Is this to good to be true? £100 Kodak 3700

156 replies [Last post]
johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Slipperman
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2001

John

Seems to get 'middling' review. But, does look exceptional value at £100.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?cameras=kodak_dx3700&method=sidebyside

Here's better review http://www.steves-digicams.com/2001_reviews/dx3700.html

[This message has been edited by Slipperman (edited 05 January 2002).]

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

It does look good, my Dad was after a cheap one, and this look excellent value, I wonder if PCWorld have them in stock at this price?

Also Slipperman thanks for the review links, not to bad, and they did review them at $500 and $400, if they were $100 I think the review would have been even better.

Could someone confirm it comes with the docking station, as the reviews say this is a must have.

The Kodak site says "KODAK EasyShare Camera Dock insert" is this it?

cheers

Mick

Mick

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.kodak.com/GB/en/corp/store/catalog/Product.jhtml?PRODID=20869&CATID=7354#dx3700 also says

quote:
PACKAGE CONTENTS

KODAK EasyShare DX3700 Digital Camera with wrist strap
KODAK EasyShare Dock
KODAK Picture Software CD
Cables for USB and video
7-Volt AC adapter
KODAK Ni-MH Rechargeable Battery Pack
Documentation Kit
KODAK EasyShare Camera Dock insert

The bold lettering had better be 'it'

Great review link Slipperman

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

cheers John,

Looks like it does have Docking Station

I am just looking at a advert in National Newspaper for Dixons and it has a Kodak DX3215 (1.3 MP) for £169.89, so 3.1 MP for £100 has to be a bargain.

Unless someone out there knows different?

Mick

Mick

ChrisG
Offline
Joined: Apr 10 1999

As fat as I can see this camera only has a digital zoom (3x?). Is this a drawback?

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

At £300 maybe, at £100 with 32mb mem card, who cares (unless you have a specific requirement then pay £400 - £500), at £100 it's a deal, it's a steal, it's flaming sale of the century.

All the write ups on the above post by Slipperman were not to bad, and this was at $400 & $500.

Mick

[This message has been edited by Hawk (edited 06 January 2002).]

Mick

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Well spotted John.

I just bought a DSC but have ordered one of these anyway - at the price it has to be worth a chance!

Gavin

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Disclaimer

If this adventure goes pear shaped 'Don't Blame Me'

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

They confirmed the order & product was "in-stock".

I'm expecting it to turn up on Tuesday.

It seems like a safe bet:-

"Thank you for shopping at kodak.com! Please review the terms
and conditions at: http://www.kodak.co.uk/GB/en/corp/store/op/orderPolicy.jhtml
These govern this contract which are provided for your reference.
Please print these off and keep them in a safe place.

You should also be aware that you have a right to cancel this contract
if you wish, without stating any cause, by sending or delivering to us a
notice in the form attached within seven (7) working days beginning with
the day on which the relevant goods are delivered to you. Any monies paid
will be refunded within 30 days. If exercising this right, we would ask
you to keep the goods in the condition they arrived in, and return them, in
their original packaging, to the address stated below:

Kodak
c/o Sykes
Nether Road
Galashiels
TD1 3HE
UK

The only cost you are required to bear is the cost of the postage to return
the goods to us."

Thanks again John (without prejudice )

iMike
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 2000

Spoke to Kodak - they say the £100 price was a server error, no stock at this price (wether they honour orders already placed is anyone's guess).

Alan Roberts at work
Offline
Joined: May 6 1999

It's the old story, "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is".

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

I just checked my online order status

quote:
Thanks for your order!

Your order confirmation number is: W-05-******
The order status is currently: PROCESSING

Here is the order we are processing for you:

QTY Item Item Total
2 KODAK DX3700 Special Deal £200.00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shipping £4.99
TOTAL £204.99
Includes VAT of £30.53
X Snip

I am still expecting these 2 cameras at the quoted price.
(Please Note, the confirmation number was edited by me )

Does everyone elso who ordered this camera have the same £100 price in 'online order status'? (Mine is for 2 cameras)

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 07 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

John,

Yes exactly the same.

I tried to talk to trading standards today to see how I stand, you have to type in a post code at the web site, tried that number, message said sorry we are carrying out training this afternoon and are closed.

Brill I thought so typed in my work post code phoned that number, answered "Can I have you address" so give it "sorry you have to phone your local TS", well can you help me it's just a question, sorry you have to phone you local one.

I wonder if TS have a TS.

Anyway will phone tomorrow.

Mick

Mick

Alan Roberts at work
Offline
Joined: May 6 1999

As far as I'm aware, an adertised price is legally only an "invitation to treat", i.e. it's an initial offer which they don't have to honour. They have no obligation to sell at an advertised price, or above it or below it, or at all.

You might be able to press them to honour it, or to make an offer, but legally they don't have to.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

The legal situation (maybe) http://www.ed-u.com/online-price-mistakes.htm

quote:
Online price mistakes
Problem:
Dear e-law doctor, we advertised a computer on our Business-to-Consumer (B2C) web site at the wrong price by mistake and customers have ordered thousands of them. We have e-mailed the customers stating that we apologise and there is no binding contract because we did not confirm the order.

Some customers are now threatening us with legal action.

Answer and remedy:

Pricing error on web site costs Buy.com $575,000

Approximately 7,000 customers have just brought a successful class action lawsuit in America against Buy.com. for a mistakenly priced item on their web site. Buy.com have agreed to pay $575,000 in compensation. The terms of the settlement, which is subject to court approval, provide that after legal expenses, each customer will receive about $50.

A Hitachi monitor was offered on the Buy.com site in 1999 for $164.50, instead of $588, by human error over a period of 4 days.

Buy.com said it would honour the stated price for the 143 monitors that it had in stock, but that it would cancel all other orders. Then they changed their terms and conditions for future sales on their site reserving the right to cancel or refuse orders for items offered at an incorrect price.

The UK Argos case
In the UK in 1999 a similar dispute arose when Argos offered televisions on its web site for £2.99 instead of £299. Although, a breach of contract action seems to have failed, legal experts believe that Argos could have been prosecuted and fined by Trading Standards or the Office of Fair Trading under present English laws.
All web sites should avoid such adverse public actions by making sure:

that the information on their sites is accurate
they have secure terms and conditions for e-tailing
that the terms reserve the right to cancel or refuse orders for items offered at an incorrect price

Guest article by our legal contributors, © Abbiati e-law consultancy Ltd, 2001. Specialists in international e-business law:

Comments any one?

UPDATE
More info http://www.oft.gov.uk/html/shopping/index.html

Another UPDATE http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/the_economy/newsid_441000/441740.stm

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 07 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

quote:Originally posted by Alan Roberts at work:
As far as I'm aware, an adertised price is legally only an "invitation to treat", i.e. it's an initial offer which they don't have to honour. They have no obligation to sell at an advertised price, or above it or below it, or at all.

You might be able to press them to honour it, or to make an offer, but legally they don't have to.

But in our case we made an offer, and they sent us an e-mail accepting that offer with a order number (and confirmation of the price), and so entering into a contract.

YES/NO?

Mick

Mick

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/the_economy/newsid_441000/441740.stm

Business: The Economy Argos - an invitation to 'treat'

quote:
So the customer cannot insist on buying the television at the advertised price. If the shopkeeper has put an unusually low price on it - deliberately or by mistake - he can refuse to do a deal with the customer.

Argos does not have to sell you a television for £3.

However, if the company accepts your order electronically then there may be a valid contract.

Mmmmmmmm

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

Mick

Please post this for me at CV Digi Camera http://www.theinquirer.net/07010209.htm

quote:
Kodak finds itself in grey area over £100 camera offer

But consumer law untested
By Mike Magee, 07/01/2002 12:29:19 BST

HUMAN ERROR CAUSED a glitch on a Web site that meant a camera normally offered for £329 was displayed for some days at a knock down offer of £100.
See Kodak makes Kodak Web offer Eva Glass can't refuse.

That could means that a heap of disappointed would-be buyers of the digital camera may find they get no camera and no redress in consumer law either. Maybe.

A representative of Kodak UK told the INQUIRER this morning that human error had caused the DX3700 to appear on a Web page in a bundle that cost £100.

Some people who thought they had secured a bargain have even started advertising their prize on Ebay, we learn.

The Kodak representative said that the price should have been £329 and that although orders for the camera have been taken, to the best of her knowledge none of those orders have been processed. The error, she said, was corrected within 24 hours.

It was never supposed to have been listed at that price, Kodak said.

But the case is a very grey area, a representative from the Consumers Association told us today.

Whether hundreds of buyers are now out of luck is debatable. Although Kodak said it was checking with its own lawyers and would issue a statement later today, the UK Consumers Association has a view on the case.

The press office told us that if the camera was offered as a result of a mistake and was obviously not meant to be offered at that price, it could be that people who had received confirmation of that order might not "have a leg to stand on".

But she added that if buyers reasonably thought the camera was being offered at that price - and she said with prices being as competitive as they are today, particularly in electronics goods - that might be argued, Kodak might have to stump up, particularly if the firm had confirmed the order.

The particular page which we linked to yesterday suggested that the deal was a "special offer", so this is where it could get interesting.

She said online transactions were a grey area and every new case that happened was in effect a test case.

It looks as though we'll have to wait to see what Kodak says in its statement. We've had dozens of emails from people who have had confirmations.

My browser Computer is writing a tape at the moment & I don't have the CV password on my son's

Cheers

John Price

Hope this is ok Bob, if not either delete your self, or let me know.

Mick

Mick

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Mick

Thanks for posting the Inquirer link above when my main computer was unavailable.

Heres the Rub from Kodak

email received 07 January 2002 20:02

quote:
Dear Sir or madam,

Recently, you submitted an order for our collection of DX3700 Digital Camera
plus memory card and inkjet paper. The

price stated in that order is £100.

We regret to inform you that, unfortunately, the price as stated on the
Shop@Kodak website on December 31, 2001 was incorrect. It should have been
£329. We rectified this on our official site within 24 hours but we
understand that for a short period thereafter some people have been able to
continue to access the page by quoting a specific url.

All orders placed from our website legally constitute offers to purchase
from us, just like taking goods to the till in a retail store. As such, we
are entitled to accept or reject offers from customers.

In this instance, notwithstanding you having received a confirmation of
receipt of your order, we must decline to accept your offer to purchase the
DX3700 Digital Camera package at the incorrect price of £100,and we have
ceased any further processing of your order. We naturally will

not now be deducting that sum in respect of the DX3700 product collection
from your credit card, since we are unable to deliver the product to you in
these circumstances

This does not affect any other goods ordered by you stating the correct
price placed at the same time as the order for the DX3700 product
collection.

We do apologise for any inconvenience to you arising from this error and any
disappointment caused. As a goodwill gesture therefore, we are happy to
offer you a discount of 10% off your next order from the Shop@Kodak site,
placed before January 31 2002. To take advantage of this offer , please call
us at 0870 2430270.

We look forward to your continued shopping at Kodak.com.

If you require further information please call us on 0870 2416639

Kind Regards

Shop@Kodak

I bought this camera in good faith as a special deal, I thought it was to good to be true, however I am still peeved.

I suspect this one may make the news as quite a few forums have picked up on it.

Regards (I did mention pear shaped )

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 07 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

No problems John.

I think the one area they are on dodgy ground is this:

In this instance, notwithstanding you having received a confirmation of
receipt of your order, we must decline to accept your offer to purchase the

the notwithstanding

To me this means oops! This is where we lose out.

Like you John I will follow this with interest, as I think the press will get hold of it.

I know for a fact of one local BBC radio station where people took up this offer, one in consumer affairs, and I have sent them my details.

