Nikon USA Service: A Cautionary Tale

[ctmasada]

Question from someone who doesn’t understand: you sent Nikon your property and they kept it? Where I come from that’s theft.

Thanks. An eye-opener for me, as well. I sent Nikon USA my well-cared for lens with noisy AF (?possible early AF motor failure) and authorized payment of $800+ for repair. More than 2 months later, I discovered secondhand (notified of billing through my credit card company) that my service order status was updated from "Parts hold" to "Product replaced". I contacted Nikon Support who initially told me the lens was "beyond repair" and that they were shipping me a refurbished lens (confirming that "Product replaced" status means swapping original for a refurbished lens, not replacement of AF motor or other part for repair).

I contacted Nikon Support again and pressed them for more details. They confirmed that, actually, this was a supply chain issue and that they could not allocate the new part for repair in a certain (i.e., *their*) timeframe, so they would be swapping out my original lens (with original like-new trunk) for a refurbished lens (and a broken, heavily used trunk, as it turns out). Nikon Support presented this as their sole remedy and never offered other options, either proactively or in our back and forth emails.

In hindsight, I should have been more hard-nosed about the situation, although by that point my credit card had already been billed. Another lesson learned. Dealing with the aftermath now after checking in with Steve and the BCG Forums community. Still waiting to hear back from Nikon Support. I do think big corporations need to be held more accountable for shabby practices (just as they should be richly rewarded for excellent products and services they do provide), and I am hopeful Nikon will eventually make this right. I greatly appreciate the supportive comments and advice here, and I hope sharing my story might be helpful to others.

 

[PAUL50]

Long time BCG reader, first time poster. Corresponded with Steve privately (THANKS, Steve!) and now sharing my ongoing experience with Nikon USA Service/Repair, at his suggestion. This was an eye-opener for me. Asking members for any additional advice and insights.

Shipped my beloved single-owner 600mm f/4G AF-S VR lens in mint-condition CT-607 hard case to Nikon service for noisy AF (?signs of early AF motor failure, need to replace AF motor) in mid-May 2022. Service order was on "Parts hold" status until a week ago when I was notified that my credit card was billed for Nikon's initial repair estimate (~$800); checked Nikon account and discovered the service order status was updated to "Product replaced". I emailed Nikon Service, asking what *that* meant (?replacement of part vs. entire unit). Very nice Nikon Support staff member confirmed that a replacement AF motor could not be allocated and installed for my original lens within Nikon's set timeframe (?) due to supply chain, and therefore they would be shipping a refurbished lens (different serial #) to replace my original lens. I'm not an NPS member and was never given any option(s) other than swap-out with a refurbished lens (with unknown service/care history).

Refurbished lens looks and works OK but the hard case it was shipped in is broken (one handle is GONE) and beat to heck--a far cry from the like-new original hard case I shipped the lens in for repair. I see a $400+ MSRP for a new Nikon CT-607 hard case. I intend to sell the refurbished lens (service history unknown) and case (such as it is) to MPB, KEH or the like, rather than privately to a local birder friend (who wanted to buy my original lens after repair) since I have no confidence in the lens and am, frankly, embarrassed by the case. From past experience, I fully expect MPB, KEH, etc. to take one look at the case and dock me $400 off lens+case resale value. (Hopefully, the refurbished lens wasn't bouncing around the globe in this beat up case, though I don't know that it wasn't.)

Sent Nikon Support an email with photos and requested replacement of the case to match what I sent them, at the very least. Waiting to hear back. Is this what we now can expect from Nikon's (and I expect others') service practices in this crazy supply chain-crippled and short-staffed market? Don't want to be a 'Karen' but don't want to be taken, either. (I do wonder whether Nikon NY/USA looked at the Nebraska return address and saw what looked like an easy mark. ) I do appreciate the "tool-not-a-jewel" mind-set, but it is pretty discouraging to take care of my photo gear and find myself in this situation.

Migration to Z-mount is turning out to be a much more expensive and aggravating journey than expected. Thanks for letting me vent my spleen. I plan to update my post as this continues to unfold. I hope Nikon can make this right.

