Jump to content

david_v_goliath

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

8 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks dx100uk N180 filed 2-3 weeks ago. No N157 received yet. Can’t even monitor online, as Defendant did not use the online system to reply, so case passed to the County Court Business Centre (i.e. online status is no longer updating). It hasn’t yet been assigned to a local Country Court. Any thoughts on the merits of Amazon’s defence?
  2. Phew! Thanks for the reply dx100uk! The Defendant instructed a law firm (Eversheds Sutherland LLP), has filed its Defence, submitted its n180 Directions Questionnaire (declining mediation, indicating that 0 witnesses would attend the hearing). I submitted my n180 as well, accepted mediation, and indicating that 1 witness (myself) would attend the hearing. I haven’t heard back from the Court since then. Given the value of the claim (<£1000) I think it’s slightly mad for Amazon to have instructed a (I guess) expensive law firm. They have submitted a long Defence, that I think is quite weak. In brief, it argues the below. Any advice on what to do next? My position is (still) that I returned the correct phone and Amazon is wrongly denying me the refund. Also any thoughts on point 1 below - they are obviously the same company and I don’t see how a dispute about a sale from Amazon UK to a UK consumer cannot be heard in UK. 1. I have filed the claim against the wrong company. I filed the claim against the UK company (AMAZON EU SARL, UK BRANCH (COMPANY NO. FC032354)), but the Defendant states: “The Claim should have been issued against AEU, as AEU is the company from which the Claimant purchased the item(s) referred to in the Claim. This is explained in the Amazon.co.uk Conditions of Use and Sale (the “Terms”) which state: “Your contract is with Amazon EU Sarl” (see page 9). AEU is a company registered in Luxembourg whose registered address is 38 Avenue John F. Kennedy, Luxembourg 1855, Luxembourg.” 2. I am put to strict proof to demonstrate that the phone was faulty. I think this is bizarre as a) I was not asked to do this when I reported the item as faulty, and b) because it is now impossible for me to demonstrate this because I have sent the phone back to Amazon! 3. Amazon claims the phone was not received. They state: “It is AEU’s position that they received a different product to the Item. Namely, AEU received a model iPhone 12 White 64GB. This phone received had an inferior storage size to the Item, a different serial number and was in an unsellable condition; as seen from the annotations made by the agent who processed this return at page 16.”. No actual evidence (photos, serial numbers, videos, etc) are provided only a brief note apparently left by an Amazon associate: “Associate Remarks: EDI4 have received a product with a different serial number recorded on CSC. Item returned is model iPhone 12 White 64GB and in unsellable condition. #RedPhone”
  3. Hi all - I have submitted a claim, and have just now received Amazon's Defence. Is anyone able to assist me with next steps?
  4. Thanks @just_jue - unfortunately I don't have the IMEI. I don't have the box, I have spoken to Vodafone, and they are not able to provide the IMEI number of previously used phones, and my iCloud account does not have a record of it because I removed the iPhone from my iCloud before sending it back (which is, of course what you are supposed to do). Worse still, Amazon refuses to provide the serial number of the iPhone, citing data privacy reasons. Amazon also has not included the serial number or IMEI number on any of the invoices or order confirmations. So I am really stuck!
  5. They told me that the phone had been destroyed on an initial call with their customer services (which I have recorded , luckily). So they are already in that corner, I guess. What do you think I might gain from asking them to send it to me? In the best case, they cave an give me a refund? I think it’s more likely that they just they reconfirm in writing what is already confirmed on a phone call. In the worst case, they send me a phone that is definitely not mine, and apparently in an unsellable condition. To sue for incomplete disclosure under the data protection act, would I need to formally make a SAR, or do you think the URL I gave should suffice? I’m tempted to make a specific SAR, just to be sure. The purchase of the phone: purchased on 7 Feb 21, for £832.97, return requested on 13 Nov 21 (9 months later). Later than 6 months.
