filmscanners: Re: Epson

[Robert DeCandido <rdcny@earthlink.net>]

Hello All,

I agree with Arthur that honesty is the best policy. Period  

Here is a real life situation to try out your honesty with: When I
purchased my Epson 1160, I thought I was getting a new printer. 
That was how the store in NYC sold it to me: NEW!  However, upon
close examination I saw that it was a refurb.  The problem arose
when I needed to return the printer to Epson a week later when I
could not get one nozzle to clear.  I told them that the printer I
had just purchased was a new one despite my determining it was a
refurb.  Or rather, since they never asked, I never told them it was
a refurb. They accepted the printer back and sent me a new one that
works great.  If I had told them my new printer was indeed a refurb
sold to me as new, then they would have sent me a refurb in return.

My point here: there are many grey areas; but yes, Honesty is the
best policy. Finally, Epson has been better than most companies
regarding returns and customer service.  More companies should have
that level of customer support.  It is one of the reasons I continue
to purchase Epson products, such as the 860 I just purchased for my
girl friend.  And finally, finally since I live in the USA I assume
that the rest of the world has the same consumer laws/protection as
here in the states.  I sometimes forget that this is an
international list with interesting people from everywhere.

rdc  


Arthur Entlich wrote:
> 
> Epson tries to walk a fine line on this matter.  One the one hand, they
> are absolutely within their rights to refuse service, or charge for
> service for any printer returned during warranty which has head problems
> which could be related to the ink used, and in fact, I would go as far
> as saying they should do so.  On the other hand, the cost of proving the
> inks were indeed not theirs is probably greater than simply repairing
> the unit.
> 
> US law does make third party consumables a protected "right", and no
> company may carte blanche void warranties based upon the use of 3rd
> party expendables which meet or exceed manufacturer's guidelines, nor
> may they refuse warranty service on non-related systems.  However, I
> also know that Epson went from a 2 year to one year warranty on many
> products, plus pulled toll-free support in recent years, and I do, in
> part, blame people who have abused their goodwill for this.
> 
> I know of several people who admitted on the Epson list that they
> continually used 3rd party inks, and whenever they had a massive ink
> clog, they would return the printer to Epson with Epson ink carts in it.
>   In some cases these people made several returns leaving Epson to cover
> the cost of shipping and repair.  This is downright deceptive, IMHO.
> 
> I have used Epson color printers since the original Epson Color Stylus.
>   Up until now, I have used Epson inks, and up till now I have had no
> ink blockages I could not resolve myself.  Perhaps the same would be the
> case with 3rd party inks, I don't know.  In all likelihood, quality ink
> sets from any reputable dealer would be unlikely to do damage to the heads.
> 
> Art
> 
> Rob Geraghty wrote:
> 
> > "Robert DeCandido" <rdcny@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >> You do not void your warranty by using third party inks in an
> >> Epson.  If you need to return the printer for servicing, just remove
> >> the CIS and re-install the Epson cartridges.  See the Inkjetmall web
> >> site (Cone Peizography, eg) for a discussion of this.  We have been
> >> back and forth on that issue on the Peizo list...Repeat: You do not
> >> void the warranty!
> >
> >
> > I suspect Epson would take a different view if the reason the printer
> > was being returned has due to head blocks caused by non-OEM
> > inks.  AFAIK Epson's official line is that the use of 3rd party inks
> > voids the warranty as far as anything to do with the ink flow is
> > concerned.
> >
> > Rob