Best to all,
Chris

I don't presume to speak for others, but I have had problems in the past with Nikon repair services in Melville, NY, and after the second negative incident with them have ever after used other authorized service facilities for all repairs. In the first instance, you sent the lens and case to them for repair, not repair or replacement, and based on what you've said, you never authorized an exchange of the product or the case, either impliedly or expressly. If that's true, then Nikon presumptuously, and without permission, converted your property to their own use, and I think you may have a claim for the return of the property or the value of the property converted. Unless you signed an agreement accepting a replacement in lieu of a repair, or otherwise agreed to replacement of the product, Nikon had no legal authority to decide on their own unfettered initiative to replace the lens and case. Just because they sent you a replacement does not presumptively mean that you have accepted it. I sincerely doubt that they thought they had a "rube" they could take advantage of based on your zip code. Nikon, in my opinion, and based upon my experience, can be arrogant and just assume once they have your property that they are free to do with it as they please. I may love their products and use them exclusively, but I'm no fan of their repair facilities. I'm not giving you legal advice, I'm not in a position to do so, but since that lens and case are very valuable, it would be worth an hour of an attorney's time to ask him or her their view on the subject and perhaps have them write a demand letter stating that you do not accept the replacement lens and case, never authorized a replacement, and demand your original property be returned. Best of luck.

 

[Replytoken]

Being practical, my question for the OP is does Nikon even know where you lens and case are at the moment? How many used 600mm lenses could there be in Melville? Or has it been shipped off to someplace else where it can no longer be retrieved? If it is the former, you might be able to get your lens and case back. If the latter, I would focus on getting a new case and possibly a different refurbished lens that is in better physical condition.

Good luck,

--Ken

 

[ctmasada]

I don't presume to speak for others, but I have had problems in the past with Nikon repair services in Melville, NY, and after the second negative incident with them have ever after used other authorized service facilities for all repairs. In the first instance, you sent the lens and case to them for repair, not repair or replacement, and based on what you've said, you never authorized an exchange of the product or the case, either impliedly or expressly. If that's true, then Nikon presumptuously, and without permission, converted your property to their own use, and I think you may have a claim for the return of the property or the value of the property converted. Unless you signed an agreement accepting a replacement in lieu of a repair, or otherwise agreed to replacement of the product, Nikon had no legal authority to decide on their own unfettered initiative to replace the lens and case. Just because they sent you a replacement does not presumptively mean that you have accepted it. I sincerely doubt that they thought they had a "rube" they could take advantage of based on your zip code. Nikon, in my opinion, and based upon my experience, can be arrogant and just assume once they have your property that they are free to do with it as they please. I may love their products and use them exclusively, but I'm no fan of their repair facilities. I'm not giving you legal advice, I'm not in a position to do so, but since that lens and case are very valuable, it would be worth an hour of an attorney's time to ask him or her their view on the subject and perhaps have them write a demand letter stating that you do not accept the replacement lens and case, never authorized a replacement, and demand your original property be returned. Best of luck.

Thank you very much for your kind reply and support. I’m sorry to hear that you, too, have had negative experiences with Nikon USA Service.

Still waiting on Nikon Support to respond to my request for a like-new trunk to match what I sent them originally. Once I (hopefully) receive a comparable trunk, I will then sell the refurbished lens+trunk to MPB, KEH, etc., accept the loss and chalk all this up to experience.

Apologies once again for my snarky zip code comment.

 

[MotoPixel]

Chris,

Certainly it's your choice on how you proceed from this point, but if I may offer a little different take on this. I'll preface by saying that as a semi-pro Nikon user for over 25 years, I've never had occasion to use Nikon Service...and from and I've heard over the years, perhaps I've dodged a bullet.

I'm generally a non-confrontational guy and if I don't do my due diligence in a matter, I bite the bullet and walk away...lesson learned. In this case, though, I'd not walk away from it and chalk it up to experience. Nikon (and those employees directly involved in the decision) need to be held to account for actions like this or they'll keep doing it because it never rises to the point of getting upper management's attention. Very likely why Steve suggested you go public with it, but, depending on their response to you, I'd not let it go lightly. No, it's not the end of the world for YOU...but for the next guy/gal, it might make a huge difference.

