Printing Industry Standards/Dealer Ethics/Disclosures

nov329

Member
First I apologize if I am posting in the wrong thread. I wanted to get community input on an issue we have been dealing with for sometime. Due to legal reasons I wont go into details;
We purchased a piece of equipment north of $500K. We purchased the equipment as new. After few months of operating the equipment and continuous issues we recovered logs on the machine that indicated substantial use of the equipment prior to installation at our facility. The dealer confirms the validity of logs and the usage. Their position is that equipment is new unless it was installed at a customer location and being exhibited at multiple shows and a floor model does not make the machine used. Our position is that at a minimum they were obligated to disclose the prior use.

I would appreciate all comments. In your experience is this common in the industry? Should it be?
 

PricelineNegotiator

Well-known member
Floor/demo models are not new. Hope your lawyer is going to get you proper compensation.

What is the company you are dealing with? I would like to know this.
 

nov329

Member
Sorry, I am not sure I can say until I talk to the lawyers. I would like to. My intention is, to ask if the community has a different understanding? 26 years in the industry that has not been my experience. Apparently, legally; there is no definition for new at least not in this industry. Mu purpose is not to make allegations about a certain company, I just want to know if I am wrong. What is new equipment and what is used? is there obligation for disclosure? I obviously think there is.
 

gordo

Well-known member
Before you go to an expensive lawyerI hope you talk to the dealer. Perhaps you can work something out with them. If not then tell them that you have no other recourse but legal action.
 

nov329

Member
Before you go to an expensive lawyer hope you talk to the dealer. Perhaps you can work something out with them. If not then tell them that you have no other recourse but legal action.
This is way past that, been in litigation for a few years now. I just want to know. If a dealer is selling a machine as new, do they have an obligation to let the buyer that the machine was used for demo, floor unit purposes? or any other reason? As a buyer I would say they do, then as a buyer I am biased. What is the norm? What is common sense?
 

PricelineNegotiator

Well-known member
The norm and common sense would dictate that your dealer does not mislabel a used/floor/demo model as new. Floor and demo models are the same thing as used, just a specific type of used. I think it would be hard to argue otherwise.

Of course, machines require testing and calibrating before they are sent to the client. If you can prove a certain standard of testing that is done on this model of machine, and that your logs indicate usage outside of that range, then you have a case depending on the quantitative use outside of normal testing procedures.
 

nov329

Member
The logs and testimony are conclusive; the equipment was shown in at least two shows and used as show floor unit. The logs also indicate at least 30,000 clicks on the equipment prior to installation. The dealer claims; exhibiting equipment at shows and using as floor unit does not mean equipment is used. Obviously I disagree. legally however, it seems they can make that claim. In this state there is no legal definition for New equipment vs, used. So, technically they can sell as new so long as it has not been sold to an end user, the manufacturer and or dealer can use for "demonstration" as long as they want and sell as "new". As far as normal testing; whatever that is, I am certain it does not include shipping to shows for exhibition.
 

PricelineNegotiator

Well-known member
If it's a digital press like a Xerox Iridesse, 30,000 clicks is nothing. It's a shitty move on their part, but that's only a few large jobs. Hopefully you can learn from it and not interact with this particular dealer after the lease is over. The price difference between floor/demo and new machines can be small. If you have no legal avenue to pursue recourse, then spend your time on other things like making money.
 

nov329

Member
If it's a digital press like a Xerox Iridesse, 30,000 clicks is nothing. It's a shitty move on their part, but that's only a few large jobs. Hopefully you can learn from it and not interact with this particular dealer after the lease is over. The price difference between floor/demo and new machines can be small. If you have no legal avenue to pursue recourse, then spend your time on other things like making money.
Not a digital press, a digital spot coater + foil. The issue is the unit never worked properly, we suspected extensive use specially on the foil unit when it arrived for installation with worn rollers that the dealer claimed were damaged at the factory. That is why we started looking into logs on the unit in the first place. I recovered logs on the spot coaters computer that had been erased. Prior to that the dealer denied any previous use, the story changed once we confronted them with the recovered files. We are currently involved in litigation and have been for a few years. Honestly by posting here I was hoping to get some expert users to comment this. I was hoping someone would point me at some resource in the industry that clearly delineates New and used.
 

Puch

Well-known member
30000 clicks is nothing for a beast like this. On the other hand, the multiple transport and installation/deinstallation cycles can be stressful for the machine, especially if they were done in a hurry. Without any legal background, I would say that the logs prove the machine wasn't factory new, when you got it installed. 'New' means the equipment just came out of the factory, it wasn't installed anywhere, it has the factory packaging (fully intact), and has no traces of use beside the factory testing/calibration. Traces of use in this case means the logs, too, IMHO.
 

