I · Payment / order / remittance on file (lead)
Verifiable purchase and manufacturer order papers already on this archive (consumer T.C. Wu):
- EX07 / EX08 — purchase proof · Leica Monochrom · photo dated 2014-08-18
- EX04–EX06 / EX09 — estimate / reminder / order confirmation 1058152
- EX10–EX11 — estimate / confirmation of receipt 1105973
- On-file cost line: Ursula Brand, 2019-09-06 — contribution from 01.12.2018 of €1303 + VAT (~€1550 incl.)
- Bank purchase-path PDFs (public, unredacted): /bank/ · BANK01 · BANK02 · BANK03 · BANK04
- Leica-emailed estimates / order confirmations / confirmation of receipt (public): EX04–EX11 as listed above; archive also holds order confirmation 811072.
- Survey email subject refs only (not invoice PDFs; no separate formal Leica Rechnung/Invoice PDF found as attachment): 2009060040 / 2009061250 — “LEICA Customer Survey repair invoice …” subject lines only.
Payment / remittance on file — bank PDFs are public; Leica-emailed estimates / order confirmations / confirmation of receipt are public; survey invoice numbers 2009060040 / 2009061250 are email subject refs only.
- Bank gallery /bank/ · /exhibits/bank/
- BANK01 · BANK02 · BANK03 · BANK04
- EX04–EX11 gallery above · archive order confirmation 811072
II · Core allegation (alleged): money / cost-sharing collected — quality warranty / 2014 Kulanz not honoured
Consumer characterisation (alleged — not a judicial fraud finding):
- Leica ran the commercial / charging path (estimates, order confirmations, €1303 contribution line, order administration) — money / payment obligation is on file;
- the 2014 public CCD goodwill / Kulanz (replacement regardless of age; work toward a “permanent solution”) and ongoing sensor / quality issue were not met with manufacturer relief matching those promises — through later discontinuation of CCD repair;
- one-line position (alleged): focus on collecting money or cost participation; quality warranty and prior promises not honoured; after payment / charge, responsibility for quality and goodwill is missing; HQ takes (or demands) money and still does not stand behind the quality / warranty / goodwill promise.
III · Auto-tickets: “we will update” ≠ named point-by-point reply
Latest CRM / auto wall: SC00111693–SC00111703. Earlier: SC00110963 / SC00110964 / SC00111076 / SC00111077 (and Demand-day / prior batches on the home status). Ticket number + “we will update shortly” is not a named numbered answer to /questions/ — alleged process-promise gap.
IV · Numbered demand — 7 calendar days (deadline 2026-09-30)
- Named accountable person and internal file number for 1058152 / 1105973?
- Written schedule of all payments / charges (amount, date, document no.) on these orders?
- How do you reconcile 2014 goodwill with later €1303+VAT and programme stop — numbered answers to /questions/ or reasoned refusal?
- Why do auto-tickets (including SC00111693–SC00111703) still fail to supply a point-by-point reply — when will the named answer issue?
- What written remedy (repair / replacement / refund / reasoned refusal) remains after quality / goodwill (alleged) were not honoured?
V · Public send record (afternoon wave)
- Message-IDs: will be hung on this page when the afternoon email wave send completes — not invented.
- From: admin@leica.gmbh only (no info@; no Gmail Reply-To)
- Deadline: 2026-09-30 Asia/Shanghai · 7 calendar days from send
- Morning Formal Demand remains on record: /updates/2026-09-23-formal-demand.html
Alleged / unanswered. Consumer-authored lawyer-letter style only — not licensed legal representation.
Q1–Q12 + payment gallery · Morning Formal Demand · Bank PDFs · Exhibits · All updates