This seems like one of those times where taking a firm stand could benefit others, much more than yourself...think about that.

Cheers,
Tom

 

[ctmasada]

Thank you very much for your kind reply and support. I’m sorry to hear that you, too, have had negative experiences with Nikon USA Service.

Still waiting on Nikon Support to respond to my request for a like-new trunk to match what I sent them originally. Once I (hopefully) receive a comparable trunk, I will then sell the refurbished lens+trunk to MPB, KEH, etc., accept the loss and chalk all this up to experience.

Apologies once again for my snarky zip code comment.

Apologies once again for my snarky zip code comment. Meant tongue in cheek (though I do admit to chafing at popular references to flyover states and toothless Cornhusker fans, especially when dealing with large corporations. A discussion probably more appropriate for a different forum.) I’m not a big confrontation guy. Trying to keep things in perspective and maybe find a little humor along the way if I can (?) as I look forward to getting back out there for fall bird migration.
Best,
Chris

 

[Replytoken]

Apologies once again for my snarky zip code comment. Meant tongue in cheek (though I do admit to chafing at popular references to flyover states and toothless Cornhusker fans, especially when dealing with large corporations.) I’m not a big confrontation guy. Trying to keep things in perspective and maybe find a little humor along the way if I can (?) as I look forward to getting back out there for fall bird migration.
Best,
Chris

Keeping things in perspective is usually a good idea. Can you find out why they did what they did without first asking if that was what you wanted? I cannot imagine that staff were plotting to take your lens from you, and they may thought they were actually helping you, but they did not really consult with you in a more direct way, and that is an issue. if you want to write it off, then I can understand, but it may not hurt to ask for more information, and perhaps see if you can talk with a manager about what they can do to rectify the situation in a more palatable manner.

--Ken

 

[Woody Meristem]

A friend who owns a camera shop sold Nikon and Canon for years and said that he dropped Nikon because of the poor repair service impacted his customers and indirectly his store. He now sells several brands but not Nikon. Personally, I've had great service from Canon and, for various reasons, have begun using Olympus much more -- eventually we'll see how good OMDS's service may be.

 

[ctmasada]

Chris,

Certainly it's your choice on how you proceed from this point, but if I may offer a little different take on this. I'll preface by saying that as a semi-pro Nikon user for over 25 years, I've never had occasion to use Nikon Service...and from and I've heard over the years, perhaps I've dodged a bullet.

I'm generally a non-confrontational guy and if I don't do my due diligence in a matter, I bite the bullet and walk away...lesson learned. In this case, though, I'd not walk away from it and chalk it up to experience. Nikon (and those employees directly involved in the decision) need to be held to account for actions like this or they'll keep doing it because it never rises to the point of getting upper management's attention. Very likely why Steve suggested you go public with it, but, depending on their response to you, I'd not let it go lightly. No, it's not the end of the world for YOU...but for the next guy/gal, it might make a huge difference.

This seems like one of those times where taking a firm stand could benefit others, much more than yourself...think about that.

Cheers,
Tom

Thanks a lot, Tom. I certainly appreciate your comments and principled approach. I would agree that those photographers with name recognition and standing would not tolerate Nikon’s mishandling of this service encounter, so perhaps I shouldn’t either. I’ve yet to hear back from Nikon Support, so I will likely have more time (though hopefully not too long) to reconsider my way through this. Maybe even ‘take one for the team’ . I hope to report back with news of favorable resolution.
Best regards,
Chris

P.S.: Reviewed my latest previous email to Nikon Support. In my defense, I did mention to them that I would hold off on completing their emailed service satisfaction survey pending their response to my request for free shipment of a like-new CT-607 trunk to match what I had sent them originally. Ball's in Nikon's court....

 

[ctmasada]

Keeping things in perspective is usually a good idea. Can you find out why they did what they did without first asking if that was what you wanted? I cannot imagine that staff were plotting to take your lens from you, and they may thought they were actually helping you, but they did not really consult with you in a more direct way, and that is an issue. if you want to write it off, then I can understand, but it may not hurt to ask for more information, and perhaps see if you can talk with a manager about what they can do to rectify the situation in a more palatable manner.