As for it going Pear shaped John, I just thank you for brining it to our attention, at least we had the chance, your initial reaction as well as mine was not how good a offer it was, but what was wrong with it (The Camera that is).

Mick (Hoping for a Digital Camera for his Birthday)

[This message has been edited by Hawk (edited 09 January 2002).]

Mick

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

"But she added that if buyers reasonably thought the camera was being offered at that price - and she said with prices being as competitive as they are today, particularly in electronics goods - that might be argued, Kodak might have to stump up, particularly if the firm had confirmed the order. "

I believed the camera offered was a special deal, it was cheap - but that's what special deals are all about - after all the camera has no optical zoom and uses an odd ball memory card. True - it has good resolution but so has a £1.99 35mm from a toy shop.

It's clear from the statement above that Kodak know there is a problem. However, they haven't attempted to contact me since I placed the order, so I can only (rightly ?) assume that all is well & my spanking new DX3700 et al will turn up in the morning .

Gavin

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Gavin

'Online Order Status' You do have a number?

I have just checked my 'Online Order Status'

It's still been processed!!!

'notwithstanding ' (In spite of) the email which you can't reply to, I am still expecting my cameras to turn up, as it was in stock when I ordered it.

The reason I believe this is because the Precedent has been set by the Buy.com incident. (Which seems fair) http://www.ed-u.com/online-price-mistakes.htm

quote:Buy.com said it would honour the stated price for the 143 monitors that it had in stock, but that it would cancel all other orders. Then they changed their terms and conditions for future sales on their site reserving the right to cancel or refuse orders for items offered at an incorrect price.

John Price (Super Optimistic mode)
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 08 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

I would like to think you're right John and my online order status says the same thing more than 24 hours after I placed the order.

Kodak's confirmation said that the items where in stock at the price and my card WILL be charged. I cannot check my CC until morning but if it's been billed they have to send the goods.

Maybe Kodak's PR departments ar*e is twitching - the papers & radio stations (eg 5 Live) love to get their teeth into anything like this.... Argos made the ITN & BBC TV News when the messed up with some underpriced telly's.

ChrisG
Offline
Joined: Apr 10 1999

My advice would be to send the documentation you have to the ASA. They are fair (well they found in my favour with a not dis-similar incident in 1998 with Techno -didn't include the internet but the principle was the same).

Basicly as I see it if you have n order confirmation then Kodak should supply. It is not your responsibility if they choose to automate their order system.

Good luck
Chris

[This message has been edited by ChrisG (edited 14 January 2002).]

Ken W
Offline
Joined: Apr 9 1999

I have an order confirmation number, so have they not entered into a contract? If the price had been correct and I refused to pay after ordering, would they not have "demanded" the money? Would they not just have taken the money from my credit card? Of course they would! So does the law only work one way in this instance?
As I see it. It was marketed as a "special offer" so we are entitled to believe the price to be correct as a special offer.
Something not yet mentioned which may be relevent. Kodak say it's a mistake, but "nowhere" on that special offer page did they place the usual E&OE (errors & ommissions excepted)
Thoughts please.
Regards
Ken

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Got the "sorry we messed up" email overnight.

It suggests they did debit my CC but will put the money back. If this is correct then Kodak have entered into a contract and should fulfill the order.

Here's a quote from their own terms of business.

"Please note that we will, however, not deduct any sums from your credit card unless, or to the extent, we are able to deliver the products to you."

I don't expect to get anything joy from Kodak but it's been a larf .

Alan Roberts at work
Offline
Joined: May 6 1999

I think that if they've accepted your order, they've entered into a contract and that dispenses with the "invitation to treat" caveat. So I reckon they've got to supply because they agreed the price by accepting the order. Kodak's a big firm so they might just let it go and write off their loss. But they won't repeat the scenario.

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Posted on behalf of John Price (the remote contributor).
-------------------------------
Subject: CV Kodak's "special offer" of £100 for the DX-3700

Gavin

More info at
http://www.theinquirer.net/08010206.htm
Pressure mounts on Kodak to deliver cameras

Please reply to me at xxxxx@xxxxxx

You can post this link in your name if you wish as I am at work without my
CV password

Also see linked from this page http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2002010543,00.html

Thanks

John Price

Auto-letter not good enough
By Mike Magee, 08/01/2002 09:30:06 BST

DESPITE PLACING A CALL to Kodak UK's PR department yesterday, which resulted
in the company promising us a statement by the end of play yesterday, no
such missive has tipped up in our email inbox.
But we had hundreds of emails from people who took advantage of Kodak's
"special offer" of £100 for the DX-3700 camera and we've also received
additional information from the Consumers Association which leads us to
believe disgruntled consumers may well have a case and Kodak will have to
deliver these units.

The Sun aka Current Bun has picked up on the story and said 10,000 people
were affected and it could cost Kodak £2.3 million. (Link below).

Along with many others, the INQUIRER has also had an auto-letter from Kodak
which we reproduce in full below, but we believe that really this response
doesn't fit the case.

There are also some points which need clarifying. When we spoke to the Kodak
PR yesterday morning, she told us that her firm had rectified the problem
within 24 hours of finding out about it, but in fact she also said during
the same conversation that the "special offer" had been up on the Web since
Thursday last week. That's been confirmed by many readers who placed orders
for this unit at the end of last week.

It's obvious that many of our readers really did believe that this was a
special year end offer, and as the sum of money is not vastly different from
the list price, we think that it's reasonable for them to press the point.

Take this letter, for example: "Isn't this the January Sale time when good
are shifted at low prices? Wasn't the page indicating that this was a
"special deal"? & Isn't this camera offered for $238.00 from buydig.com? http://zdnetshopper.cnet.com/shopping/resellers/0-11326-
1411-6913299-0.html? It's not the only "special deal", tho' Kodak's was
better - I'd expect that as they make them!"

Another reader emailed us with the following: "The price for the Kodak
camera wasn't unbelieveable for the following reasons: 1. It's January sale
time when companies shift slow moving stock, 2. The DX3700 has received some
poor reviews (Re battery life) therefore it can be assumed they weren't
selling as well as they should, 3. There are loads of instances of goods
being sold at 1/3 the retail price. "PC World were selling Psion wavefinders
for £49 recently-retail price £299, I recently booked a holiday on the 'net
for £420-brocure price £1069+insurance, PC world were selling a printer for
£25 recently- normal prince £79, Martin Dawes were selling TiVo's at
£149-normal price £399."

Advice faxed to the INQUIRER by the Consumers Association would suggest to
us that Kodak should be pressed to deliver these goods. This document is a
Q&A which has distinct relevance to this case and is also shown below.

We now believe as a result of this that Kodak ought to provide the goods at
the price advertised - if not as part of a contract, then certainly as a
matter of goodwill.

The "confirmation" Kodak talks about in its auto reply is actually a
receipt - that's what our copy says.

We will be happy to hear from Kodak again and we're still waiting for the
statement from them.

If the firm rings us or emails us, we'll update this story later. µ

* AS A MATTER OF RECORD, we'd just like to point out that the INQUIRER
bought one of these items too for the purposes of research into this story.
We already have a top notch Fuji camera and don't really need a new one, but
we reject the cancellation of our own order for the camera and expect
delivery forthwith. Like many of our readers, we received an email
confirmation of the price, including delivery, at £104.99. µ

See Also
Kodak finds itself in grey area over £100 camera offer
Kodak makes Kodak offer Eva Glass can't refuse
Digital Photography News External coverage of the story
BBC Argos story More Web buying tomfoolery
Current Bun latches on to the story
--------------------------

[This message has been edited by Gavin Gration (edited 08 January 2002).]

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Kodak have special a DX3700 Web Offer department in place - I spoke to them earlier today, very nice people but not yielding on my order.

They did send me the address of their legal department.

----------------

Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:44:39 -0000
From: Kodak Digital Imaging Support Centre

Subject: Kodak Address (Lindsey - KDISC)

Dear Sir,

Here is the address you requested,

Kodak Legal Department
Kodak House
PO Box 66
Station Road
Hemel Hempstead
HP! 1JU

Regards,

Kodak Digital

-----------------

John Willett
John Willett's picture
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2001

As this thread sems to be on two boards at once I have just posted on the other thread
http://www.dvdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubb/Forum8/HTML/001271.html

and suggested we all continue here.

I did, by the way, copy the other thread to Which? this morning.

John

John
 
A picture tells a thousand words, but sound tells a thousand pictures.

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999
johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Watch this space tomorrow http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/audiovideo/programmes/working_lunch/default.stm

Richard Ruane is been interviewed
(Source http://letstalk.planetdps.com/read.php?TID=27 A forum dedicated to this issue)

Thanks to Gavin & Mick for posting my stuff from afar.

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

This morning at 7:34

quote:
Thanks for your order!

Your order confirmation number is: W-05-xxxxxxx
The order status is currently: PROCESSING

This evening at 18:10

quote:
Thanks for your order!

Your order confirmation number is: W-05-xxxxxx
The order status is currently: REMOVED

Well done to Kodak for the biggest e-commerce cock up this Century, so far.

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

ChrisG
Offline
Joined: Apr 10 1999

I will tout this again: The Advertising Standards Authority are duty bound to investigate all cases brought to their attention - they have a lot more clout and knowledge than any one individual.

[This message has been edited by ChrisG (edited 14 January 2002).]

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

More links
http://www.ananova.com/business/story/sm_489892.html
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?REQUNIQ=1010427994&30REQEVENT=&REQINT1=8&REQAUTH=21046&8001REQSUB=

There was some stuff on Radio 5 (That I didn't hear)

Apparently it was something like this

""Essentially a website which advertises products for sale is no different to a shop window, so advertisements would normally be viewed as simply "invitations to treat". However, publishers should ensure that they do not fall into the same trap as Argos. If the website generates an automatic reply in the form of a confirmatory note after the order is placed or by way of a separate email, then it is likely that acceptance will have already occurred and a binding contract entered into. It will be too late to try to get out the contract later on. The alternative is to set up a manual confirmation system and publishers will have to weigh up the costs and risks of doing this."

Also allegedly said:

"They just had a 10 minute article on it with Kodak on the phone and some legal guy. Kodak weren't budging even though the other guy was telling him that they've accepted an offer to treat and they're legally bound by the Sale Of Goods act to fulfil the contract."

We will have to wait & see on this one.

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 08 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/bglitem.cgi?file=BADV065-1111.txt

quote:
Guidance Leaflet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Selling on the Net

A checklist for businesses within the United Kingdom, wishing to adopt best practice when designing web pages which promote the sale of goods and services on the Net.

If you would like any further information concerning the advertising and selling of goods and services on the internet, please contact your local Trading Standards service.

The Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations were implemented on 31/10/00. The Regulations require the consumer to be provided with information in a clear and easily understood manner and in good time before the conclusion of any distance contract.

CONSUMER PROTECTION (DISTANCE SELLING) REGULATIONS 2000

Key features of the Regulations:

the consumer must be given clear information about the goods or services offered.
after making a purchase the consumer must be sent confirmation.
consumer has a cooling-off period of seven working days.
new powers for local Trading Standards Departments and the Office of Fair Trading.
By complying with the Regualtions and providing the following information in a clear and comprehensible manner, not only are you encouraging the confidence of consumers, you are enhancing the quality of their on-line shopping experience!
Web site Checklist

Full company details - name, a UK address, e-mail address, phone /facsimile number.
Full terms & conditions which are readily accessible, fair and meaningful.
A description of the goods or services being sold.
Pricing information - fully inclusive of any delivery charges i.e. taxes, excise duty etc.
Details of stages involved in the ordering process including any costs involved in distance communication.
Information about the availability, delivery and despatch of goods.
A clear complaints procedure & policy on returning goods.
Information about withdrawal / cancellation rights.
A statement that the UK law is the applicable law.
A statement indicating that when buying goods and services on the internet, you are entering a legally binding contract.
A data protection statement.
A privacy policy & information about security issues.
A * cookie (unique identifier ) policy.
An opt out box for unsolicited e-mail.
* a cookie is a piece of information that is placed on your computer which enables web sites to remember information about the choices you make when you visit their sites.

