Canon’s PIXMA MX892
The OEM is facing complaints about selling PIXMA machines with defects in the USA.
Actionable Intelligence (subscription required) reported on the cases, taken up at the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, which are class-action complaints from consumers accusing Canon of “knowingly selling certain PIXMA inkjet all-in-ones with a printhead defect that renders the printer inoperable for printing, copying, scanning and faxing”.
The first class action was filed on 23 May on behalf of Sarah Barrett, whilst the second was filed on 10 July on behalf of Marcus Ho, with both complaints stating that “after limited use [or] well before the end of their useful lives”, some of the PIXMA machines display a “wrong or incorrect printhead error message”, U052, and refuse to print, scan, copy or fax thereafter.
Barrett’s complaint came after she bought a PIXMA MX892 in Virginia, and includes mentions of 16 other defective models that Canon allegedly continued to sell, including the MX892, MP600, MX860 and MX700, all of which use a “permanent thermal printhead rather than an integrated inkjet cartridge with a replaceable printhead”.
Part of Barrett’s complaint added that if the issue “cannot be resolved by trouble-shooting […] the printer must be returned to Canon for service”, but the OEM allegedly knew of the defect “because of the repairs it was asked to do”, and yet did not recall the machines. The complaint added that “Canon has refused to pay for labour or diagnostic expenses” for consumers affected a year after purchase (after warranty runs out), with repair costs said to “exceed the price” of buying a new machine.
Barrett’s complaint also stated: “By engaging in the above described conduct, Canon committed acts and omissions with actual malice and accompanied by a wanton and wilful disregard of persons, including Plaintiff and members of the Class, who foreseeably might by [sic] harmed by those acts and omissions.”
The complaint alleges Canon “violated the New York Consumer Protection Act and breached both expressed and implied warranties”, with “no fewer than tens of thousands of persons nationwide” said to be affected”, with Barrett seeking “restitution and disgorgement as a result of Canon’s unfair business practices”, as well as Canon “be ordered to inform the public about the printer defect”.
Ho’s complaint names additional machines such as the MG5320, MP530, MP960, MX850 and MX892, with Ho buying an MG5320 that also displayed the message, and Canon apparently refusing to “repair or replace the printer for free because it was outside its warranty period”. This complaint adds that the internet is full of “consumers [who] have complained of the exact same print defect”.