--Ken

Thanks, Ken. I appreciate your comments. My impression is Nikon took the most expedient course in response to their (and everyone’s) ongoing supply chain issues: swap out original lens with failing AF motor and like-new trunk with a refurbished lens and a broken trunk.

I was notified of billing ($800) by my credit card company, indicating that shipment from Nikon was imminent; only then did I learn that the service order status had been updated from “Parts hold” to “Product replaced”. I emailed Nikon Support and they clarified that “Product replaced” meant swapping of my original lens (and trunk) with a refurb lens (and a broken trunk, as it turns out) and not replacement of failed part(s) in the original lens.

This was the only option communicated directly to me by Nikon Support. At no point was I asked if this was OK. I received the refurb lens and broken trunk by UPS Ground only a couple days (breathtakingly fast!) after I learned of my service order update.

Their approach might have been the best solution for a working pro on a tight schedule but I am an amateur with very different priorities and values. (I shoot for NEBRASKAland magazine as an unpaid regular contributor; I am grateful for the opportunity to share my photos with Nebraska Game and Parks and their educational programs).

In this case, I think Nikon made some assumptions without checking with me. And like others, I expect the poorly matched trunk swap was careless execution but not malicious.

We’ll see how things shake out. And I will complete Nikon's emailed satisfaction survey accordingly.

All the best,
Chris

 

[Replytoken]

Thanks, Ken. I appreciate your comments. My impression is Nikon took the most expedient course in response to their (and everyone’s) ongoing supply chain issues: swap out original lens with failing AF motor and like-new trunk with a refurbished lens and a broken trunk.

I was notified of billing ($800) by my credit card company, indicating that shipment from Nikon was imminent; only then did I learn that the service order status had been updated from “Parts hold” to “Product replaced”. I emailed Nikon Support and they clarified that “Product replaced” meant swapping of my original lens (and trunk) with a refurb lens (and a broken trunk, as it turns out) and not replacement of failed part(s) in the original lens.

This was the only option communicated directly to me by Nikon Support. At no point was I asked if this was OK. I received the refurb lens and broken trunk by UPS Ground only a couple days (breathtakingly fast!) after I learned of my service order update.

Their approach might have been the best solution for a working pro on a tight schedule but I am an amateur with very different priorities and values. (I shoot for NEBRASKAland magazine as an unpaid regular contributor; I am grateful for the opportunity to share my photos with Nebraska Game and Parks and their educational programs).

In this case, I think Nikon made some assumptions without checking with me. And like others, I expect the poorly matched trunk swap was careless execution but not malicious.

We’ll see how things shake out!

All the best,
Chris

If it was me, I would see what kind of response you get. I agree with your expectations as I am an amateur as well, and I have a limited budget, so I tend to buy and keep my gear, and like to keep it in as good a shape as possible. A friend once reminded me that you can be assertive without being aggressive, and I think that it a good approach. Perhaps they may be able to remedy their initial approach after you get hold of somebody who can actually make a decision and make it happen?

All the best,

--Ken

 

[ctmasada]

If it was me, I would see what kind of response you get. I agree with your expectations as I am an amateur as well, and I have a limited budget, so I tend to buy and keep my gear, and like to keep it in as good a shape as possible. A friend once reminded me that you can be assertive without being aggressive, and I think that it a good approach. Perhaps they may be able to remedy their initial approach after you get hold of somebody who can actually make a decision and make it happen?

All the best,

--Ken

Thanks, Ken. I agree with your comments and appreciate your advice. So far, I haven't managed to burn any bridges in my communications with Nikon Support. Still waiting to hear back from them....

I'm glad I shared this with the BCG community. Hope to have follow-up with positive resolution.

Best regards,
Chris

 

[Abinoone]

Long time BCG reader, first time poster. Corresponded with Steve privately (THANKS, Steve!) and now sharing my ongoing experience with Nikon USA Service/Repair, at his suggestion. This was an eye-opener for me. Asking members for any additional advice and insights.