  6. Thanks for the reply BankFodder Phone sent v phone apparently received They claim they received a different model phone but won’t provide much detail. Apparently an iPhone phone model and colour, but with lower storage space (64gb instead of 128gb) and a different serial number. I suspect someone in their warehouse decided to help themselves to a free upgrade, at my expense. I also suspect that this is a problem that Amazon faces with rogue operatives. I can’t prove any of this of course, but don’t believe I should have to find out how Amazon lost it, and prove that I am not trying to defraud them. Anyway: The original first line customer support wrote: “Upon checking as per update from return center, we have received wrong Item iPhone 12 White 64GB and in unsellable condition instead of correct one which we actually delivered to you. We won't be able to process further until we receive correct Item. If you want to appeal the decision of return center, please reply back to email which you received regarding wrong return. Please return Item for refund.” The head office customer support / complaints team wrote: “As we spoke about on the phone I have reviewed the serial number of the item returned against the item that was sent you. Unfortunately they do not match and I am unable to issue a refund for this item. However, if you can provide a photo of the invoice you received and/or retrieve the serial number from your provider I will continue to investigate this return on your behalf.” SAR I submitted a request for personal information using Amazon’s form, here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/help/customer/display.html?ref_=hp_left_v4_sib&nodeId=GXPU3YPMBZQRWZK2. This is the first search result on Google when I searched for Amazon UK DSAR, but not sure if it counts as a formal SAR under GDPR. In response, I got a download with hundreds of files but none appeared to contain details of the investigation, or the serial number etc of the phone. I have also specifically asked Amazon for details of the phone they apparently received and the investigation they performed, with any evidence of their claims (eg photos, serial numbers, etc.). Their response was: “While I do understand your request for additional information; unfortunately we will be unable to share the details of this investigation due to data protection regulations.” An infuriating brick wall. Given this all, do you think I should make a specific, formal subject access request specifically requesting information about what happened with the return, what investigation they performed,etc? I can’t help but feel that this is all very unfair: Amazon have refused the refund without any evidence, they are effectively accusing me of trying to defraud them, they won’t give me any details (not even the serial number of the phone so I can report a theft to the police and have the phone blocked). I don’t want to ask Amazon to send me the device that they received (even if destroyed) as it is not mine.
  7. Sorry to hear about this experience. When you write that “Amazon received back our goods, and are now adamant iPads were sent. Proper investigation has not taken place by them and have decided this amounts to attempted fraud.” what evidence have they given of this? Have they provided you with the serial numbers or the iPads apparently sent? I am experiencing a very similar problem (https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/443690-amazon-refusing-refund-claiming-serial-number-does-not-match-apparently/#comment-5144555 if interested) in which Amazon apparently conducted an investigation but refuse to provide any details or evidence. They are a broken record, and refuse to engage. I think that in your case, given that you bought it on a debit card very recently, you might be able to use the charge back option if you contact your bank. Beware that apparently Amazon regularly close accounts if customers use charge backs…but at least you might get your money back! Good luck…
  8. Thank you for the replies An update: 1. Amazon refuses to provide any evidence of its claims, citing data privacy. It maintains the serial numbers do not match without providing any evidence. 2. Amazon has an automated SAR form which I have filled out. They have supplied details of chats, emails etc but none of their internal communications or records relating to their investigation (not sure if this would be covered in a general SAR anyway) 3. I filled a section 75 claim with my credit card supplier, American Express, and they have rejected my claim with the following reasoning: "...the onus is upon the Claimant (you) to demonstrate a breach of contract and/or misrepresentation by the Supplier of goods/services, in this instance, Amazon. Although we have no reason to disbelieve your version of events, Amazon has stated that the phone that you returned does not match the one that was originally purchased. We trust you will appreciate that when reviewing Section 75 claims, we must remain impartial and base our assessment solely on the evidence provided. With this in mind, we have been unable to substantiate a breach of contract and/or misrepresentation" I'm not sure where I stand now. It doesn’t seem right that a supplier can just claim, without any evidence whatsoever, that a customer did not return the correct item. Nor does it seem fair that The burden of proof is on me to establish that I returned the correct item (ie to prove that I did not attempt to defraud Amazon). surely the only way to do that, would be to record a detailed video as I package an item and take it to the post office - which is clearly unreasonable. Does anyone have any advice? Should I pursue this with my card company? Or refer to FOS? Or pursue it with Amazon through MCOL?
