INKJET FRAUD
Publisher's Reply to Canon's RESPONSE dated 2 October 2007
Mr. C. Gonidellis,
Canon Australia Pty Ltd
1 Thomas Holt Drive
NORTH RYDE NSW 2113
Dear Mr. Gonidellis,
I refer to your letter to me dated 2 October 2007.
I note your response is that of typical bully boy tactics that can be expected from a large corporation that has a culture of refusing to see the error of its ways. As such your letter will be produced in court as even further evidence in my claim against Canon for aggravated damages.
Your lawyers will (or should) inform you that in order to prove that a statement on this website is actionable under the tort of injurious falsehood, Canon would be required to prove all three of the following elements in a court of law:
1.
The statement must be false;
2.
The statement must be published maliciously;
3.
The statement must have been intended to produce and resulted in actual damage, and Canon will have to show a direct economic loss because of the statement, i.e., prove that damage.
In defence of that, I say the following:
1.
There are no false statements on this website. Canon's representations in its advertising brochures may or may not be correct in the context that it chooses to put them. However, when put in the factual context I have put them (using the machine for printing predominantly black text), it is true that they become false. It is well settled Trade Practices / Fair Trading law that once a representation is made, the representor is under a duty to provide all matters that are material and not "tell half the story", or selectively omit information that causes or may cause a consumer to be misled. The Canon representation "cost-efficient printing" is simply false in my circumstances. As to the Ink Yield representations, a consumer would expect to achieve those representations in any aspect of legitimate use the machine is put, as Canon does not publish otherwise, however in practise, I have found this is to be extemely far from the case. Canon has, and continues to omit the ink usage in its advertising, that is material to the machine printing predominantly black text.
2.
There are no malicious statements on this website. As said all statements are true and they are published because they are true and because of the severe frustration and wasted time Canon has put me too with apparent oblivion as to the inconvenience it has caused me when it was well aware of the problem's inherent cause before the time of the commencement of my complaint. Also they are published in the public interest to warn consumers of Canon's consumer conduct and its attitude in refusal to correct that conduct. As said, Canon continues to omit the ink usage in its advertising relating to printing black text when it is well aware of the machine's inherent design to use excessive ink in the way that it does. Per my letter to Canon dated 20 May 2007 I conveyed this fact to Canon in Sydney as informed to me by its authorised agent and technician at Maroochydore..... "On contacting Sunshine Coast Printer Specialists I am told that there is nothing that can be done as it is normal for the machine to use that quantity of ink in its self cleaning processes."
3.
In order to prove number 3, Canon had better get started. However in light of 1 and 2 Canon will get to know what its like to be wasting its time.
Australian governments and its courts make the law in Australia Mr. Gonidellis, not Canon.
You may wish to note, that I have experienced no other serious fault with the Canon Pixma MP830 other than what is published on this website, except to say that when a colour ink cartridge becomes empty the machine will not print at all thus causing a non voluntary replacement of that colour cartridge if I wish to print black text.
Regarding my allegations of Canon telling lies. I have given Canon ample opportunity to rectify the false statements it has made to me in writing. It has chosen and continues to choose to not remedy them and as such I will be asking the court to find that they were intentional falsities, i.e., lies.

Finally, after suffering around 8 months of Canon's delinquency, Canon did eventually make its position clear in that it will not rectify my complaint and apparently will not answer my letter dated 20 September 2007. As such and because Canon appears incapable of presenting the truth, there will be no further verbal discussion between Canon and myself unless Canon can first provide in writing all of the following:
(a) acknowledge the ink usage I suffer in my circumstances is excessive;
(b) rectify the Canon falsities/lies;
(c) apologise for its conduct;
(d) a willingness to take the machine back and refund its full purchase price.

Yours faithfully,

Gordon Craven - 3 October 2007

This website is published by Gordon Craven
PO Box 125, TEWANTIN 4565 QUEENSLAND AUSTRALIA