Shipped my beloved single-owner 600mm f/4G AF-S VR lens in mint-condition CT-607 hard case to Nikon service for noisy AF (?signs of early AF motor failure, need to replace AF motor) in mid-May 2022. Service order was on "Parts hold" status until a week ago when I was notified that my credit card was billed for Nikon's initial repair estimate (~$800); checked Nikon account and discovered the service order status was updated to "Product replaced". I emailed Nikon Service, asking what *that* meant (?replacement of part vs. entire unit). Very nice Nikon Support staff member confirmed that a replacement AF motor could not be allocated and installed for my original lens within Nikon's set timeframe (?) due to supply chain, and therefore they would be shipping a refurbished lens (different serial #) to replace my original lens. I'm not an NPS member and was never given any option(s) other than swap-out with a refurbished lens (with unknown service/care history).

Refurbished lens looks and works OK but the hard case it was shipped in is broken (one handle is GONE) and beat to heck--a far cry from the like-new original hard case I shipped the lens in for repair. I see a $400+ MSRP for a new Nikon CT-607 hard case. I intend to sell the refurbished lens (service history unknown) and case (such as it is) to MPB, KEH or the like, rather than privately to a local birder friend (who wanted to buy my original lens after repair) since I have no confidence in the lens and am, frankly, embarrassed by the case. From past experience, I fully expect MPB, KEH, etc. to take one look at the case and dock me $400 off lens+case resale value. (Hopefully, the refurbished lens wasn't bouncing around the globe in this beat up case, though I don't know that it wasn't.)

Sent Nikon Support an email with photos and requested replacement of the case to match what I sent them, at the very least. Waiting to hear back. Is this what we now can expect from Nikon's (and I expect others') service practices in this crazy supply chain-crippled and short-staffed market? Don't want to be a 'Karen' but don't want to be taken, either. (I do wonder whether Nikon NY/USA looked at the Nebraska return address and saw what looked like an easy mark. ) I do appreciate the "tool-not-a-jewel" mind-set, but it is pretty discouraging to take care of my photo gear and find myself in this situation.

Migration to Z-mount is turning out to be a much more expensive and aggravating journey than expected. Thanks for letting me vent my spleen. I plan to update my post as this continues to unfold. I hope Nikon can make this right.

Best to all,
Chris

So sorry for your troubles. I'd be more than a little pissed about it too. What I don't understand is why Nikon didn't remove the AF motor from the refurbished lens, and install it in your near-mint unit, then ship it back to you in your original case? Maybe it's too late for that but I'd ask about it, after telling them that what they sent you is unacceptable. At the very least, they owe you a good case. Best of luck, and let us know how it turns out!

 

[ctmasada]

Thanks for your kind reply and support.

Good question. I imagine just replacing my original lens with a functioning refurb lens (the sole remedy offered by Nikon—they never asked me if that was OK prior to the swap-and-ship) was a quicker and easier solution for them than actually repairing my original lens (which I *had* expressly authorized)—but I’ll have to ask.

At this point, I’m feeling resigned to the refurb lens (which I intend to sell to help defray cost of backordered Z 800mm f/6.3) but I’m still waiting for a response from Nikon to my formal request for replacement of my like-new CT-607 trunk.

Best,
Chris

 

[PAUL50]

Thank you very much for your kind reply and support. I’m sorry to hear that you, too, have had negative experiences with Nikon USA Service.

Still waiting on Nikon Support to respond to my request for a like-new trunk to match what I sent them originally. Once I (hopefully) receive a comparable trunk, I will then sell the refurbished lens+trunk to MPB, KEH, etc., accept the loss and chalk all this up to experience.

Apologies once again for my snarky zip code comment.

Obviously what you ultimately choose to do in this situation is totally up to you, but you asked for opinions and I respectfully disagree with some of the well intended advice you’ve received. And so, what follows are my last, best, and most kindly words to you on the subject. I’m not giving you legal advice but think you should spend a few dollars obtaining the views of an attorney and perhaps have them write an appropriate letter. We are talking substantial sums of money here.

