crantinope
-
Posts
45 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
I did already do this The paper tag just came off the bit of elastic it was attached to when I was unwrapping the watch, I returned it with the watch. It was untouched other than detaching from the elastic, just had the model number on it with a tiny barcode as I remember I have ordered the watch from elsewhere now, so a refund is all I want, but I can tell from their last email that they believe that nothing trumps their T&C's. If I reply stating that I wish for a full refund, including the link regarding CCR, do I challenge them on what actions I have taken that have de-valued the item. They will state obviously that the lack of (attached) tag means the item cannot be sold as new, but where do they get 20% from as the re-stocking fee? their website clearly states 30% in their FAQ's (The retailer is PLUS WATCHES, in the UK, not US)
-
Ordered 11th December, Received and unwrapped (by this I mean taken out of the box and plastic removed from watch to check condition and function) 13th December, emailed the retailer on 15th December, received back by retailer 20th December. (I have decided I don't want the alternative from them now, I would just like to get a full refund, but not sure how I challenge them on this). I paid through paypal with the money coming from my DEBIT card, forgot to switch it to my CREDIT card funding on this occasion. Below is the reply I received today: Hi Nick, It is clearly stated on the website if tags and plastics are removed we can no longer sell the watch as brand new and therefore we have to charge a restocking fee. We can either send you back this one or you will need to pay the fee before receiving the new model. Kindest Regards, Deborah
-
I have sent the following reply: A fair reply? Hi Deborah, Just to confirm, I had to remove the plastic to inspect the watch and check it was blemish free and functioning correctly (buttons & winder). It was all in order, and obviously I would have kept it, but for it being the wrong style. Does this constitute me handling the watch more than was necessary to evaluate its condition as it was only the outer packaging that was removed? I was under the impression that the Consumer Contracts Regulations afforded me the same opportunity to inspect goods as I would in a bricks and mortar shop, i.e.. I wouldn't expect to purchase a watch that I could only view wrapped in plastic wrap. The watch hasn't been worn, just inspected. I would appreciate your comments on this especially as I don’t want a refund, just a slightly different watch and would ask that you consider waiving the “re-stocking” fee. All the best…….Nick
-
Thanks for the replies, even though I am still slightly confused. I read the links provided and I suppose my question would be, Was I within my rights to remove the wrapping to inspect the watch and check it was blemish free and functioning correctly. It was all in order, and obviously I would have kept it, but for it being the wrong style. Does this constitute me handling the watch more than was necessary to evaluate its condition? I obviously don't want this to be a long drawn out process with the retailer but it would be good if there were something I could quote them to show their stance is unreasonable (if indeed it is)
-
Just to clear up one thing, the "snapped tag" is just the little paper Michael Kors tag with the Barcode and mk5569 model number on it. It was attached with a 2" piece of elastic type string to the strap and came off when removing the wrap, it wasn't a part of the watch that "snapped"
-
The email conversation I have had with the retailer so far: Hi Nicholas, We have received your watch back however there are no plastics and tag is snapped, we therefore cant resell as new. We can only exchange this watch for you if you pay a 20% restocking fee and the difference of price of the watches or we can send it back to you. Kindest Regards, Deborah ============================================================================= Hi Nicholas, Thanks for your email. We can invoice you the difference in price once we have received your watch back. Please attach the Name, order ID, together with a brief note so that the shipping department know what it is about. If you require any further assistance please be reassured that we are here for you at all times. Kind regards, Deborah ====================================================================== Hi, I just wanted to advise you that I recently received the below watch (please see order ref), but I have helpfully been advised by my partner that I purchased the wrong one!! The one I was supposed to have ordered was the MK5263 Blair version. I can see there is a difference in price between this and the one I have ordered, and am happy to pay the difference. Is this going to be a problem? Kind regards.
