This note adds no new facts. It sets the two order papers named in Q8 (the March 2020 close of 1058152 and the June 2020 successor order 1105973) side by side, using pages already on this archive. For the short word list see the glossary; for the sequence see the timeline.
1. What Q8 asks
On the twelve-questions page, Q8 asks Leica to reconcile two pieces of paper in the same file: the March 2020 close of order 1058152 and the June 2020 successor order 1105973. The question does not allege a new fact; it asks which of the two documents describes the camera’s real status. As of this date Q8 is still listed as open.
Q1–Q12 · Q1–Q12 unanswered · Q10 still open
2. The 1058152 path, August 2019 to March 2020
The case landing for 1058152 records, as alleged, the 5 August 2019 estimate and reminder PDFs (EX04–EX06), the 29 August proceed-or-return question, the 4 September “not acknowledgeable” purchase-proof line, the 6 September €1303 + VAT restatement, the 11 September 403 thread and the 11 November Europe-only return address. The last entry is the 6–7 March 2020 close and order confirmation (EX09).
Case 1058152 · Journal 2019-08-05 · Autumn 2019, one file
3. The 1105973 path, June 2020
Three and a half months after that close, the file holds a 24 June 2020 confirmation of receipt (EX11) and a 25 June 2020 estimate (EX10) under a mail thread titled “New order number 1105973 // AW: 1058152”, with a related photo (EX12). The thread title itself links the new number to the order that had been closed.
Case 1105973 · Journal 2020-06-24 · Order 1105973 note
4. Why the two papers do not sit easily together
If 1058152 was closed in March 2020, the complainant asks what was received in June 2020 and why a fresh estimate was issued. If the camera was still in Wetzlar, the March close would not describe its physical status. Q6 asks the related question directly: the date and place of each order’s physical status.
Q6 and Q8 · Orders arc · Europe-only return
5. The October 2019 stop date beside both orders
In a June 2022 message summarised on this archive, Wetzlar’s Complaint Manager dated the CCD production stop to October 2019. On that account, both the March 2020 close and the June 2020 estimate came after the stop. That is why Q8 sits next to Q9, which asks for the last CCD-fit date at Wetzlar against the June 2020 estimate.
Journal 2022-06-26 · 2020 stop · Price ladder
6. What the €1303 line is and is not
The €1303 + VAT figure on the 1058152 path is a quoted contribution restated on 6 September 2019. It is not proof of payment, and the complainant has seen no formal invoice. Q8 asks only that the close and the successor order be explained in writing.
€1303 note · 2018 price change · Not acknowledgeable
7. What a short answer to Q8 would look like
One dated sentence per order would do: what “closed” meant for 1058152 in March 2020, what was received under 1105973 in June 2020, and where the body has been since. The record compiled here holds auto-acknowledgements and ticket numbers, plus a company letter dated 2 October 2026 that the consumer disputes as a closure; none of these is a numbered reply to Q8.
Auto-replies ≠ answers · 2026-10-03 update · How the answer changed
Open line as of 2026-11-04: no numbered point-by-point written reply to Q1–Q12 is on file. A company letter dated 2 October 2026 is on file; the consumer disputes its closure of the matter (2026-10-03 update). Allegations and unanswered questions only, not a court finding.
CCD-Korrosion (DE) · M9 CCD corrosion (EN) · Wetzlar Customer Care · Public sources · Exhibits · 12 questions