I fear here you’re missing the essential point. Nikon misappropriated your property and replaced it with unacceptable equipment. Issues of whether it was done maliciously, or just negligently, or simply unthinkingly, or with best intentions are wholly irrelevant to the simple fact they converted your property which is equivalent to a theft. Conversion merely requires the intent to exercise dominion and control over the property in question and that is precisely what Nikon has done. You are entitled to have your equipment returned and, in response to an earlier comment, in the alternative, the reasonable value in dollars of the original equipment in the extremely unlikely event they can no longer find it in their system. The “practicality” of the situation is if you don’t make a proper refusal of their proffered substitute inferior replacement and make a proper demand for the return of your original equipment, the best you can hope for is they “graciously“ give you an unbroken case in which to place an inferior refurbished lens that upon resale you’ll take a serious financial loss. That result would be unfair, inappropriate, and fundamentally wrong.

This is not a question of burning bridges, or of being “aggressive“ as opposed to being “assertive,“ this is simply a question of whether you’re going to make an appropriate, (emphasis on the word “appropriate),” demand on a company that has wronged you to correct the situation and place you back in the position you were in before they converted your property. Making an appropriate demand is not, as apparently some would a think, a declaration of war, it is instead, a clear statement to Nikon of your expectation of a fair and reasonable resolution of a problem they created.

As it stands now, all you’ve done is asked for them to give you an unbroken case for a presumably inferior refurbished lens, apparently accepting that lens in lieu of your original one. If your request is approved, and you get a case, you’ve lost your original lens and it’s value on resale. Where’s the fairness in that. Based upon my experience with Nikon, you will not get past a pleasant sounding customer service rep to a supervisor, but even if you do, your not getting your lens back because you haven’t requested it.

In your shoes, I would write a letter, explaining your position that you do not accept the replacement lens and demand the return of your original lens and case. In the alternative, in the extremely unlikely event that they cannot locate it, you want the value in dollars of the equipment they lost. Doing this you open the discussion from a position of relative strength requesting only what’s fair and reasonable vice just asking for a better case and taking a bath. The worst that can happen is they say no and you negotiate down to a replacement case.

I suggest paying an attorney to write the letter because many decades of hands on experience tells me companies like Nikon take lawyer letters more seriously than letters received from just an aggrieved customer.

Best of luck to you. Paul

 

[ctmasada]

Paul,

Thank you very much for taking the time to share your recommendations in such a considered and intelligent way. I am grateful to you and the BCG community. I will reach out to Nikon Support again today…

Warmest regards,
Chris

 

[DavidT]

Reading this makes me glad I sent my 300 f2.8 to APS in Chicago and had a motor replaced. I got it done in less than a week, got my actual lens and case back.

I would be pretty pissed and now Nikon gets the better case, a mint lens they will ultimately repair and sell as a refurbished lens.

No thanks! I would tell them to send my old lens back and I would seek an alternate repair.

 

[ctmasada]

Thanks a lot, DavidT. I reached out to Nikon Support again just now, since I’ve yet to hear back. I asked whether they still had my lens and trunk, and I clearly stated my expectations for repair of my original lens, as I had authorized, and return of my trunk (or replacement with like-new). We’ll see where I end up. I appreciate your support.

Chris

 

[PAUL50]

Paul,

Thank you very much for taking the time to share your recommendations in such a considered and intelligent way. I am grateful to you and the BCG community. I will reach out to Nikon Support again today…

Warmest regards,
Chris

Good luck!

 

[PAUL50]

Reading this makes me glad I sent my 300 f2.8 to CPS in Chicago and had a motor replaced. I got it done in less than a week, got my actual lens and case back.

I would be pretty pissed and now Nikon gets the better case, a mint lens they will ultimately repair and sell as a refurbished lens.

No thanks! I would tell them to send my old lens back and I would seek an alternate repair.

I’ve used CPS Chicago and they’re great.

 

[Replytoken]

I’ve used CPS Chicago and they’re great.

I believe that is APS if this is who is being referenced: https://www.nikoncamerarepair.com/ .

--Ken

 

[PAUL50]

I believe that is APS if this is who is being referenced: https://www.nikoncamerarepair.com/ .

--Ken

Thanks. Stand corrected.

 

[ctmasada]

APS site bookmarked for future reference. Many thanks!

 

[ButlerKid]

FWIW....I have used APS in the past and been satisfied with their work. Their prices are comparable to Nikon Repair.

 

[philippe]

.