A8 06/00

This leaflet is relevant for the following nations only:

England
Scotland
Wales
Northern Ireland

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

The Daily Mirror http://www.mirror.co.uk/kellysi/kellysi/page.cfm?objectid=11522368&method=full

quote:
We're sure Kodak will try to weadle its way out of this one, but we've done our homework - these days a confirmation email is as good as contractual.

http://www.newsgate.co.uk/uk/uk.legal/msg204021.html

quote:
I've spoken to my local trading standards and they are interested, mainly
because of the wording of the email receipt we've all been sent. Essentially
they believe that a contract does exist since offer and acceptance has
occured however that may have come about. I've been advised to contact Kodak
in the first instance (waiting for a call from Kodak Legal now) and advise
them of trading standards' position. TS have asked me to keep them informed
since they may be able to file a misrepresentation charge against them
(=£5000 fine per customer for ~50000 customers = ~£250 million) if they
refuse to supply the camera.

In the mean time, an interesting twist is that the credit card companies may
also be liable under Section 75, Consumer Credit Act 1974. The TS person I
spoke to is unsure as to whether money needs to have changed hands for
section 75 to apply, they seemed to believe that only a contract to supply
was required.

--
Matt Butterworth

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 08 January 2002).]

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 08 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Hamvideo
Offline
Joined: Aug 14 2000

Hi all.
I too placed an order for the KODAK SPECIAL and had the order confirmed--a week after the "error", 06 Jan to be exact, I have emailed Kodak to tell them that they are breaking UK law by trying to opt out of the contract. They have created an interesting precedent, we will all watch this space with interest. I think the heading of the next topic sums it up nicely. "ORBS"

Henry.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.oft.gov.uk/html/rsearch/reports/oft303.pdf
CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974
SECTION 75 – EQUAL LIABILITY

This may or may not be be applicable?

Is there a lawyer in the house

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

ChrisG

Thanks for the tip.
http://www.asa.org.uk

Job Done.

Thank you for filling in the ASA's on-line complaints form. We will now send you a postcard with a reference number for your complaint on it. As you have chosen to e-mail your complaint to the ASA please do not also send us a printed copy of this form or any further information relating to your complaint until you receive your reference number, which should be quoted in all future correspondence with us.

Gavin
NB: No Orbs where harmed during the creation of this posting.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

No 2 complaint sent to ASA

Complaints Form
Thank you for filling in the ASA's on-line complaints form. We will now send you a postcard with a reference number for your complaint on it. As you have chosen to e-mail your complaint to the ASA please do not also send us a printed copy of this form or any further information relating to your complaint until you receive your reference number, which should be quoted in all future correspondence with us.

Thanks Chris G & everyone else for your input

If you see any relevant stuff please post it here.

The next know occurence of this saga is when
Richard Ruane is been interviewed from http://www.richardruane.co.uk/

Working Lunch
BBC2 12:30 Wednesday 8th January

Don't blame me if theres nothing included in the programme

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 08 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Another info site
http://www.andyuk.net/Kodak/

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.mirror.co.uk/kellysi/

Loophole

quote:
Nothing like doing your research, is there?KODAK'S taken the unsavoury decision to worm its way out of the £100 camera fiasco.

In a disgraceful show of corporate greed over mistaken goodwill, Kodak has used a legal loophole so it doesn't have to honour thousands of purchase agreements and lose millions of pounds. It is thought more than 10,000 people received confirmation from Kodak, stating they'd bought the camera.

But Kodak maintains this was a mistake (originally it got itself into more hot water by saying it was a hack). Yesterday it told customers: "We must decline to accept your offer at the incorrect price of £100 and we have ceased any further processing of your order." Legally Kodak can do this because the UK hasn't yet caught up with a European law that makes electronic receipts binding. E-commerce expert James Roper from trade body IMRG told us: "The law is developed by case example and this could become one of those cases that changes the system.

"Clearly, a contract has been formed. The best way to deal with it - to save an embarrassing Trading Standards case - is for Kodak to admit a mistake and as a gesture of goodwill honour the offer."

Somehow, we feel Kodak won't give in that easily.

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

John Willett
John Willett's picture
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2001

Somehow I think Kodak will lose a LOT more by taking this stance.

Not only disgruntled customers, but also the wide world watching this saga are now likely to look for alternatives to Kodak products and the resultant loss of business will be a lot more than coughing up the cameras at £100.

I certainly will think twice about buying Kodak after their attitude to this.

John

John
 
A picture tells a thousand words, but sound tells a thousand pictures.

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

Just submitted my complaint to asa , will contact which later when i find my subscriber no.

kodak will certainly not be selling any more carousel slide projectors to my place of work , approx 3000 every 3 years

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

John Willett
John Willett's picture
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2001

It would be interesting to find out if your credit card had been debited and then credited with the £100 (+ delivery).

If so, then a contract would certainly have been made as soon as the card had been debited and I don’t think Kodak could wriggle out of that.

John

John
 
A picture tells a thousand words, but sound tells a thousand pictures.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

I am very unhappy that the Kodak site has taken my confidential credit card number, I believed in good faith that they had an article for sale, once they had my card number they say sorry and that it isn't for sale!

If a ordinary person was doing this type of thing on a web site I suspect the Fraud squad would be involved.

UPDATES today

I have recorded the Working Lunch programme but I haven't watched it yet.

I thinks it's available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/audiovideo/programmes/working_lunch/default.stm 8 minutes into the real player epic.

The BBC have also told me that they

quote:
will also have a story up on the site this afternoon, which will be based
on the findings of that programme's research.

Reaction at http://www.theinquirer.net/

quote:
Consumers Association warns over Kodak group action
Could be uphill struggle

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

I watched the 5 minute segment on 'Working Lunch', it seemed fair and accurate, however 'No Conclusion' was reached as the lawyers quoted interpret this 'pea soup' episode in different ways.

UPDATE

My queries

Point 1
Kodak say that the site was devlopmental.

Why was it linked to their secure site with the £100 price tag intact & an enabled to recieve an order & post a contract reciept back to the buyer?

Point 2

Gareth Jones (Vice President of Kodak) said that only 25 people made an order on 31st December & they have contacted them.

What about the my order placed on January 4th & other orders up to the 7th of January 2002

More links
The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/23/23606.html

Example Letter to Kodak http://www.richardruane.co.uk/

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 09 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

ChrisG
Offline
Joined: Apr 10 1999

Interesting to note that during a recent walkabout in Ipswich (during which Jessops were unable, without a significant amount of tutoring on the camcorders they sell and accessories to tell me they didn't have a neutral density filter for a Panasonic ds27/8 - Dixons were more help, what is happening in this world!!).

Anyway back to story. Nearly every electrical store (and Argos) had very (VERY) prominant notices informing of print errors in catalogues and adverts and notification of the correct prices for goods in these cases. Never really noticed this in previous years.

Just a thought but in Health & Safety legislation, the phrase "where reassonably practicable" is often used as a defence. Surely it was "reasonably practicable" for Kodak to proof read their web-site in the same way that these stores had done with their catalogues and correct their mistake before uploading the information, especially bearing in mind the size of the company and the customer base they command?

Good luck all

Chris

[This message has been edited by ChrisG (edited 14 January 2002).]

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

How long, with 1,000’s of orders a day (numbers of up to 10,000 people are being banded about) , for cameras that you normally get 10 or 20 orders tops, until you realise there is a problem?

31 Dec 01 until the 7 Jan 02 = 8 Days.

Why did it take 8 days to realise, could there be something more sinister in Kodak and there agents case?

I think Kodak is laughing at us, all those lovely address for mail shots etc.

Have we been duped or can you really make this kind of error, with all those orders flowing through each day (It does not say a lot for Kodak’s quality control) there most be some safe guards in place?

I say again 8 days, no way.

There is a nasty smell about this; one day maybe 8 NO way.

The other answer is total incompetence, to a frightening level, that will make me steer well clear of any Kodak product.

Unhappy Mick.

With a very unhappy Dad , who will not now be getting a Digital Camera for his birthday, (anyone knows of a good Digital camera around the £100 mark)?

I love my Dad, but pay £329 (£290 odd with the Kodak, 10% discount offer) when .

Mick

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Dail Mirror 10th Jan 2002
http://www.mirror.co.uk/kellysi/

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Paul Argyle
Offline
Joined: Dec 14 2000

Yes definitely check out the DVD Reviewer link. It's the best overall legal analysis I've seen so far.

Apologies if this has already been posted but here's the email I got this morning (automated reply - the sequel!) I had sent a complaint via their website and also to the address shown...

-------------------------------
From: kdisc@support.kodak.com
Subject: DX3700 Order Complaint

Dear Mr Sir/Madam,

Thank you for contacting us again, we're sorry we can't write to you personally, and hope that the following will help to clarify the points in your letter. As we indicated before, all orders placed from our website legally constitute offers to purchase from us. As such, we are entitled to accept or reject offers from customers. In particular the email we sent you after you placed your order is merely an acknowledgement of receipt of your order and not an acceptance. This acknowledgement is part of an automated system as is common industry practice. It is not a contract. We declined to accept your offer to purchase the DX3700 camera collection at the incorrect price of £100 and as a result we did not process your order any further, and therefore did not deduct any money from your credit card.

Once again we do apologise for any inconvenience to you arising from this error and any disappointment caused. Kodak is naturally very embarrassed by the whole incident and as you know as a gesture of
goodwill is offering 10% off your next order at Shop@Kodak (for orders placed before 31 January 2002). To take advantage of this offer please call us at 0870 2430270.

Yours faithfully

Shop@Kodak

-------------------------------

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

With referance to the: http://www.dvd.reviewer.co.uk/news/feature.asp?Index=5265 artical.

As you say a positive article.

The one area I disagree with is:

Try to avoid using emails or telephone calls to deal with the company, as these are easily lost or forgotten, and/or difficult to trace later. You will also be lost in the melee of people trying to contact Kodak right now.

All though I agree for future litigation it will not be of much use, I think as many people as possible should be phoning and e-mailing them now! This will make them aware of the feeling out there, which may help them to focus their minds on which way to jump next.

Mick

Mick

Paul Argyle
Offline
Joined: Dec 14 2000

I agree Hawk. I read elsewhere that we should be phoning the customer service number as Kodak are monitoring the response. I've just done that and spoke to a very nice lady who was more than happy to log a complaint and made notes ref. my order number about what action I had taken so far. I think that in this case, given the number of people involved, a direct response via phone and email is essential to leave Kodak in no doubt about the scale of the problem.

abbiati
Offline
Joined: Jan 10 2002

Kodak victims have a good case!

Some retailers who have done the same thing on the High Street have been prosecuted

I have posted a new legal opinion on my website: www.elawdoctor.com stating that victims have a good case.

In my opinion, all the victims should form an action group with one spokesperson, one lawyer, representing them.Trading Standards, The Office of Fair Trading London, must be interested.

They should speak to Radio 5 Live and Working Lunch on BBC 2 who have featured this already. And what about BBC's Watchdog programme?

I am an e-commerce lawyer/consultant and a a part-time, self-employed adviser, acting as a 'Business Service Adviser' for 'Business Link for Essex'

Regards
Paul Abbiati
mailto:law@abbiati.co.uk, www.elawdoctor.com

ps
Offline
Joined: Feb 28 2001

One of our Kodak cameras has developed a fault, so I phoned the customer services number (0870 243 0270 in case you need it). While listening to the "press 1 for .... press 2 for ...." stuff I heard an option for DX3700 web orders. Out of curiousity I pressed that option having read these threads to see if there was any additional information there. Basically I lied and said a colleague of mine has bought one! Anyhow, after some time on hold they told me that the official line is that there was a fault on the web site and Kodak are no longer wanting to go through with the sales. They advise if you want to go further with the matter you need to write to their legal dept at:

Kodak Legal Dept
Kodak House
Station Road
Hemel Hempstead
Herts
HP1 1JU

I read on with interest as I think this could end up an interesting battle of lawyers. A distant memory of free flights and hoover comes to mind!

PS

John Willett
John Willett's picture
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2001

I really think Kodak are so stupid - I am sure they have now lost far more money in loss of goodwill and, people vowing never to buy Kodak again after seeing their attitude to this; than if they had done the decent thing and supplied the cameras at £100.

If they had, the publicity would have been so good that they would probably have gained many more sales of Kodak products at full price - as it is ........

I will read on with interest

John

John
 
A picture tells a thousand words, but sound tells a thousand pictures.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

The BBC Working Lunch info is now up at the Beeb website.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/audiovideo/programmes/working_lunch/default.stm

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.kodak.co.uk/

quote:
If you have an enquiry regarding the recent KODAK DX3700 Digital Camera Offer you can contact us here http://www.kodak.co.uk/cgi-bin/global/en/service/c ontact/feedback.cgi?conf=/UK/include/en/digital/dx3700Contact/contact.conf

This is the standard answer you get for your time

quote:
Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for contacting us again, we're sorry we can't write to you
personally, and hope that the following will help to clarify the points in
your letter.

As we indicated before, all orders placed from our website legally
constitute offers to purchase from us. As such, we are entitled to accept
or reject offers from customers.

In particular the email we sent you after you placed your order is merely an
acknowledgement of receipt of your order and not an acceptance. This
acknowledgement is part of an automated system as is common industry
practice. It is not a contract. We declined to accept your offer to
purchase the DX3700 camera collection at the incorrect price of £100 and as
a result we did not process your order any further, and therefore did not
deduct any money from your credit card.

Once again we do apologise for any inconvenience to you arising from this
error and any disappointment caused. Kodak is naturally very embarrassed by
the whole incident and as you know as a gesture of goodwill is offering 10%
off your next order at Shop@Kodak (for orders placed before 31 January
2002). To take advantage of this offer please call us at 0870 2430270.

Yours faithfully

Shop@Kodak

This post in another forum is a gem

quote:
I've just had a call from my local TS - according them, and despite the confirmation email, Kodak never actually completed the contract as the confirmation was issued by an automated email responder, so it's not binding.

ANSWER

So does that mean that our orders have not been legally cancelled either because that came from an automated email responder too, didn't it?

I am considering a recorded delivery letter to kodak & kodak legal this W/E

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 10 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.richardruane.co.uk/

quote:
News

What's happening at the moment 10/01

Which magazine are going to run the story in their magazine and website, looking into the legal consequences of Kodak's actions.

Watchdog have confirmed that if there is no resolve before the start of next week they will look at running a story on the Tuesday edition of Watchdog.

I've also heard unconfirmed reports that Working Lunch are going to do a follow up tomorrow (Friday) but I will speak to them confirming this.

I have sent a mail to Kodak's management asking for them to rethink their position otherwise the media interest will be kept up, if we lie down now Kodak will win, and nobody wants that.

I'm also encouraging people to make more of a deal about the lack of security on Kodak's site at the time which allowed CC details to be obtained.

For all those questioning my commitment to this, no I've not been promised a camera by Kodak to silence me, I have a personal life which has been put on the back burner this week, much to my wife's disgust.

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/consumer/index.shtml

quote:
Radio Ulster
BBC Radio Ulster Comsumer affairs programme, "On Your Behalf", will be covering the issue on Saturday morning.

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 11 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

quote:

I'm also encouraging people to make more of a deal about the lack of security on Kodak's site at the time which allowed CC details to be obtained.

end quote:

i asked kodak about the above .......... no reply ... they are getting slow on the answering front ..... maybe they don't all know the same 'corporate lie' yet.

there is a denial contained within a newspaper article yesterday about the statemaent that the site was hacked.

we misheard the answer from the people answering the phones.

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

I've been surfing around looking at the latest info.

Watchdog look set to go with this story on Tuesday.

Working Lunch will update their story when there is a new development, i.e Legal action http://letstalk.planetdps.com/read.php?TID=180

quote:
Interesting email from BBC
Dear Kodak 'customers!'

You are the four people of the hundreds that have told us about this so far, that have said you will be taking Kodak to court. The lawyers we have spoken to suggest you have a very good chance. Following your stories is the way we
can update this saga, and take the story forward.

Please e-mail / call me and tell me what your plans are in relation to this.

We'd love to feature you on Working Lunch.

I'm keen to carry this on but need new things to happen (eg people lodging official complaints against them. If Kodak cave in, as some are suggesting they will next week, then great. In the meantime we'll continue to say on Working Lunch how many people have e-mailed us.

Yours,

Dan

Dan Roan
Broadcast Journalist
BBC News
TV Centre, London
0208 576 0914
07976 888979
dan.roan@bbc.co.uk

I personally think that Kodak will ride it out & hope the fuss will die down.

However I know that Computer Shopper & PC Advisor will be publishing stories on this Kodak mess next issue.

From Kodak's point of view this isn't good news, I suppose if they bowed down to the pressure on them to comply with their contract the bad publicity generated could be reversed and they may end up with a positive outcome, their losses would be offset by the 'good publicity'.

The precedant set would then be the benchmark for other internet pricing mistakes.

If the matter isn't settled before publication of next months Computer mags this could drag on for a long time as the 'loss of bargain' has been woken in many influential people.

Kodak wouldn't like their 3700 featured on the covers of these mags in WH Smith featuring the disatisfaction of visitors to their web pages.

It's in Kodaks hand to wrench good public relations back from the depths of a serious situation.

I am very careful who I give my credit card details to, Kodak won't be getting my details again as my confidence in their automated ecommerce system is shattered.

I don't think I am alone in this view, I hope it hasn't caused damage to other internet shops as well.

Yours

John Price

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 11 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

I have now emailed 'Working Lunch'

The other Kodak related threads on Computer Video forum are

Digital Still Camera http://www.dvdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubb/Forum10/HTML/006151.html

Kodak sale: digital camera at 1/3rd price! http://www.dvdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubb/Forum8/HTML/001271.html

From my calculations 10 Computer Video forum users have given their credit card details to Kodak for Nil product.

Mock Auction springs to mind.

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 11 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

ONLINE CONTRACT LAW http://www.apectelwg.org/apecdata/telwg/e-com/ukeuapec.doc

Comments anyone?

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

ARGOS T&C

quote:
5. The price you pay is the price displayed on this website at the time we receive your order apart from the following two exceptions. For products reserved through Click & Collect, the price you pay is the price in store on the day of collection. While we try and ensure that all prices on our website are accurate, errors may occur. If we discover an error in the price of goods you have ordered we will inform you as soon as possible and give you the option of reconfirming your order at the correct price or cancelling it. If we are unable to contact you we will treat the order as cancelled. If you cancel and you have already paid for the goods, you will receive a full refund.

The Argos conditions now are crystal clear.

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 12 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

On Your Behalf
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/consumer/index.shtml is on now via realmedia player also on the Radio if you can find it.

The Kodak camera fiasco is featured.

oyb@bbc.co.uk

It's just finished, it will be available as a RM recording after midday.
UPDATE
It's starts at approx 40mins into the prog.

Gareth Jones toed the Kodak line, he said that in excess of 2,000 people were involved (Not 10,000).

Kodak can't supply the cameras because of the principle, It would devalue the camera & would undermine their retailers.

He stated the link was only available from before midnight Dec 30th & removed 11am Dec 31st (I think), the link only existed in cyberspace!!

He also said that in a real shop a customer would be advised of the incorrect price & given the option to purchase at the correct price. (This isn't what happens in my experience).

It looks like it's "see you in court" after the 30 days have elapsed.

btw Hertfordshire trading standards are Kodaks local office where most of the complaints are ending up.

If I have made any mistakes, please let me know & they will be corrected.

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 12 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Paul Argyle
Offline
Joined: Dec 14 2000

That's interesting John, I've been waiting for an "official" comment on the number of people involved. 2000+ is not an insignificant figure!! I guess the retailer problem could be quite sticky for them - last time I looked dabs.com had got almost 300 of these cameras in stock.

Mind you, they might not sell them anyway now since the camera's shortcomings have been picked over so much and a more popular price has been established!

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

He stated the link was only available from before midnight Dec 30th & removed 11am Dec 31st (I think), the link only existed in cyberspace!!

i didn't order mine till 6th january.
they therefore didn't remove the links to allow purchase or don't know how to set up websites ..... either way they are incompetent and does that now mean that any kodak webpages could be out of date and therefore no orders are guaranteed to be real in their eyes

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Look what I just found on another forum http://letstalk.planetdps.com/read.php?TID=205
http://www.internetcontent.net/ReportDisplay.asp?ReportID=91

quote:Everyone remembers the glitch that cost Argos; in December 1999 a TV set on their website, retailing for £299.99 was advertised for £2.99, causing a mad rush of bargain lust. Obviously the price was wrong and Argos had to shell out over a million pounds in fulfilment costs. Not only did they lose financially, but also the ensuing media exposure embarrassed their management and dented their credibility. In a customer-centric organisation incidents like this must be avoided.

customer-centric, now that's a word worth remembering http://www.cio.com/archive/120101/rule.html

What I've read on consumer law says, if there is an ambiguous line in a contract, the balance weighs in favour of the customer.
(Don't ask where I read it).

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 12 January 2002).]

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 12 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Another post I may have not seen before

I don't have a direct link for this, it's been quoted from http://www.the-scream.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3794&perpage=20&pagenu mber=2

quote:
The Office of Fair trading have ruled Kodak's contract legally binding!

OFT statement on the matter

The contract (E-Mail Acknowledgement) is VALID and BINDING the Office of Fair Trading Say so.
I have just spoken to the UK Office of Fair Trading at some length.

By accepting your credit card details and sending an order acceptance based upon them they have entered into a legally binding contract. The terms shown on the Kodak website breach EU law on three counts 'unilateral right to alter contract terms', 'Right to alter Price', 'Right to vary delivery period without agreement' you simply cannot grant yourself the right to be able to vary the terms any time you like including during a contracts execution isn't fair or legal and hence isn't binding. The terms may be valid in the USA but they ain't valid 'ere!.

Does anyone have a direct link for this, please.

OFT doesn't show it http://www.oft.gov.uk/html/distance/rights.htm

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 12 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Did anybody get a postcard from the ASA ?

I didn't .

I did get this from Kodak:-

"Dear Mr Gration

Thank you for contacting us. My name is Gareth Jones and I am the General
Manager and Vice President of Kodak Digital in Europe. Dan Carp has asked
me to contact you regarding your recent correspondence to him. I hope that
the following will help to answer the points in your letter.

Clearly, I'm sorry that you are not happy with the way we have been handling
this matter......"

He went on to repeat the official bit about how 'a contract is not really a contract when it's with Kodak'.

