Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Faulty Iphone via Amazon/eversheds - claimform issued after they refused a refund - they say serial number does not match


david_v_goliath
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 696 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

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)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

More info required.  Was this an item Amazon were selling or were they selling on behalf of a company, but sending the orders out, dealing with returns.

 

Did you keep any information, pictures, serial numbers, anything which may be helpful ?  If the phone was now in use by whoever allegedly stole it, could Apple help ?  E.g. lock the phone remotely.

 

Yes the section 75 claim is probably best way forward.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps an SAR request to Amazon to obtain all data records.  Surely Amazon must have kept record of information about the phone including serial numbers and this data would have been registered against your sale transaction, so if the phone went missing in transit to you, they could take action to stop it being used.

 

You have suffered a loss, as the phone Amazon sold you, is apparently not the one they received back. Therefore based on this, logically the phone was swapped at some point.

 

Contact your credit card company about this. If you are pursuing a section 75 claim, get them to confirm what details they need.

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

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?

 

@unclebulgaria67@BankFodder - any advice you could offer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

An SAR should cover everything.

What phone do they say they received from you?

If they have destroyed a telephone which they knew belonged to you then they had no business destroying it.

You can either deal with the whole thing at one go – but I would be tempted to attack on the basis of the incomplete SAR first of all

If you are happy to do that then I would send them a letter of claim telling them they are in breach of their data protection obligations and if they don't make complete disclosure within 14 days that you will sue them in the County Court.

 

I do think you need to find out about this other phone. If they have deliberately destroyed something which they believe belongs to you then that is tort and could merit additional damages.
Although I'm wondering whether it would need actually to belong to you rather than simply their belief that it belonged to you.

Whatever, you need to find out more about it.



 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what the problem is with asking them to send you the device that they received. It backs the more into a corner – especially if they have said it was destroyed.

Where is the message saying that it was destroyed?

On the basis what they have told you above, it seems to me that maybe the best thing to do is sue for incomplete disclosure under the data protection act and also breach of contract for failing to refund you a faulty phone.

You haven't told as much about the purchase of the phone. When was it bought? When did it develop a fault? Have you told us its value?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

 

I am proceeding to a claim, using the money claim online service. My draft particulars of claim are below. Any advice before I submit?

 

A few thoughts:

 

1. Money claim service seems to have changed - POC no longer have a word limit. I’ve tried to keep it short anyway. Should I cut even more?

 

2. Money claim service asks if I want to submit further details (I will answer no) or evidence (I will answer no)

 

3. Do I need to specify any particular laws (consumer rights act, or generally breach of contract?). Amazon already agreed to provide the return, so I guess I don’t need to prove any more that the item was faulty (and in any case, I can’t as they seem to have lost it)

 

Quote

Claimant seeks refund of £752.97 for faulty item returned to Defendant.

Claimant purchased item (iPhone 128GB, White) from Defendant on 7 Feb 2021, for £832.97. Reference number XXX
Claimant reported fault with the item to Defendant on 7 Nov 2021. Defendant initially offered and applied partial refund of £80 on 13 Nov 2021. Claimant was not satisfied with this, so Defendant agreed to provide remaining refund of £752.97 when item returned. Defendant returned item using Royal Mail service arranged by Claimant, on 24 Nov 2021.
Defendant received package on 26 Nov 2021, but did not provide refund. Claimant complained on 2 Dec 2021. Defendant launched investigation, and on 6 Dec 2021 claimed that: (a) serial number of item received did not match that recorded on Defendant’s system, (b) item was in unsellable condition, and (c) item had been destroyed by Amazon.
On 7 Dec 2021, Claimant wrote complaint and  letter before action. Defendant continues to refuse refund, refuses to disclose details of investigation, refuses to confirm serial numbers, refuses to provide any evidence to substantiate its claims, citing data privacy concerns.  
In any event, the claimant did return the correct item to the defendant and it may be that this item was stolen and substituted by an employee of the defendant.

 

 

@BankFodder any comments?

 

@BankFodder or @dx100uk,  I'd really appreciate any comments on my particulars of claim before I submit

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

hope so we're all wasting our time if not....

 

have you done your N180? DQ?

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Faulty Iphone via Amazon/eversheds - claimform issued after they refused a refund - they say serial number does not match

let them wriggle..

 

await the N157.

 

keep a close eye on the claim status on mcol 

has it been assigned to a local county court?

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Can’t even monitor online, as Defendant did not use the online system to reply, 

 

Even if they manually respond using the response pack its still inputted to MCOL and shown in the status. Your N157 will be on its way.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...