Recent pushback by Canon on inclusive toner service contracts

[Rick]

I have recently been cut off from ordering additional toner under my supply inclusive service contract with Canon Business Solutions. They say I have used slightly more than double the 5% coverage for 8.5 x 11 copies they contractually are obligated to supply according to the fine print on the back of the contract. Although i have been successful in getting waivers from the regional sales manager I am concerned about the future and am wondering how many other printers are having this problem and what we can do about it as a group. I go over my contracts very closely and usually revise them but missed this detail.
What makes it worse is that service response time has been awful in my region and parts ordering is even worse. so as far as I am concerned they are not meeting their contractual obligation to provide service in the 2-4 hour average response time promised.
Again, I believe I have been given a waiver but not sure what the future will bring. Is this happening with any other of the manufacturers? One of the reps claimed others companies are charging for the for the cost of shipping toner to their customers. Any comments or feedback on this subject would be appreciated.

 

[JoshB]

Working from multiple locations with multiple printer companies, I've never seen a shipping charge for toner.

It seems very strange that they would threaten to cut you off for going over coverage. Isn't the usual response to just ding your bill? How do that think they're going to make any money if you aren't printing? This feels like a power play or a panicked response to toner shortage... something is fishy.

 

[X33]

I'm hearing many of these stories lately ... I'm in the U.S. by the way.

I would say read carefully your terms and conditions. No matter what they promised unless it's in writing.

 

[JustPrint!]

Canon did this also about a year ago. A call to salesperson fixed the issue. It's what the computer tells them. Some kind of formula that they must follow.

What is surprising is that Konica sent out a tech last week to see why we were using so much toner. LOL. Well, I was surprised. The tech said maybe machine is "dumping" toner. LOL
I showed him what we print monthly and the coverage on it and that was that.

Weird! Before I sign my new b/w machines next year I guess I am looking into that contract.

 

[easiprint]

It's amazing how the vendors minds work - put a machine in a print shop, and then wonder why they use so much toner. I ordered 2 black toners from Xerox last week and I had to beg and plead to get them both, they only wanted to send one. They said, well you only had one two weeks ago - yes, and????? That was two weeks ago, we're a high coverage print shop, not an office ffs

 

[Emtri]

I have never seen or heard of this problem before, We usually order 4 of each colour for our c6500, and that usually lasts us about a month or so depending on coverage and what we're running

Also 5% coverage on an 8.5x11 is barely basic text coverage, What Canon machine are you running? Even in an office environment 10% coverage would be normal
I also wonder how they know your doing more then 5% coverage?

 

[Craig]

Oh boy am I glad Xerox doesn't do that, I went through 12 bottles last week alone.

 

[Rick]

Canon toner pushbacks

Canon toner pushbacks

I am running a IR5185 40 per minute. Yes, a discussion with the regional sales manager did take care of it, at least temporarily. He mentioned that a way around it is to review their profitability with my entire shop to justify approval of toners above the contract usage. I am also wondering if anyone has experience crossing out the fine print on toner before signing the contract. I often make changes and they are usually accepted.

 

[arossetti]

Oh boy am I glad Xerox doesn't do that, I went through 12 bottles last week alone.

I send an eco-box back to xerox a day, we had to have our sales rep take off the restrictions on our account because they were trying to limit us initially after a new contract.

 

[ScottL]

Working from multiple locations with multiple printer companies, I've never seen a shipping charge for toner.

It seems very strange that they would threaten to cut you off for going over coverage. Isn't the usual response to just ding your bill? How do that think they're going to make any money if you aren't printing? This feels like a power play or a panicked response to toner shortage... something is fishy.

Maybe I can explain this for you. Canon's service pricing is based on 3 cost components plus profit on the sum. The cost breakdown goes 50% toner, 30% parts, 20% labor. Pretty easy to see how they get a little crazy when you use more toner than anticipated!

Hope that helps.

 

[JoshB]

Oh I get toner limits for sure. I'm just not cool on their response here.

I understand "We're going to charge you more". That works, but what is going on when they say "Stop printing."? That's just lunacy. They might as well say "Please go out of business and default so we can lose a customer, reposes your equipment and then resell it at half price."

 

[ScottL]

Oh I get toner limits for sure. I'm just not cool on their response here.

I understand "We're going to charge you more". That works, but what is going on when they say "Stop printing."? That's just lunacy. They might as well say "Please go out of business and default so we can lose a customer, reposes your equipment and then resell it at half price."

I agree! (maybe they ARE lunatics - just a thought)
What they will end up doing at some point, probably sooner than later, is charging for excess toner usage. When one does it, they all will follow. The whole idea of toner being included in your service was so that they could insure that they got your toner business. Now, it seems, in production print, the toner inclusion is killing their profit model. The only way out is to stop selling production equipment or get even on the toner.

 

[JoshB]

Isn't this common practice already? Am I living in my own little world where I get dinged extra for more toner rather than simply shut down?