(This cop out slogan is now allegedly a registered trademark of Kodak Digital & Applied Imaging EAMER)

Kodak winners of this weeks "E-tosspots" award.

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

You're doing well ...... they won't even answer my emails .... or forms filled in online.

The more they ignore me the harder i'll fight back ...... maybe they aren't sure about scottish law

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Oh Dear http://www.kodakstoxiccolors.org/action/action.html

They seem to have bigger problems than us

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

New Lawyers opinion, Recommended reading,
Including a good sample of a letter to send to Kodak (I think on first looks).

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/a_w_smith/New%20Lawyer.htm

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 12 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Hawk
Offline
Joined: Nov 5 2000

All,

I would like to take this opportunity, to thank John Price for all his efforts keeping the CV Forum users fully up to date on this issue.

Thanks John the info has been invaluable.

I will be out of touch with the Internet for a week (will be in the Lakes) but will keep a keen eye on the TV in the local drinking hole .

Hope it goes well this week, and Watchdog take up the issue (I have mailed them and received a reply).

Anyway thanks again John, keep up the good work.

Mick

[This message has been edited by Hawk (edited 13 January 2002).]

Mick

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

No probs Mick

Thre's so much stuff around, I hope these links will be useful to anyone that's interested.

Another legal link http://www.beale-law.com/view_article.asp?table=PublishedArticle&id=18

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Working Lunch BBC2 featured Kodak again today http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/audiovideo/programmes/working_lunch/default.stm

18min 15 secs into the programme until 23min 50 secs approx. (Only viewable until the next programme)

Points Raised

-Largest amount of e-mails ever sent to 'Working Lunch'

-Kodak say less than 5,000 affected

-Suing for loss of bargain mentioned by one contributor

-This will probably be a test case in a higher court

-Write in after 30 days have elapsed since order, this is the recommendation (distance selling regs)

-Trading Standards organising things & irritated by this matter as well

-Paul Abbiati spoke & said to join together for group action test case later (he who posted earlier in this thread)

Again if I have made mistakes, please let me know & I will correct them.

It looks like Kodak are going to have a long game on their hands.

My prediction, lengthy legal costs, Paying loss of bargain & a heap of bad publicity.

In the end e-commerce will be absolutely straight forward. Although I haven't had major problems like this before.

My biggest problem was trying to cancel a back order with CD N**, In the end they still sent it and agreed to accept the CD back + shipping.

There's a saying in the UK

"The customers always right"

If you don't want people to buy your product Mr Kodak, take the link & mechanism to buy off your site.

Don't display 'Special Deal' when the January sales are on, take the order on an automated system, then say Ooops!

Rapid face saving measure highly recommended.

BBC 1 Watchdog tomorrow night (Very probably).

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 14 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Got a replay to my rejection of offer mail today from Gareth Jones @ Kodak:-

--------------
Sent: 11 January 2002 21:20
To: Management Support
Subject: Re: Digital Camera KODAK Order W-05-XXXXXXX

KODAK Order W-05-XXXXXXX

I reject your stance that we didn't have a deal - you sold it to me and took
my personal credit card details & sent me a receipt. Please honour the
contract we had and send me the camera without delay.

I am ready to participate in a group civil action against your company if
you do not send me the camera I ordered.

Thank you

Gavin Gration

Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 4:33 PM
Subject: RE: Digital Camera KODAK Order W-05-XXXXXXX

----------------------

Dear Mr Gration

Thank you for your reply to my letter regarding the DX3700 offer. At this
time, I can add no further comments to those already made.

Please be assured that we are continuing to give this matter our fullest
attention.

We will keep your reply on file, and we will contact you again if there is
any additional information.

Yours sincerely,

Gareth Jones
Regional Business General Manager & Vice President
Kodak Digital & Applied Imaging
EAMER

-------------

Hmmm...... just have to wait a bit longer then.

Gavin

fisherman
Offline
Joined: Dec 23 2000

If there are less than 5,000 people affected, surely this means that Kodak are only quibbling over about £100,000.

One would have thought that a serious court case and the subsequent publicity (either good or bad) must cost them at least that amount ?

Or are they just playing silly so and so's ??

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Kodak have made a mistake, There's no doubt about that, hence the 10% offer.

They then made a second mistake for principle's sake (Not profit) by choosing not to supply.

They said "Customer you can't have the camera" after our credit card details have been given.

This has never happened to me in any shopping experience before.

If you didn't have it in stock
Say So

If the Price is wrong
Don't direct me to a secure site & take my card details.

If the deal goes through & 'Processing' is displayed
Don't snatch the goods out of my reach.

If it all goes Pear shaped
Don't make excuses, pay up the cost of your mistake & move on.

We aren't noisy customers for nothing.

We feel cheated by the loss of bargain and the misinformation promoted by Kodak to the media.

If Kodak's house was in order they wouldn't be in the mess they are in, a positive decision will get them out of it, I suspect this will be their cheapest option long term.

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

John Willett at Home
Offline
Joined: Jun 29 2001

Fisherman,

The difference is about £1,000,000 for 5,000 customers, not £100,000 (you appear to be missing a nought)

If you only count loss of profit, the figure would be much less.

However, Kodak have probably already lost a lot more than this already due to the bad publicity.

John

Michael Renn
Offline
Joined: Aug 30 2000

Sorry fisherman:
I think your figures are wrong, I make it over 1 million. ie £1,170,000.00
Mike

andrewh
Offline
Joined: Oct 4 1999

The loss if they deliver will be the cost less 100 quid, times 5000. This is probably a negative number and certainly is very small. Normal CE practice is to have list price at around 3 times cost.

If cost was 110 then they would lose 50k and be very very happy. All they need to do is to supersede the DX3700 with the DX3701 and the retailers are then happy as well as they have a 'new' product to sell.

However, if they lose Sepulchre's order for 3000 carousels over the next few years (along with all the professional services they deliver with these wonderful machines), that is devastating, and a much bigger number just from one customer. Losing ten customers like this would mean heads would roll.

Keep at them. If I were UK based, I would have ordered too but on the local site here the special offer was for a much lower spec camera (1.2 Mpixel I think). I reckon the mistake was the wrong camera! Now on the Netherlands site they have the DX3700 bundle at a whopping 629 Euro!!

Andrew

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

BBC 1 Watchdog tonight at 7 o'clock (Maybe?)

7:13 approx

Watchdog Said

TS & ASA investigating

"However It Develops It Looks Like Negative Exposure for Kodak"

Many a True word spoken in jest

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 15 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Watchdog UPDATED
Summary http://www.bbc.co.uk/watchdog/reports/reports_wkodak.shtml

http://www.richardruane.co.uk/

Daily Mirror today http://www.mirror.co.uk/kellysi/

ZDNET http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2102465,00.html

On Your Behalf article from BBC NI http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/consumer/kodak.shtml

UPDATE
Another info site http://homepage.ntlworld.com/a_w_smith/

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 15 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

abbiati
Offline
Joined: Jan 10 2002

Appeal to EU consumer commissioner?

Non-enforcement of e-commerce law on the net is not e-commerce at its best! The internet is not immune from UK consumer law.

If this had happened in the high street in the UK, trading standards could prosecute under 2 well-known consumer laws.

Kodak's defence - their claim that there is no binding contract, its an invitation to treat, acceptance never happened, its a mistake, does not rub.

This is not the first time this has happened. This has been going on for too many years now.

The last famous case on this in the press was 'the Argos case' in 1999. If this behaviour/attitude by a large retailer is left unpunished it will undoubtedly put consumers off buying online.

We need the Office of Fair Trading, the ASA and any other relevant authorities to make a stand for consumers on this.

Appeal to EU consumer commissioner?

If the OFT is not prepared to move on this - consumers should consider contacting the EU Directorate-General on Consumer Affairs and the EU Commissioner on Consumer Affairs.

The UK should be showing the EU, the world that we have the best consumer law on e-commerce not that large numbers of consumers have to fight for their rights on prime time tv because of slowness, inaction by the UK consumer authorities.

Paul Abbiati, www.elawdoctor.com, an e-commerce lawyer interviewed on BBC2 Working Lunch

andrewh
Offline
Joined: Oct 4 1999

A very good way to start addressing this to the European Commission is to go to your Euroguichet that is the local starting point for EU consumer complaints in the UK, it is run by CAB and the details are:

Ms N. Simpson
National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux
Myddelton House
115-123 Pentonville Road
UK - LONDON N1 9LZ
Tel. +44.207.833.2181
Fax +44.207.833.4371 / 833.7037
E-mail nicola.simpson@nacab.org.uk
Internet: http://www.nacab.org.uk

Look at the appropriate web site for more info: http://europa.eu.int/comm/consumers/index_en.html

You could always try sending an email to the Commissioner (david.byrne@cec.eu.int) but I reckon that trying the more normal channels first will get more action.

HTH and good luck

Andrew

P.S. I presume that was John's mug top left on Watchdog. Argh! :-(

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

quote:
P.S. I presume that was John's mug top left on Watchdog. Argh! :-(

Twas not me

John (unless you mean another John?)

The Guardian 16th Jan 2002 http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4336176,00.html

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 16 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

abbiati
Offline
Joined: Jan 10 2002

Class?Group action - funding issues

1. Out of interest, I have telephoned a contact at a top city IP/technology firm to see their reaction to the question - would they represent a group of Kodak victims in return for the publicity they would get?

2. The Law Society run a scheme: 'Lawyers for Business' - check the LS site for members of this scheme. First 30 minutes free - I think.

3. The Bar Council/Inns of Court School of Law run/support a scheme? whereby trainee barristers represent claimants for no charge for experience/pro-bono work. Its usually very serious criminal/human rights cases. This case affects all buyers under English law,could set a precedent and would be well-reported in the media, so, they may be interested. Somebody should approach them.

Paul Abbiati, e-commerce lawyer, www.elawdoctor.com

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

It looks like legal action is afoot if Kodak don't deliver by January 23rd http://dejavu.irc4you.net/Wolfie/read.php?TID=311

Another info site

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

John Willett
John Willett's picture
Offline
Joined: Jun 1 2001

I have received the following from Which? regarding my e-mail to them.

----- snip ----- I have been informed by our legal team that if a consumers order was confirmed the following may be of interest:

The consumer(s) can argue that there is a contract in place for the supply of the goods at the stated price (£100). Kodak's terms and conditions refer to the confirmation email as being a "receipt", so this is evidence of the order being accepted, and a contract being in place.

Where a contract is entered into on the basis of particular terms and conditions - in this case that the price will be £100 - it is a "breach" of that contract to fail to supply the goods as agreed. In such circumstances, the consumer is entitled to claim "damages" to cover losses suffered as a consequence. The most obvious "loss" is the cost of the goods themselves, so if deductions have been taken from a credit card, these should of course be returned. However, it is also possible to argue that another loss is a "loss of bargain". Such a loss arises where it would cost more to purchase the same goods elsewhere. This "loss" is likely to be at least the difference between the £100 quoted, and the amended price of £329.

If a remedy cannot be negotiated, the consumer has the option of taking the matter to the small claims court - details from their local county court/assistance from local CAB.

NB: In law, there is a "defence" to a claim of this type. The principle of the "law of mistake" means that a contract will be voided (effectively cancelled) if either party can show that they have made a mistake in the contract AND it was reasonable for the other party to know that a mistake has been made. This is something that would ultimately be for a judge to decide, looking at issues such as would anyone expect that this product would be sold at such a discount, the expertise and experience of the trader etc. There has been a fairly recent case where a trader was successful in relying upon the law of mistake in similar circumstances, but that does not necessarily mean they would be successful here.

As a side issue, it is a criminal law offence - under the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 - to apply a "false or misleading" description to goods or services sold in the course of a business. It is also an offence - under Part III Consumer Protection Act 1987 (and related legislation) - to apply a "false or misleading" price indication to goods or services sold in the course of a business. These "offences" are investigated by local Trading standards Departments. This may be a (fairly weak) bargaining tool that the consumer can use: say that they will refer the matter to their local Trading Standards Department for consideration.

We are advising those affected to consider contacting the Office of Fair Trading who have been dealing with Kodak on this issue. Because of the Office of Fair Tradings involvement Which? will not be taking an active interest at present although we will be monitoring the situation.

Office of Fair Trading
Fleetbank House
2-6 Salisbury Square
London
EC4Y 8JX
Telephone: 08457 224499

This story was also featured on Watchdog last night:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/watchdog/reports/reports_wkodak.shtml

They stated that both Trading Standards and the Advertising Standards Authority are investigating the story (nothing currently on their websites) and what is being looked at is whether Kodak had entered into a binding contract.

Currently, Kodak have apologised offered a 10% discount for the next purchase to the people that purchased the camera online - but are not going to process the orders at the price offered.

I hope you find the above useful.

John

John
 
A picture tells a thousand words, but sound tells a thousand pictures.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

John

Thanks for posting the above.

In my opinion Kodak's defence is getting weaker & harder to defend.

MicroMart are reporting the Kodak fiasco on page 64 (So I hear, I can't get a copy yet).

UPDATE
ComputerActive http://www.computeractive.co.uk/News/1128346

Kodak's defence in court maybe:

The page was hacked?
The credit card details went to Kodak who in turn cancelled the 'CONTRACT' (Kodak used CAP's) Odd kind of hack to me

Disgruntled employee?
Already denied by Kodak

The price was unrealistic?
Not in January sales season, £29 may have been argued, dropping off the 3, however £100 is IMO is a deliberate entry.

They didn't know the advert existed on their site?
This is from Jan 30th to Jan 7th 2002, in the working week, registering sales against one of their products on their server.

If the Jan 30th post was a mistake why didn't the delete & disable the whole page?
Whoever had the knowledge to load the page with links certainly had the knowledge to remove it properly.

There are probably other arguments on each side. Personally I don't know where the original link came from, my son picked up on the bargain in a PC Zone forum when he was in the market for a digital camera, I just clicked on the link & placed my order, I had my doubts about the quality of the camera i.e. digital zoom & battery memory, however I thought that £100 was a good deal for a 3.1Mp camera.

We use Kodak 3800 cameras at work & they are very good so I thought a superior model was worth the risk.

I originally said:

quote:
Is there something wrong with these cameras?

I didn't doubt the trusted Kodak's secure web pages.

They need to reassess the situation as when this hits the courts things are going to get messy for them. If the ASA chase them £5000 per person for a misleading advert, Although they may have to pay this anyway if found guilty.

This saga is & will be full of Ifs and Buts

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 17 January 2002).]

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 17 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

ASA replied by post today

In a nutshell

quote:
The Codes will not apply to organisations' claims on their own websites.

ASA said I may be able to take up the complaint with CAB or Trading Standards, which I have done already.

My local TS say that small claims court is the way to proceed.

Office of Fair Trading was another suggestion from ASA.

It' amazing what you can get away with nowadays, the saga continues.

Now who's going to film the Kodak documentary?

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 18 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

http://www.kodak.com/GB/en/corp/store/op/orderPolicy.jhtml#TC

quote:
Placing Your Order

How do I order an item online?

Locate the item in the Online Store.
Click "Add to Cart" to place the item in your shopping cart.
Click "Continue Shopping" to return to the Online Store. Make additional purchases and then click "Complete Your Purchase." If you are finished shopping, click "Complete Your Purchase" now.
Enter your billing and shipping information.
Click "Complete Your Purchase." You can also click "Review Your Order" to verify the accuracy of the information before you click "Complete Your Purchase."
Review the information on the Approve Your Order screen and click "Approve Your Order." You can also click "Cancel" to cancel your order or "Change Your Info" to make a change before approving the order.
NOTE: You must click "Approve Your Order" to complete a transaction.

NOTE: You must click "Approve Your Order" to complete a transaction.
That's what I thought I did, complete a transaction.

My Order status today edited to remove personal info i.e.* web page saved

quote:
Thanks for your order!

Your order confirmation number is: W-05-*******
The order status is currently: REMOVED

Here is the order we are processing for you:

QTY Item Item Total
2 KODAK DX3700 Special Deal £200.00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shipping £4.99
TOTAL £204.99
Includes VAT of £30.53

BILLING AND SHIPPING INFORMATION

Billing Name & Address Shipping Name & Address
John ***********
***********etc.

Credit Card
XXXX XXXX XXXX ****

Phone Number Email Address
(*****) ****** john@johnpr98.com

Is this a gift? Gift Message
No

Note that Kodak still say after the

'The order status is currently: REMOVED'

Here is the order we are processing for you:

Confusing

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 18 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Radio Cambridge Kodak Interview link

Angela Simonson? from, Kodak

Angela Simonson said:
Technical glitch (NO HACKING)
Rectified problem in 12 hours
People had bookmarked this removed page???

ALLEGEDLY I SAY
how did the secure server still allow people to make orders, they didn't remove the processes.

Also in the interview:
Dave Broughton (Cambridge TS) said pay up, be a decent company
Kodak won't budge, it's a mistake

Kodak think it's a fair solution for the consumer!!!

Kodak say
Letter is only a receipt to purchase

Kodak legal guidance say that there is no confirmation of order, even though the interviewer said to her that it says that very thing on the retur email.

If no money has changed hands, No Contract
Changes

Less than 2,500 orders, they say they don't have stock available at that price.

Another interview:
Radio Cambridge had even announced it as 'Deal of the day' (Not a Kodak advert).

The Kodak subject has also been aired on Radio Scotland on Friday, No details available .

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 19 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Another Kodak bargain
PALMPIX CAMERA FOR PALM M100
(manufacturer part# 1813955)

£74.13 inc. vat £63.08 ex vat
http://www.gb.buy.com/stores/product.asp?STR=24&sku=230140510&DeptId=11501

Or at KODAK http://www.kodak.com/GB/en/corp/store/catalog/Product.jhtml?PRODID=20873
KODAK PalmPix Camera with Portfolio Case

Item 6021
Price £31.99

This can't be correct can it as Gareth Jones said that they have a duty to their retailers not to undercut them.

Or aren't the items identical?
The Kodak offer does include a case extra to Buy.com's offer.

Of course there is a perfectly rational explanation for these adverts as well, ain't there?

Details pinched from http://dejavu.irc4you.net/Wolfie/read.php?TID=345&page=2

The highest price
Technoworld.com : 111.63

John Price (Only a lay person)
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 19 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

I also wrote to working lunch:-

Can you give Kodak a bit more stick ?

They still won't send the camera I ordered in good faith - not only that they're at it again with products well below RRP (even though RRP's officially don't exist) - they're ofering a PalmPix camera for £31 including as free case worth £29, the same thing in Argos is £89 and no free case - is this another "mistake" or a geniune "special offer".

Give 'em hell till they give me my camera !!!

B.T.W. Lucia Graves-Morris from the A.S.A. wrote to me after I complained to them about Kodak. They can't help with organisations claims made on their own websites uhnless they refer to sales promotions.

Sounds promising doesn't it ?

They go on to say, "the ASA has decided to apply the rule to the `introduction` to consumers through the initial online advertisement but not the subsequent `relationship` that develops with the organisation".

So, as I understand it, the A.S.A. are telling me that it might be naughty for Kodak to advertise something they don't intend to supply at the advertised price - but it doesn't matter because they (the A.S.A.) don't really care !

Can you believe it, who writes their "CODES" - Basil Fawlty perhaps ? We cover you for anything except the bleedin' obvious !!! (Silly walk optional).

Keep up the good work.

Best Regards

Gavin Gration
Proprietor
Manchester Video www.manchestervideo.com

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

I have done some detective work

This recent thread may be interesting, although Tiny did debit this mans card & reinstated the amount before he went to Small Claims.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&threadm=a1vnga%24tn4fu%241%40ID-49507.news.dfncis.de&rnum=9&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DTiny%2BVideologic%2Bgroup:uk.media.dvd%26hl%3Den

Also http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Tiny+Videologic+group:uk.media.dvd&hl=en

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

E-Contract: An Overview of the European Electronic Commerce Directive
http://www.buchananingersoll.com/euro_law/articles/econtract.html

This article makes interesting reading (Argos & Compaq)

quote:
These two incidences demonstrate the difficulties posed by automated ordering systems and an internet retailer may find it very hard to argue that no contract has been concluded particularly where the customer receives an acknowledgement back confirming the order.

John Price (Coughing at home)
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

The heat is on

If you can't stand the heat
Get outta the.......

I had some interesting news this afternoon but was holding onto it for a while, however it's common knowledge now at http://members.tripod.co.uk/kodakcamera/_disc3/00000366.htm

Are there 2 Gavins involved in this

Kodak at 'Ilford'â„¢ sounds a fitting venue to me.

May justice prevail.

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

alan eades
Offline
Joined: Oct 3 1999

John,

Good luck, give `em hell !

Alan.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Guardian Update today
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4341028,00.html

quote:
The full picture

Last week we mentioned that Kodak had advertised cut-price digital cameras on its website, then, after confirming orders made by dozens of customers, decided that the ad had been inaccurate and the price was three times higher. A trading standards spokesman said that the law is blurred in such cases and that it is unclear at what point a contract has been entered into unless money has changed hands.

Conrad Meehan of Leicester city council's consumer protection service disagrees. "The wording of the 'confirmation' emails received by complainants indicates to us very strongly that Kodak have accepted the offer. For example, they state that the order is being processed, they state that the customer's credit card will be billed, they state 'Please keep this message as your receipt of the purchase', and that the consumer has a right 'to cancel this contract'.

"The case could be taken to the county court (small claims track), but the appropriate measure of damages is 'loss of bargain'. That is, if Kodak does not deliver goods in accordance with the contract, it could be held liable for the cost to the consumer of buying the same goods elsewhere. Given a normal price of £329 against the 'special price' of £100, the consumer should therefore pursue the difference, £229, as damages, and not a 'very small amount' as suggested."

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Mirror Update today
http://www.mirror.co.uk/kellysi/

quote:
THE first legal proceedings have been issued against Kodak over the £100 digital camera fiasco.

A claim has been filed in Ilford County Court which will focus on whether a contract was formed when Kodak sent the email saying: "Please keep this message as your receipt of the purchase" and included the word "contract" five times.

The "Special Offer" for the sale of a Kodak DX3700 digital camera appeared on the company's UK website on December 31 for just four hours, claims Kodak.

But customers were able to buy it at the "wrong price" (£100 instead of £329) up to four days later, and receive confirmation of purchase. Sadly, Kodak opted to try and worm its way out of honouring the deal.

It's the first writ we've heard of, but it's not likely to be the last, judging by the strength of feeling against Kodak on sites like Kodakcamera.co.uk

Lawyer Michael Archer of Beale and Company, who will fight the Ilford case, said it will be an important test case, not only for other disgruntled customers (of which they're are 2,000) but for the rules of buying on the internet.

"We've been contacted by 45 people over this, and while only one has issued proceedings, the rest said they will wait and see the outcome," said Archer.

But given the PR battering Kodak will get if it allows this to go to court in six months, Archer is convinced Kodak will settle out of court to avoid massive legal costs.

Yet Kodak remains foolishly bullish. Its letter to Beale and Co at the weekend was unsigned, didn't address any issues and said it was refusing to back down.

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

For the info of the CV 10

UPDATE http://www.theinquirer.net/24010203.htm

Kodak articles appearing soon.

The Sun tomorrow

Computer Shopper Issue 170 (March out end of Feb)

John Price (reporting)
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 24 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

This is more like it
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4342981,00.html

quote:
Customers who insist on their rights are likely to find the courts order the difference between that £330 and the £100 for which the camera should have been supplied.

Richard Colbey is a barrister

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Beale & Co roundup http://www.beale-law.com/
Click on
25/01/02 - Beale and Company take up internet selling case

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Shakey
Offline
Joined: Jan 25 2001

John

Just a quick note to say thanks for keeping us up to date on this. As a purchaser I am following this thread with interest. I have put off buying a new digital camera until this is resolved.

Cheers

Martin
--
www.martinshakeshaft.com

[This message has been edited by Shakey (edited 27 January 2002).]

Paul Argyle
Offline
Joined: Dec 14 2000

Just adding another thank-you for keeping us up to date John. I can just see you as the windswept rain-beaten reporter broadcasting live from the steps of the Magistrates Court as the Kodak entourage admit defeat...I'd be there to take a snap if I had a camera
(Don't suppose anybody round here's got one of those cramcoder video thingys?...)

Cheers,

Paul

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Who me?

I won't be in the front line, behind the camera always.

I should have ordered a camcorder http://www.mirror.co.uk/kellysi/
TESCO IS OFF ITS TROLLEY

Kodak get's a mention many times

I was actually looking for Tims girlfriend. (See Chatter)

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 28 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

New article same news (more or less) http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/23873.html

Radio 5 were discussing the saga this morning but I didn't hear it.

Unconfirmed whisper that the case was ongoing in Ilford today, I suspect this ain't true as it's too early (Prove me wrong someone).

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Radio 5 interview http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/mayo/kodak_statement.shtml

quote:
We received stacks of emails and calls about Kodak's online offer of a cheap digital camera for £100... which plenty of people ordered but didn't receive. The reason? Kodak had made a mistake and withdrew the offer. Here is the full statement from Kodak on this issue:

Kodak statement
On 31st December 2001 Kodak advertised a DX3700 digital camera together with a 32mb memory card plus inkjet paper on the shop@kodak website. The price for this collection of products was shown as £100 which was incorrect.

The correct price of £329 has now been posted on the website. Kodak regrets any inconvenience and disappointment caused to customers. Although Kodak will not sell the above product at the incorrect price, it will offer any affected customers a discount on their next order from the Shop@kodak website by the end of January 2002.

Kodak does reserve the right to decline to accept any customer's offer to purchase, prior to payment.

Frequently Asked Questions
Q. If an email was sent in confirmation of an order then surely this is a contract?
No, this is not a contract. As part of Kodak's good customer care practice all orders to the website are acknowledged on receipt. It is common industry practice and courteous to acknowledge customer orders, all part of an automated system. The whole issue has arisen as a result of a technical glitch which is embarrassing, but Kodak is not legally bound to honour any of these orders as was detailed in our email response to customers. As a gesture of goodwill we are offering a ten per cent discount to those customers affected - we're not legally obliged to do this.

Q. There were no obvious signs for the consumer to pick up the fact that this was a mistake.
Again, Kodak is very embarrassed by the whole incident and is now, as a gesture of goodwill, offering a ten per cent discount to customers who have been affected. This means they will receive a £400 product pack for £360.

Q. How many people were affected by this?
We're not commenting on numbers at this time, but all customers are being dealt with and offered a discounted solution. Again, legally, we are not obliged to do this.

Q. Why not honour the orders?
We are not legally obliged to honour these orders, as very clearly stated in our terms and conditions. We do not have availability of the product at the incorrect price stated and, as per our terms and conditions, we are unable to supply at that price. As a gesture of goodwill we are offering a ten per cent discount to those customers affected - we're not legally obliged to do this.

Q. I have confirmation and this should be honoured. Will it be?
The £100 price stated was a technical error and rectified within 24 hours of being posted. We do not have availability of the product at that price and per our terms and conditions, we are we are unable to supply at that price. However, meantime we have already offered a goodwill gesture of 10% off your next purchase to recognise any inconvenience caused.

Q. Can I have written confirmation that money will not be charged to my card ?
It is our policy not to charge money against credit cards until product is being shipped, so the question does not arise. There will be no charge levied.

Q. This was advertised as an offer and seems reasonable, so how can you retract it?
The price was briefly incorrectly stated on the website . We rectified this within 24 hours of it being posted.

Q. I am going to consult trading standards / consult my lawyer.
We apologise for any inconvenience. If you wish to consult trading standards/a lawyer, then it is your right to do so. In the meantime we have already offered a goodwill gesture of 10% off your next purchase in case of such inconvenience.

Q. We hear that Kodak is offering a camera for £100. Is this true?
No. There are good offers on our website, but not as low as £100.

Q. Does this mean Customers credit order details are insecure on Kodak's main site?
Kodak's internet shop processes your order over a secure site. When a browser communicates with a secure server all data is encrypted, keeping it private. This technology makes it safer to transmit your credit card information over the Internet.

Q. How many Customers had put an order in?
Kodak is currently communicating with all those customers who placed an order for the DX3700.

Send us your thoughts on Kodak's statement.

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 30 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

This may be a windup but the http://www.kodakcamera.co.uk webmaster has made this statement tonight.

quote:
From the frontpage....

The Kodak Surrender Is Imminent - My Trusted Source Has Spoken Directly With A Senior Figure Within Kodak. They Were Unwilling To Confirm Either Way Whether They Were Admitting Defeat. This Is Completely Different To The Answers Given Before. NO.

If True This Would Be The Greatest Consumer Victory In History. 30/01/02 9.00pm

Dom
Webmaster http://www.kodakcamera.co.uk

Doubting John (Who will be right chuffed if it's true)

I only want my camera ordered in good faith.

UPDATE http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl=en&threadm=abkg5uchr3dsv6b8uaqq2l5f9opuuq4ie9%404ax.com&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26group%3Duk.adverts.computer

quote:
From: Paul Womar ({$PW$}@womar.co.uk)
Subject: Kodak Cave In
Newsgroups: uk.comp.vendors, uk.adverts.computer
View this article only
Date: 2002-01-30 11:21:04 PST

Sorry to post yet another bloody Kodak thread but I thought this boy was
pretty important!

I'm sure you can remember the fuss over the DX 3700 camera that Kodak
were offering for 100 quid, the 10% off of the next order as a goodwill
gesture when they refused to fulfill the order. I wanted some CDs from
them so I left it until the last day the offer was valid (today) just
incase they changed their minds.

I made 3 calls today as each time I called nobody was able to give me
the 10% off and I kept being told that someone would contact me or I
should call back. On my 3rd call at 16:30 today I spoke to a guy a
Kodak who told me that I couldn't have my 10% off as they had decided to
fulfil the original orders! Apparently emails will be sent out tommorow
or Friday and a hotline will be set up for camera buyers to call, the
person who I spoke to (didn't get a name, sorry) seemed keen to stress
that it would be open over the weekend, so looks like all should be well
soon. Hopefully we will soon see this email from Kodak and get these
things afterall.
--
-> The email address in this message *IS* Valid <-

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 30 January 2002).]

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 30 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

I'll check my mail with anticipation Mr Price !!!!

But wait !! Today I ordered a phone from Carphone Warehouse's website, Free Phone, Free Connection, Free Delivery, Free 3 year coverplan, £25 cashback for an old phone and a FREE LG DVD Player worth £149.00. (Subject to 12 month contract).

Got the order confirmation - no mention of the free DVD player - I emailed them asking to confirm the offer at lunch time - no reply as yet.

I think they will send it (the website said up to 8 weeks for delivery of DVD player), but if they don't !!!!!

If anyone is in the market for a new phone and free dvd player see the offer at:-
http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/NASApp/commerce/gben-specialoffers-Main

BTW Most current LG players won't play DVD-R's or VCD/SVCD's - which is odd cause the older ones did.
Gavin

[This message has been edited by Gavin Gration (edited 30 January 2002).]

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

If this is correct

I just hope that it isn't the Jan 31st 25 only!
http://www.kodak.co.uk/UK/en/digital/dx3700offerStatement.shtml

quote:
Kodak EasyShare DX3700 Digital Camera Special Offer:
Kodak will offer the Kodak EasyShare DX3700 Digital Camera, along with a memory card and inkjet paper, at the advertised price of £100 + p&p to all of our customers who ordered the camera and accessories recently.

The resolution of this matter has been a top priority for Kodak. One of our company's core principles is our commitment to our customers - even in difficult situations like this one.

As you know, a mistake on our website allowed a number of customers to order the Kodak EasyShare DX3700 Digital Camera and accessories at an incorrect price of £100. Despite the incorrect listing, Kodak will offer the camera and accessories at the advertised price of £100 + p&p.

The customers whose orders have been affected by this situation have been notified directly of this decision, and they have received instructions for taking up the offer. Orders will be processed upon confirmation from the customer, and the cameras and accessories will be shipped directly.

Kodak values its customers. We regret any inconvenience caused by these exceptional circumstances and we appreciate our customers' continued patience in allowing this matter to be resolved.

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 31 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

It's official

email recieved this morning from Kodak Management at 02.22

quote:
Dear Mr John Price

Your Original Order Ref:-W-05-*******

We are pleased to tell you that Kodak will offer the Kodak EasyShare DX3700
Digital Camera, along with a memory card and inkjet paper, at the advertised
price of £100 +p&p to all of our customers who ordered the camera and
accessories.

The resolution of this matter has been a top priority for Kodak. One of our
company's core principles is our commitment to our customers, even in
difficult situations like this one.

As you know, a mistake on our website allowed a number of customers to order
the Kodak EasyShare DX3700 Digital Camera and accessories at an incorrect
price of £100. Despite the incorrect listing, Kodak will offer the camera
and accessories at the advertised price of £100 + p&p.

As noted in previous communications, your credit card has not been charged.
If you would like to purchase the Kodak EasyShare DX3700 Digital Camera,
along with the accessories, for £100 + p&p, please follow the instructions
below. Please note that the closing date for this offer is 28th February
2002.

Once again, we apologise for the inconvenience caused to you by these
exceptional circumstances and appreciate your continued patience in allowing
this matter to be resolved.

Yours sincerely,

Gareth Jones

Regional Business General Manager & Vice President
Kodak Digital & Applied Imaging
EAMER

HOW TO CLAIM:-

1. Call our special Freefone hotline (see 5 below). We expect the next few
days to be really busy, but we will keep the lines open until February 28,
2002 so there is plenty of time to take up this offer.

2. We will start to ship orders from February 11, 2002. Please allow up to
28 days for delivery.

3. Please have this email to hand when you call. Our representative will
ask you to confirm:-
* Your original order reference (for each order you have placed)
* Your name and email address
* The quantity you ordered
* The delivery address
* Your credit card details

4. Please note
(i) the provision of your credit card details will constitute your
acceptance of the proposal in full and
final settlement of any claim you may have against any Kodak company
and/or Link Network

Ltd.

(ii) this offer is personal to you and is non-transferable
(iii)this offer shall be subject to Kodak's terms and conditions of
sale, save as where expressly

varied by the terms of this offer. A copy of the terms &
conditions is available at:-

http://www.kodak.com/GB/en/corp/store/op/orderPolicy.jhtml

5. The Freefone number is 0800 *** ***

You may call until February 28, 2002.
Our call centre hours are Monday to Friday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

IMPORTANT:-

In anticipation of an initial high level of calls we have extended call
centre hours to minimise

extended call waiting in the first few days.
We request that you call our number on:

Thursday 31st January between the hours of 0900 and 1300
.
Alternatively please call at your convenience.

Thanks to every one for their emails\post's of support (It was a little bit lonely on this thread sometimes )

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 31 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Ken W
Offline
Joined: Apr 9 1999

John
Just to confirm. I've received the same email.
Ken

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Gavin

Paul Argyle
Offline
Joined: Dec 14 2000

Fantastic! (Just got the email too).

Paul.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

All done & dusted, no reply at 9.02, or 10.30, however I got through at midday, 2 minutes music, 3 minutes order confirmation etc.

I now have a new order number & delivery date, within 28 days of February 11th.

Kodak were featured on Radio 5 Simon Mayo today & Working Lunch, Gareth Jones was featured on the 2 programmes, emphasising that Kodak where delivering what the customer wants after listening to their views.

No climb down was evident, no confirmation of numbers of orders involved.

The interview clip links are available to listen\watch at http://www.kodakcamera.co.uk/

It's a good result, the contract issue will never be cleared up now but I suspect many ecommerce sites have tightened up their T&C since this saga started.

When the Euro directive comes into force it should safeguard everyone from this kind of thing happening again.

I'll post any new links that come up and will definitely post after Feb 11th when the goods are delivered.

Thanks to BobC for not deleting this thread.

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 31 January 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

alan eades
Offline
Joined: Oct 3 1999

John,

Well done, good result.

Alan.

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

quote:Originally posted by alan eades:
John,

Well done, good result.

Alan.

got my email at 8.01 tonight , one minute after the ordering system shuts down according to the email , so making phonecall tomorrow morning ..... best 100.00 i'll have spent over xmas

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

Hamvideo
Offline
Joined: Aug 14 2000

Hi John.
I too received the confirmation from Kodak today, will be making my phone call tomorow (just fr the record my original order was on 6th Jan re the querry on yr earlier posting).
Shame you havnt got a hit counter on this thread, I think you would be surprised how many of us were following your leads, you most certainly were not alone in your quest.
I would like to thank you for keeping our hopes up, without your diligence I think a lot up us affected would have shrugged our shoulders and put it down to bad experience.
Your links were very useful.

Keep up the good work,

Regards Henry.

Keitht
Offline
Joined: Jan 8 2001

Now all that's left is for Watchdog to claim "a result". That seems to be the standard reaction with them.

------------------
Regards

Keith

Regards Keith

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

Got my order accepted , but not able to add the original quick delivery to the order because "no cameras in stock".

They won't even express deliver on the day they are sending them out.

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

A bunch of links reporting the end of this saga.

If you want to read more, the links are at: http://www.kodakcamera.co.uk/

quote:
Nice Article From The Register - Thanks Tim!! 1/02/02 4.20pm
BBC News Online Thanks BBC For The Link To This Site!! 1/02/02 1.30pm
See Page 2 Of Todays Financial Times 1/02/02 1.30pm
The Sun 'Did I really say that!!' 1/02/02 9.00am
The Mirror 1/02/02 9.00am
Independent 31/01/02 10.15pm
PC Advisor 31/01/02 10.15pm
ZDNet.com 31/01/02 10.15pm
Internet Magazine 31/01/02 10.15pm
Silicon.com 31/01/02 10.15pm
Ananova 31/01/02 10.15pm
ZDNet.co.uk 31/01/02 10.15pm
The Inquirer 31/01/02 10.15pm

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

A useful page with the DX3700 manual link (2½MB PDF file) http://www.kodak.co.uk/global/en/service/products/ekn009502.jhtml

Explore the camera http://www.kodak.co.uk/global/en/digital/easyShare/dx3700/demo/dx3700Demo.jhtml;jsessionid=LPBSTXMUOHDYNQHIO2SHWFQ

In anticipation

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 02 February 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Whoooeeee, an email from Kodak 'Management Support'

quote:
Dear John Price

Subject: New Order Reference Number ********

Further to your telephone call we confirm your acceptance of the Kodak
proposal.

Your new order reference number should be quoted in any communications with
us.

Yours sincerely

Kodak Customer Support Centre

And

On Your Behalf
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/consumer/menu.shtml#kodak

quote:
Finally! The price is right for Kodak.

They say the camera never lies, but it seemed an advertisement on the net did!

We catch up with a story that ran in early January when Kodak had a special offer on their website for a digital camera.

Kodak said the price had been a mistake and withdrew the offer but now, less than three weeks later, Kodak is going to offer the camera at the special price of £100.

Real media version of the show http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/consumer/index.shtml

Starts at 13 mins 30 secs, finishes at 18 mins 10 secs. (Nothing new)

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 02 February 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Videoman
Offline
Joined: Oct 30 1999

Camera came this AM. Thanks Kodak for the bargain of the year!

Frank

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

The cameras are on their way already

Mine was shipped today but not delivered yet

Heres how I knew

Type in your new ordernumber in http://wwwapps.ups.com/ietracking/tracking.cgi?build_trn=yes&IATA=gb&Lang=eng
'Reference Number:'
******-KODAK

Also include your country & Postcode for luck

Apparently the 3700 firmware also needs updating to improve battery performance, download availble here http://www.kodak.co.uk/global/en/service/software/dx3700/dx3700Software.jhtml;jsessionid=YBOSME1VTPPCZQHIO2SHWHY

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

The cameras arrived at 10:45

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 07 February 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

alan eades
Offline
Joined: Oct 3 1999

What a conteted little fellow you are

Alan.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

And Meowww purrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Paul Argyle
Offline
Joined: Dec 14 2000

Got mine too! Aren't we all happy little pus... er, bunnies

Technology overload for me this week John!

Cheers,

Paul.

Gavin Gration
Offline
Joined: Jul 29 1999

Let me know if these things are any good - I haven't claimed mine yet.

Gavin

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Gavin

I don't think that the DX3700 is worth £329, at a £100 they are OK for a point & shoot.

The docking tray is great for speedy transferral of pictures, camera in the docking tray, press the button & it's all automatically done according to your preferrences.

My sample pictures hopefully give you a clue of the picture quality.

The digital zoom is a waste of time.

Over all I'm pleased

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 10 February 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

quote:Originally posted by Gavin Gration:
Let me know if these things are any good - I haven't claimed mine yet.

Gavin

well i would hurry up and claim if you want one delivered before 11/04/02.

my order was confirmed on 1/02 , and unlike others here they havn't even supplied a shipping confirmation.( i know it wasn't due out till 11th but others were shifted early)

[This message has been edited by sepulcre (edited 10 February 2002).]

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

John Elsden
Offline
Joined: Sep 19 1999

Hi.
I'm one of the many who are waiting for our 3700's to arrive. Thanks to everyone who put messages on this site. Power to the people and all that!
Ihaven't got a USB port on my computer. I see on the Kodak site the 3700 has a second port for connection to a TV. As I edit video with a Miro DC30plus card can I access the photos through that?
Would I need a computer USB port to use the upgrade mentioned for improving battery life?To upgrade a computer do you fit a USB card or is it in the motherboard?
I see CPC have ex corporate PC's with 30gb h/d USB ports and CD writer. It might be best to get something like that instead of opening mine up. Any Views?
Many thanks John

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Windows 95 OSR2 had USB support,however Kodak recommend Windows 98 or newer though.

My old Pentium 200 has USB on the motherboard but no ports, it may be time for you to do some detective work to see if your mobo is the same, otherwise it's invest in some ports or upgrade the whole kaboodle .

Capture through the TV?
I don't think that would be worth it.

The firmware ugrade needs a USB connection to be able to transfer the files to the memory card.

Regards

John Price
http://www.johnpr98.com

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

Kodak just get better and better.

using confirmation code i try to check where my camera is.

guess what ..... the confirmation code cannot be tracked on the website , so i phone them.

'sorry sir we cannot tell you where the parcels are , the couriers have no tracking system , and anyway we have 28 days to ship it to you'

when questioned as to why some people already had them 'we shipped the ones we had in stock' ... so obviously none in stock since my order was confirmed on 1/2.

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

lesreeves
Offline
Joined: Apr 28 2001

Are you sure about that?

On the UPS site there are 2 tabs. One says tracking, the other reference. Click on reference.

Enter the details followed by "-KODAK". eg 12345678-KODAK

Worked fine when mine was delivered a week ago.

Les

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

quote:Originally posted by lesreeves:
Are you sure about that?

On the UPS site there are 2 tabs. One says tracking, the other reference. Click on reference.

Enter the details followed by "-KODAK". eg 12345678-KODAK

Worked fine when mine was delivered a week ago.

Les

the code i was given isn't available to track

TRACKING NUMBER NOT FOUND IN UPS DATABASE. PLEASE TRY LATER

and that was where i input it the last time too.

why would i think mine would arrive early

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

Gary

Make sure you are using this link, more cameras are been delivered at the moment.

quote:
Type in your new ordernumber in http://wwwapps.ups.com/ietracking/tracking.cgi?build_trn=yes&IATA=gb&Lang=eng
'Reference Number:'
******-KODAK

Also include your country & Postcode for luck

Good luck

John Price

http://www.johnpr98.com

On another matter in another place, I am not embarrassed in the least

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 14 February 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

harlequin
harlequin's picture
Offline
Joined: Aug 16 2000

just checked again ...... parcel is now allegedly in transit ..... though no info from kodak by email stating same.

mine started it's journey from Edinburgh ......

Gary MacKenzie

sepulce@hotmail.com ( an account only used for forum messages )

Thinkserver TS140 , 750ti Graphics card  & LG 27" uws led backlight , Edius 8

Humax Foxsat HD Pvr / Humax Fox T2 dvbt

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

The journey of my DX3700

quote:
PACKAGE PROGRESS
Date Time Location Activity
7 Feb 2002 10:46 GLOUCESTER, GB DELIVERY
5:14 GLOUCESTER, GB IMPORT SCAN
6 Feb 2002 18:43 EDINBURGH, GB EXPORT SCAN
18:42 EDINBURGH, GB ORIGIN SCAN
5:12 GB BILLING INFORMATION RECEIVED

Apologies for the formatting

[This message has been edited by johnpr98 (edited 15 February 2002).]

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Ken W
Offline
Joined: Apr 9 1999

I'm having great difficulty in downloading the firmware upgrade for my dx3700. some computer jargon about quicktime not having something it needs and not available at the server??
Life's too short for this typical nonsense (why do we need quicktime to download a simple file)?
So could some kind soul email me the file please.
revlo@bigfoot.com
regards
Ken W

Stuart B-M
Offline
Joined: Apr 6 2001

Dear Ken,

Done

Hope it is windows that you run ?

Regards.

Ken W
Offline
Joined: Apr 9 1999

Thanks Stuart.
Yes it was windows, you were ahead of me there.
What a great site this is when you need help.
Regards to all
Ken

Stuart B-M
Offline
Joined: Apr 6 2001

If anyone else is having problems with the download and need the windows version give me an e-mail and will send it back.

Will leave it on my Pc for a couple of weeks just incase.

Kind regards all.

johnpr98
Offline
Joined: Aug 20 1999

You are a good man Stuart, btw did you get one of these cameras?

Regards

John

johnpr98
 
If you have any Forum Suggestions please post them here

Stuart B-M
Offline
Joined: Apr 6 2001

Dear John,

No sorry i did not manage to get one, bit personal, but after 17 months now off work money is very tight, and although i have had some money, its the same for everyone im sure, you try and buy what you think is important (or hope to be),

When the offer was there, by the time i had managed to try it had been changed back to its "normal" price,
(I did look, i was just to late).