PricelineNegotiator

Well-known member
Not a digital press, a digital spot coater + foil. The issue is the unit never worked properly, we suspected extensive use specially on the foil unit when it arrived for installation with worn rollers that the dealer claimed were damaged at the factory. That is why we started looking into logs on the unit in the first place. I recovered logs on the spot coaters computer that had been erased. Prior to that the dealer denied any previous use, the story changed once we confronted them with the recovered files. We are currently involved in litigation and have been for a few years. Honestly by posting here I was hoping to get some expert users to comment this. I was hoping someone would point me at some resource in the industry that clearly delineates New and used.
Talk to the people at Larry Hunt, or any of the printing associations you belong to.
 

nov329

Member
Thankyou all, for your input. Is anyone willing to write or sign a declaration, as to their understanding as to industry standards relating to definition of New Vs. Used based on their experience.
 

keith1

Well-known member
If this were a car, it would be sold as a demonstrator and be discounted. Discounts can be fudged because there's no set price — it's negotiable.
Have you been given the full warranty as offered on a new machine? If so I wouldn't sweat it too much . . .however IMHO you should have been given a discount none the less. But this could prove difficult since prices are negotiable. The dealer could essentially make up whatever cost they choose.
While the transaction appears somewhat sleazy based on your information, if the machine works as advertised and is covered with an as new warranty, I wouldn't be inclined to spend an additional ton of money on lawyers.
As others have noted, 30,000 clicks is nothing. It could actually be a bonus in that any quirks have been corrected.
 

nov329

Member
If this were a car, it would be sold as a demonstrator and be discounted. Discounts can be fudged because there's no set price — it's negotiable.
Have you been given the full warranty as offered on a new machine? If so I wouldn't sweat it too much . . .however IMHO you should have been given a discount none the less. But this could prove difficult since prices are negotiable. The dealer could essentially make up whatever cost they choose.
While the transaction appears somewhat sleazy based on your information, if the machine works as advertised and is covered with an as new warranty, I wouldn't be inclined to spend an additional ton of money on lawyers.
As others have noted, 30,000 clicks is nothing. It could actually be a bonus in that any quirks have been corrected.
This all happened over 4 years ago. we have been in litigation since. The issue is the unit never worked properly we tried for 9 months , we suspected extensive use specially on the foil unit when it arrived for installation with worn rollers that the dealer claimed were damaged at the factory. That is why we started looking into logs on the unit in the first place. I recovered logs on the spot coaters computer that had been erased. Prior to that the dealer denied any previous use, the story changed once we confronted them with the recovered files. 575 K was not something we could just shrug off. There was no discount as there was no disclosure of the prior usage.
 

PricelineNegotiator

Well-known member
This all happened over 4 years ago. we have been in litigation since. The issue is the unit never worked properly we tried for 9 months , we suspected extensive use specially on the foil unit when it arrived for installation with worn rollers that the dealer claimed were damaged at the factory. That is why we started looking into logs on the unit in the first place. I recovered logs on the spot coaters computer that had been erased. Prior to that the dealer denied any previous use, the story changed once we confronted them with the recovered files. 575 K was not something we could just shrug off. There was no discount as there was no disclosure of the prior usage.
Get a better lawyer. There isn't much that can be done other than vent on this forum.
 

keith1

Well-known member
This all happened over 4 years ago. we have been in litigation since. The issue is the unit never worked properly we tried for 9 months , we suspected extensive use specially on the foil unit when it arrived for installation with worn rollers that the dealer claimed were damaged at the factory. That is why we started looking into logs on the unit in the first place. I recovered logs on the spot coaters computer that had been erased. Prior to that the dealer denied any previous use, the story changed once we confronted them with the recovered files. 575 K was not something we could just shrug off. There was no discount as there was no disclosure of the prior usage.

Hmm. This is a can of worms. As Priceline points out, it gets into legal issues. This isn't the forum for it. I took some law - never finished. Hopefully you have a record of all correspondence & transactions.
If all is you describe, I smell an out of court settlement. Sucks, not right, but that's life. Good luck.
 

nov329

Member
Hmm. This is a can of worms. As Priceline points out, it gets into legal issues. This isn't the forum for it. I took some law - never finished. Hopefully you have a record of all correspondence & transactions.
If all is you describe, I smell an out of court settlement. Sucks, not right, but that's life. Good luck.
Thank you, appreciate your time.
 

scotts

Well-known member
I don't know about the legality of any of this, but common sense would dictate that, if any machine was assembled in any shape of fashion at a location for operation whether purchased or for demo, and then disassembled and reassembled again at another location, than it has been "used". I would believe you have long passed the point of trying to work this out in good faith, especially for the amount of money involved. I would defiantly look into the legal aspect. And you might be able to use 'lose wages and work' because of the issues and amount of years working on the "new" equipment, as part of bargining when it comes to it.
 

De-Inking

Avanti
Sustainable Printing Goes Far Beyond Using FSC Certified or Recycled Paper
This informative paper on deinking: demand, principles, problems and solutions also explains why printing technologies are not all equally compatible with paper recycling systems; and why just a small fraction of printed material in the paper can cause difficulties.
Link To White Paper

   
Top