The Recycler
  • Static Control June 2022 Masthead Ad
  • Biuromax Web banner June 2022
  • Katun March Web Advert 2021
  • Ninestar web banner November 2022 Masthead

Canon class action analysed

Canon class action analysed

March 10, 2016

Canon's PIXMA MX892

Canon’s PIXMA MX892

An article claims that Canon’s “poor customer loyalty” and a recent class action are signs of greater dissatisfaction with printers.

The article, on Seeking Alpha, refers to the class action begun in 2014 at the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, accusing Canon of selling certain PIXMA inkjet AIOs with a printhead defect. This is said to then stop the printer working, with two complaints stating that “after limited use [or] well before the end of their useful lives”, some of the machines display a “wrong or incorrect printhead error message”, U052, and refuse to print, scan, copy or fax after.

Some of the 35 printers involved included the PIXMA MX892. MP600, MX860 and MX700, which use a permanent thermal printhead instead of an integrated inkjet cartridge and replaceable printhead, with the OEM accused at the time of knowing about the defect “because of the repairs it was asked to”, and yet it did not recall the machines, nor pay for “labour or diagnostic expenses”. The Seeking Alpha article notes that the class action was resolved in September 2015 for $930,000 (€848,307), with Canon settling.

The settlement in the USA, however, stipulated that customers – in order to get a cash payment of $50 (€45) or a voucher worth $75 (€68) – would need to “show proof that he/she incurred an out-of-pocket expense” for the specific issue. The author of the article only became aware of the issue when his own MX892 stopped working, and believes that the fallout of the case will “impact HP’s printer market”.

He notes that the plaintiffs stated “that if they and the other class members had known about this defect, they would not have bought the Canon printers”, with some respondents having issues with Canon machines since 2004, and he added that “what is telling is that every respondent who spoke about what they planned to do next was to buy a replacement printer that was NOT a Canon”.

Additionally, barely any customers have taken advantage of the OEM’s loyalty programme, and some joined its online community “with the express purpose of telling readers NOT to purchase a Canon printer”, and the author attempted to contact Canon, but received no responses from Japan or the USA. His belief is that the issues will “impact sales not only for Canon but competitors”, referring to IDC’s report on the third quarter of the last year.

Categories : Around the Industry

Tags : Canon Legal Printers

  • GPI November 2022 Web advert
  • IR Italiana Web ad January 2021
  • GM Tech Web ad September 2022
  • Ink Tank december 2022 Web Advert
  • Aster November 2022 Web advert
  • Apex Web Ad September 2022
  • Static Control June 2022 Big & Bold Ad
  • Mito December 2022 Web banner
  • GM Technology Web 2022 Ad
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • Zhono Web Ad October 2022
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • CET June 2022 Web ad
  • CTS New Ad March 2022
  • HYB October 2022 Web banner
  • HYB October 2022 Web banner
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • CET June 2022 Web ad
  • CTS New Ad March 2022
  • Zhono Web Ad October 2022
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • CTS New Ad March 2022
  • CET June 2022 Web ad
  • HYB October 2022 Web banner
  • Zhono Web Ad October 2022

The Recycler, Wittas House, Two Rivers, Station Lane, Witney, OX28 4BH, United Kingdom | Tel: +44 (0) 1993 899800 | Fax : +44 (0) 1993 226899
©2006-2021 The Recycler - Terms & Conditions - Privacy Policy including cookie use

Web design Dorset | Websites by Mark