Print

Mail

wiki links

Consumer commission turns its lens on Kodak

Eastman Kodak Co, the world's biggest photography company, raised the ire of the Consumer Protection Commission and nearly 400 consumers after it repeatedly refused to provide information regarding what many claim is a flawed model, the Easyshare LS443 digital camera.

Consumers complained that the LS443 model has serious defects, including the inability of the lens to zoom in and out, under- or over- exposure of pictures and blackening of the liquid-crystal screen.

According to information on an online self-help club by unhappy owners of the model, even if the cameras are sent for repair, problems remain.

The model hit the domestic market in 2002, retailing at about NT$19,000 (US$604) with a resolution of 4 megapixels and a 3-time optical zoom. Kodak stopped production of this model in August 2003.

On May 13, the commission invited the multinational's Taiwan representatives to a meeting, but Kodak did not provide any information on quality control, retail prices, repair records or compensation offers.

"We are quite angry about their uncooperative attitude. Usually companies try to display goodwill by offering alternatives such as offering refunds or replacement with a new model," Chiu Hui-mei (邱惠美), the commission's ombudsman, said in a telephone interview yesterday.

"We have not seen another company handle a situation the way Kodak is," she said.

Since negotiation efforts failed, the commission has authorized ombudsmen in the 23 city and county governments nationwide to ask Kodak to cooperate in local-level investigations.

If Kodak still declines to provide the requested information within the set timeframe, the local ombudsmen could impose fines ranging from NT$30,000 to NT$300,000 each time they feel the company is trying to hamper their investigations, Chiu said, citing Article 57 of the Consumer Protection Law (消保法).

There is no maximum ceiling set for the fine.

This is the first time the article will be used in an attempt to resolve a consumer dispute, Chiu said.

As complainants hail from all over the country, Kodak could possibly face fines totaling between NT$690,000 and NT$6.9 million if all 23 local government ombudsmen act in unision.

"I'll issue official letters to Kodak by this weekend and give it five days to provide the required information," said the Taipei County Government ombudsman, Ralph Ho (何瑞富).

In a statement issued yesterday, Kodak Taiwan said it had offered three alternative models to the unhappy LS443 owners, who would have to pay NT$2,000, NT$3,200 or NT$4,200 to purchase them.

This solution has been rejected by the customers.

Since production of the LS443 stopped in 2003 and maintenance parts are no longer available, it cannot offer free repair services, the company said.

Obviously angered by the situation, one LS443 owner complained on the Internet: "I don't understand why Kodak is willing to pay big bucks to hire a lawyer when it can use that money to compensate us and restore its reputation."
This story has been viewed 2108 times.