  9. Thank you for your quick reply! To clarify: - sold by Amazon directly (not on marketplace) - I don’t have the packaging or a record of the serial number - the original amazon receipt / order confirmation doesn’t list the serial number either (which is unusual) - I took a picture of the package as it was being weighed and accepted by the Post Office (as I’ve had issues with packages going missing before with other couriers) but don’t have any other photos
  10. Hi there i sent a fault iPhone back to Amazon for a refund. I used a pre-paid Royal mail return label provided by Amazon. I did not hear anything from Amazon about the refund so I contacted them for an update. I was informed on the phone that their returns fulfilment department had 1) received the wrong phone model, 2) that it was in an on saleable condition, 3) that the serial number did not match, and 4) it had now been destroyed. I asked for evidence of this, e.g. the serial number, or any other evidence, but Amazon refused to provide it. Amazon are insisting that I provide the correct item, and then I will get a refund. This is obviously a load of rubbish. I returned the correct product, and it was not in an unsaleable condition. Their standard customer service just parrot the same response back to me. I can’t get through to anyone senior at Amazon either, even after emailing Jeff at amazon.com, and the UK managing director (with a letter beefore action, giving them 14 days to give me a refund]. Those 14 days have not yet elapsed, but by reading on this forum, I see that people don’t get responses to such emails anyway. I suspect that there has been an error at the Amazon fulfilment centre, or someone who works there has stolen the phone and pressed a certain button on their system (specifying those 4 reasons) that they know means that the customer won’t get a refund, and will have a hard time getting through. Of course there is no way I can prove my side - but should the burdon really be in me? Please can someone advise me how best to deal with this? Is there a better way to contact Amazon? Or do I just need to make a section 75 claim with my credit card company? (Luckily I bought it on credit card)
  11. Well if they paid for it, then it seems that the contract is between the retailer and hermes - so hermes losing the package is the retailer's problem. If I were you, I'd email the retailer stating the above, including a picture of the receipt, demanding a refund within 14 days and otherwise threatening to pursue more formal action.
  12. Yes - it's the same person. The were only three people in the balloon - 1) the person who operates the balloon / takes the picture, 2) the claimant, 3) his now fiance.
  13. Thank you both for your replies. I think I need to clarify a few points in relation to issues / questions you have both raised: 1. The "supplier" is Cotswold Balloon Safaris Ltd. The person who operates the flights, is the same person responsible for the photography. i.e. the pilot takes the photos. 2. You are correct, @dx100uk that the supplier is not a wedding photographer (I was simply using that as a comparable situation, in that photography is of similar emotional value, and it is time sensitive - i.e. it needs to be performed at the time of the event, not at some later date). 3. You are spot on @BankFodder, that the £750 is for an all-inclusive package. It includes the flight and the photography. There is no convenient menu of options, that would enable me to easily separate out the two, i.e. you cannot purchase the balloon flight without photography, for a smaller amount of money. The issue here, I think, is that it doesn't actually cost the supplier anything extra to take a picture. There is no material marginal cost to him of doing so. He simply pulls out the camera and takes a picture at the right moment. 4. However, those pictures obviously have significant value to the claimant. The photos were an integral part of the service, and the claimant entered into the contract with the expectation of having pictures to capture the moment. He would not have entered into the contract, if pictures were not offered. There is clear email correspondence between the claimant and the supplier in which the claimant asks to confirm that photography is included / available, and the supplier replies "We would include the photos in the price you are paying for the private flight. Does any of the above change your advice? I can certainly come up with an estimate of the cost of arranging a new balloon flight (what you call the ascertainable cost), and ask the claimant to put a number on the suffering as a result of not having the photos (what you call un-ascertainable cost, and what @dx100uk says I cannot claim in a small claims court). These numbers will be significantly higher than the £750 cost - as they will include (presumably) the equivalent package at a competitor, plus the travel costs, etc!
×
×
  • Create New...