it to someone else for the same price. If he has to pay for the repair, he's actually losing money. Sorry, but I just don't see it happening unless you take him to court.

cmozz wrote in post #14492220
With respect to the lens itself, I guess that I'll send it in to Canon for a full repair. The marks doesn't appear in low light/low apertures, but it becomes more apparent the more that you stop the lens down.

With respect to legal action - I guess that there are no laws against being an *******. My trail of communications with the seller were such that I would have to have immediately brought the lens home, torn it open, scraped it, and emailed the guy. This, hopefully obviously, isn't what happened. As soon as I tested in my bright room, the damage was apparent and I emailed the guy.

Some of the points about pursuing it in civil court were helpful - it is likely that I'll try to pursue that route if the seller continues to be unwilling to work with me. At this point, I'd be willing to keep the lens, provided that he pay for the repairs.

Good luck. I hope the seller has a tiny bit of good in him to come 'round.

It's story's like this that prevent me from buying used stuff. And after reading certain threads (not this one) and seeing how unreasonable some buyers can be I don't even like selling gear unless it's to someone I know personally.

klr.b wrote in post #14492468
If he's not willing to deal with you now, I highly doubt he'll be willing to pay for repairs. If he was willing to take the lens back, he could just sell it to someone else for the same price. If he has to pay for the repair, he's actually losing money. Sorry, but I just don't see it happening unless you take him to court.

Yup. The guy may have purposely unloaded his scratched lens and will either say he knew nothing about the scratch or accuse the OP of scratching it when he got home with it.

from what i recall, as is is good up to $3500. Not worth the litigation route IMO. You self admittedly inspected the item before you bought it. cost to fix will likely be very high, so consider just living with it.

That scratch on the rear lens element isn't going to make a s**t of a difference to your pictures. Suck it up, use the lens, and stop whining about it.