-
Hi, Could someone please give me some advice?. I recently bought a Michael Kors watch online. When delivered, I opened the box and then for the purposes of inspection took the clingfilm (well, posh clingfilm for a better description) off the watch to check all was in good order. The attached tag actually came off in the process of removing the wrap. When satisfied there were no defects etc, I put it back in the box and gave it to my partner the next day. Unfortunately, I bought her the wrong version!!!!!. Even though she offered to keep it, I said I would get her the right one. I emailed the seller and advised of my mistake, offering to pay the difference between the 2 (about £9). This was agreed and I returned the watch the next day. Now on reading the returns details to get the address, it stated that a 30% re-stocking fee would be applied if the wrapper had been removed from the watch. Sure enough, I got the email today saying the watch was now "not new" and a 20%??? re-stocking fee would have to be applied. I was under the impression I was allowed to remove the wrapping as I did to make sure the watch was all in order, am I incorrect?. In addition to this the 20% advised is not what the website T&C's state. Where do I stand on this. The watch wasn't worn, and was only actually taken out of the box by me, she didn't even put it on. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
-
Tax credit owed - Rossendales involved. A little bit of advice needed please
crantinope replied to crantinope's topic in HMRC
So make sure I get back on the phone to HMRC, insist that I deal with them and offer them repayments?. What about Rossendales, what will their next move be? Do I contact them at all? -
Tax credit owed - Rossendales involved. A little bit of advice needed please
crantinope replied to crantinope's topic in HMRC
Thanks both for sorting that. Right, I think I have got it this time: -
Tax credit owed - Rossendales involved. A little bit of advice needed please
crantinope replied to crantinope's topic in HMRC
If someone can actually advise how to delete the attachments I have already uploaded, then I will, but ATM it is not plainly obvious how to get that done Cheers.......Nick -
Tax credit owed - Rossendales involved. A little bit of advice needed please
crantinope replied to crantinope's topic in HMRC
2nd attempt. -
Just a little bit of advice needed if possible please. The short version is: We were overpaid tax credits. We were advised in October, the chaser came maybe mid November, and after trying to call through to sort out a repayment plan numerous times and being unable to ever connect during my lunch time(s), I wrote directly offering to repay back at a rate I was originally overpaid. Having only been a couple of weeks ago, I wasn't unduly worried about not receiving a reply, but instead have now received (hopefully attached) a letter from Rossendales instead. This came yesterday (4 December), and they have started ringing today (according to my partner). I have no problem paying the money back, but just wanted to know what kind of repayment Rossendales were likely to accept. (I am thinking around £150-£180 per month on £1800 debt). And yes, I know, I should have sorted this directly with Tax Credits after receiving the initial notice in October, but a few pointers would be helpful about what I might expect, because I/we certainly haven't got the money to repay all in one go. Thanks.
-
Business holding my goods to ransom
crantinope replied to crantinope's topic in General Consumer Issues
I shall get my thinking cap on. That is definitely his name, and the business address is the only address I have for him, so I presume I would name him and not the business as the defendant, with the business address as the correspondence address. Correct? -
Business holding my goods to ransom
crantinope replied to crantinope's topic in General Consumer Issues
Ok, so it has got to MCOL time I suppose. The question is, do I have anything to worry about?. I have copies of emails requesting a view of a mock up before signing off, I have the infamous email telling me I was going to get my frame back fully stripped to bare metal, and I also (finally) have digital copies of the calls last August and November, and on both occasions I requested/said I would await the "mock up" which never materialised. I have tried to read up on the MCOL and the protocol, and clearly the first step is to register the claim and then worry about the evidence when it is requested. Anything else I should know, read??? Cheers......Nick -
iPhone IOS update debacle. Phone rendered useless
crantinope replied to crantinope's topic in General Retail
Reply I received from EE today. "Nothing to do with us govner" Thank you for your email dated 8 May 2014 addressed to Olaf Swantee, Chief Executive, EE Ltd. Olaf has asked me to reply and keep him updated on my outcome. Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding. I regret EE is unable to assist with this issue as the phone is the responsibility of Apple. The warranty period is 12 months from date of purchase. Apple do not allow us to repair or replace their products and hold the sole rights for this. Any repairs or replacements would need to be referred to Apple, should they charge a fee this would also be payable if outside of the warranty period. The software updates released are done by Apple and EE as a network have no control over this. EE provide the SIM Card and access to the mobile network. The Terms and Conditions of your agreement do advise that the phone does not form part of the agreement and is sourced outside of this agreement. The Executive Office is empowered to deal with any queries directly addressed to Olaf Swantee, Chief Executive Officer and the Board of Directors. The Executive Office is the highest point of escalation within EE. Should you remain unhappy with this decision, the next step would be to seek independent advice via the Communications and Internet Services Adjudication Scheme (CISAS). CISAS can be contacted using the below information: CISAS International Dispute Resolution Centre 70 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1EU Email: [email protected] Tel: 020 7520 3827 Whilst I understand this is not the outcome you were looking for, I trust I have clarified EE's position regarding this matter. Yours sincerely Victoria Hunt Executive Office, EE c.c. Olaf Swantee, Chief Executive Officer - EE Ltd
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS