To FF or not to FF...

On 7/9/2017 12:51 PM, Paul Carmichael wrote:
El 09/07/17 a las 17:49, PeterN escribió:
On 7/9/2017 6:34 AM, Paul Carmichael wrote:
El 08/07/17 a las 22:03, PeterN escribió:

It seems that in Europe it is called the Ambassadors Programme.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors.do

The best way to contact one of these guys is through an educational
presentation they are giving.

I'll keep an eye open, but:
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors.do#map


Those guys are paid by Canon to give presentations at various camera
organization functions.

Did you talk to your bank about the debit card fraud.



Bit difficult. I don't know what to do. The seller has accused me of
trying to destroy their company because I left a bad review. Been quite
threatening really. But technically the offer is there to send me a new
camera (once they have the old one and they've verified that it is
faulty). From his attitude I have absolutely no confidence that it will
end up well. I don't even have an invoice to go to Canon with under the
guarantee. Also, it seems the company is based in Gibraltar with offices
in the UK, so legally, I prolly don't have anywhere to go. And then I
think that in 10 years with the 1000D I don't think I've ever looked at
the image on the LCD screen.

It would pain me to let them get away with it, but at least I have a
camera that works.

Dunno...


So you know where I am coming from: I am the type of person who is very
aggressive about protecting my rights. I will **** away thousands of
dollars, but will spend whatever I have to if you screw me for a penny.

I regard the store's response as an attempt at bullying you. My personal
response would be to tell them that if I don't get a complete refund, I
will do whatever I have to do to protect my rights. If you are too
specific you may be accused of attempted blackmail. I would go directly
to the bank, as soon as it opens. My objective is to get a refund, and
never do business with that place, again. Based on what you say, it
sounds to me like a valid claim of fraud, which under many banking
agreements is grounds for a debit card refund. Let the bank know that
they can hold the funds until you intend to return the defective camera,
I would also let the stor know what you are doing, if the bank agrees.
If you will not help yourself, there is little more that I can advise
you about.



--
PeterN

On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 20:30:53 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/9/2017 12:51 PM, Paul Carmichael wrote:
El 09/07/17 a las 17:49, PeterN escribió:
On 7/9/2017 6:34 AM, Paul Carmichael wrote:
El 08/07/17 a las 22:03, PeterN escribió:

It seems that in Europe it is called the Ambassadors Programme.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors.do

The best way to contact one of these guys is through an educational
presentation they are giving.

I'll keep an eye open, but:
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors.do#map


Those guys are paid by Canon to give presentations at various camera
organization functions.

Did you talk to your bank about the debit card fraud.



Bit difficult. I don't know what to do. The seller has accused me of
trying to destroy their company because I left a bad review. Been quite
threatening really. But technically the offer is there to send me a new
camera (once they have the old one and they've verified that it is
faulty). From his attitude I have absolutely no confidence that it will
end up well. I don't even have an invoice to go to Canon with under the
guarantee. Also, it seems the company is based in Gibraltar with offices
in the UK, so legally, I prolly don't have anywhere to go. And then I
think that in 10 years with the 1000D I don't think I've ever looked at
the image on the LCD screen.

It would pain me to let them get away with it, but at least I have a
camera that works.

Dunno...


So you know where I am coming from: I am the type of person who is very
aggressive about protecting my rights. I will **** away thousands of
dollars, but will spend whatever I have to if you screw me for a penny.

I regard the store's response as an attempt at bullying you.

Yep, scammers can be very, very aggressive. In fact, I consider that
type of response alone to be a red flag. The only sign that there is
hope is that he sent them money, and they sent him a camera. That
makes me think he might be safe sending the camera back for an
exchange.

My personal
response would be to tell them that if I don't get a complete refund, I
will do whatever I have to do to protect my rights. If you are too
specific you may be accused of attempted blackmail. I would go directly
to the bank, as soon as it opens. My objective is to get a refund, and
never do business with that place, again. Based on what you say, it
sounds to me like a valid claim of fraud, which under many banking
agreements is grounds for a debit card refund. Let the bank know that
they can hold the funds until you intend to return the defective camera,
I would also let the stor know what you are doing, if the bank agrees.
If you will not help yourself, there is little more that I can advise
you about.

On 7/9/2017 10:02 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Sun, 9 Jul 2017 20:30:53 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/9/2017 12:51 PM, Paul Carmichael wrote:
El 09/07/17 a las 17:49, PeterN escribió:
On 7/9/2017 6:34 AM, Paul Carmichael wrote:
El 08/07/17 a las 22:03, PeterN escribió:

It seems that in Europe it is called the Ambassadors Programme.

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors.do

The best way to contact one of these guys is through an educational
presentation they are giving.

I'll keep an eye open, but:
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/ambassadors.do#map


Those guys are paid by Canon to give presentations at various camera
organization functions.

Did you talk to your bank about the debit card fraud.



Bit difficult. I don't know what to do. The seller has accused me of
trying to destroy their company because I left a bad review. Been quite
threatening really. But technically the offer is there to send me a new
camera (once they have the old one and they've verified that it is
faulty). From his attitude I have absolutely no confidence that it will
end up well. I don't even have an invoice to go to Canon with under the
guarantee. Also, it seems the company is based in Gibraltar with offices
in the UK, so legally, I prolly don't have anywhere to go. And then I
think that in 10 years with the 1000D I don't think I've ever looked at
the image on the LCD screen.

It would pain me to let them get away with it, but at least I have a
camera that works.

Dunno...


So you know where I am coming from: I am the type of person who is very
aggressive about protecting my rights. I will **** away thousands of
dollars, but will spend whatever I have to if you screw me for a penny.

I regard the store's response as an attempt at bullying you.

Yep, scammers can be very, very aggressive. In fact, I consider that
type of response alone to be a red flag. The only sign that there is
hope is that he sent them money, and they sent him a camera. That
makes me think he might be safe sending the camera back for an
exchange.

I am a firm believer in the old saying:

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.


My personal
response would be to tell them that if I don't get a complete refund, I
will do whatever I have to do to protect my rights. If you are too
specific you may be accused of attempted blackmail. I would go directly
to the bank, as soon as it opens. My objective is to get a refund, and
never do business with that place, again. Based on what you say, it
sounds to me like a valid claim of fraud, which under many banking
agreements is grounds for a debit card refund. Let the bank know that
they can hold the funds until you intend to return the defective camera,
I would also let the stor know what you are doing, if the bank agrees.
If you will not help yourself, there is little more that I can advise
you about.


--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

I am a firm believer in the old saying:

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

what happens with the hat trick?

On Jul 9, 2017, nospam wrote
(in ) :

In , PeterN
wrote:

I am a firm believer in the old saying:

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

what happens with the hat trick?

I don’t think he was using the GWB/Who delivery.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

On 7/9/2017 11:53 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 9, 2017, nospam wrote
(in ) :

In , PeterN
wrote:

I am a firm believer in the old saying:

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

what happens with the hat trick?

I don’t think he was using the GWB/Who delivery.


Why is the second word in your reply so screwed up?



--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:


I don�t think he was using the GWB/Who delivery.


Why is the second word in your reply so screwed up?

because you're using a ****ty newsreader.

On 10-Jul-17 2:48 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


I don�t think he was using the GWB/Who delivery.


Why is the second word in your reply so screwed up?

because you're using a ****ty newsreader.

Thunderbird works fine for me! :-)

Peter, though, isn't using the current version.


Thunderbird Notes
Version 52.2.1, first offered to Release channel users on June 23, 2017

Check out "What’s New" and "Known Issues" for this version of
Thunderbird below. As always, you’re encouraged to tell us what you
think, or file a bug in Bugzilla. If interested, please see the complete
list of changes in this release.

System Requirements:
• Window: Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 or later
• Mac: Mac OS X 10.9 or later
• Linux: GTK+ 3.4 or higher
Details here.

Please refer to Release Notes for version 52.0 to see the list of
improvements and fixed issues.

=

HTH

--
David B.

In article , David B.
wrote:

I donâ??t think he was using the GWB/Who delivery.


Why is the second word in your reply so screwed up?

because you're using a ****ty newsreader.

Thunderbird works fine for me! :-)

then you must not do much with it.

Peter, though, isn't using the current version.

so what? unicode is not new.

On 7/10/2017 11:01 AM, David B. wrote:
On 10-Jul-17 2:48 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:


I don�t think he was using the GWB/Who delivery.


Why is the second word in your reply so screwed up?

because you're using a ****ty newsreader.

Thunderbird works fine for me! :-)

Peter, though, isn't using the current version.


Thunderbird Notes
Version 52.2.1, first offered to Release channel users on June 23, 2017

Check out "What’s New" and "Known Issues" for this version of
Thunderbird below. As always, you’re encouraged to tell us what you
think, or file a bug in Bugzilla. If interested, please see the complete
list of changes in this release.

System Requirements:
• Window: Windows XP, Windows Server 2003 or later
• Mac: Mac OS X 10.9 or later
• Linux: GTK+ 3.4 or higher
Details here.

Please refer to Release Notes for version 52.0 to see the list of
improvements and fixed issues.

=

HTH


Thanks, I'll play with it.


--
PeterN