Mail order problems : The other side of the fence..

[BananaSplit]

You wouldn`t believe how great most of our customers are, which throws into sharp relief what a prat this particular one is. The vast majority of our customers are really honest and helpful/flexible with us if there`s ever a problem, not that there are that many. But we`re just like that with them.

We like dealing with (nearly all) of them, and they like dealing with us. That`s how it should be.

 

The question is does anyone know how to disuade awkward bleeders from dealing with us in the first place ? ! ? I`d be happy if they bought their aerial stuff elsewhere.

Actually they probably do buy their stuff elsewhere anyway, because people like that are usually only interested in buying the cheapest stuff (whether it`s good quality or not) which we don`t sell. So that could be one reason why we don`t get many members of the awkward squad buying off us.

 

I think you've probably managed to ensure that many people will now choose not to deal with you without you needing to disuade people any further.

[Justin Smith]

I think you've probably managed to ensure that many people will now choose not to deal with you without you needing to disuade people any further.

 

If it puts off people dealing with us who aren`t the aforementioned "top blokes" (or blokettes), but people with no concern for how much hassle and cost they`re causing others, then I`m fine with that.

 

I think we should examine the situation here.

There are three parties to this, the supplier (us), the carrier, and the customer :

 

The supplier hasn`t done anything wrong.

 

The carrier may have done something wrong, they might have damaged the aerial, but we can`t find that out now.

 

The customer has done something wrong, in fact they`ve done three things wrong.

1 They signed for the order as being in good condition (though I don`t actually want to stress this one, it`s an easy mistake to make and one we could have got around if the chap had done what we asked him to).

2 They didn`t do what we instructed them to (i.e. send us a picture of the aerial).

3 They did do what we didn`t ask them to (i.e. they sent the aerial back).

 

But what`s SO unfair, is that if we fully refund the customer there`s only one party which is going to lose money, namely the supplier, the one party which hasn`t actually done anything wrong.....

How can anyone consider that fair ?

[dosxuk]

But what`s SO unfair, is that if we fully refund the customer there`s only one party which is going to lose money, namely the supplier, the one party which hasn`t actually done anything wrong.....

 

Well, you have publically attacked and ridiculed one party. This person will know you are referring to him if he happens to read this thread, and you are easily identifiable on numerous websites. It's inexcusable to be calling your customers "prats" and "a***holes" simply because they didn't follow your instructions to the letter (which they were probably unaware of anyway).

 

Give him a full refund and draw a line under the matter, before he finds this thread and decides to become worthy of the names you have called him. As other posters have pointed out, all the laws are on the side of the customer.

[tinfoilhat]

One point, can you actually write "unexamined" these days ? Most couriers I come accross have those funny little PDA things where my signature doesn't look my own. Good luck on trying to find an area where you have room for a signature and "unexamined" on the tiny area you sign in.

[cgksheff]

It doesn't matter what terms he writes on his website, they cannot overrule the Distance Selling Regulations.

 

There are risks in selling by mail order. Whether you think they are fair or not, it is just something that you have to take on the chin and build into your pricing.

[cgksheff]

Can I insist that consumers who cancel an order within the cancellation period return the goods as new or in their original packaging?

 

3.58 No. Consumers are under a duty to take reasonable care of the goods while in their possession as discussed in paragraph 3.44. The DSRs allow consumers to examine goods they have ordered as they would in a shop. If that requires opening the packaging and trying out the goods then they have not breached their duty to take reasonable care of the goods. In these circumstances you cannot insist that consumers return the goods as new or in their original packaging.

You may ask consumers to return goods with the original packaging, but you cannot insist on this. In the case of goods such as earrings that have hygiene seals, you may require consumers to exercise reasonable care by not removing the seals when examining them.

 

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/oft698.pdf

 

 

Technically speaking, he may not have cancelled his contract in writing/email/fax which leaves him open, but then as Justin appears not to be fully compliant either it may be a moot point.

[Justin Smith]

Give him a full refund and draw a line under the matter, before he finds this thread and decides to become worthy of the names you have called him. As other posters have pointed out, all the laws are on the side of the customer.

 

But actually that`s incorrect, the aerial is damaged.

However, even if, in these circumstances, the law was on the side of the customer, that doesn`t make it right.

You haven`t answered how it can be fair that the only party which hasn`t done anything wrong in this, has to lose money !

Even for those of you looking at this purely from the point of view of the customer, I don`t see how you can justify that patent unfairness.

[Justin Smith]

Well OK maybe I should have been a bit more circumspect with my choice of words, but I was upset.

I`m a passionate idealist with, in this matter, a grave sense of injustice. It`s not the money it`s the principle.

I had little sympathy with the customer right from the off because the very fact he wanted to send the order back meant he was unconcerned about any effort and/or expense we`d put in to send out the order in the first place.

We frequently do stuff for our customers FOC even when we don`t have to. However that`s for genuine people who`d usually offer to pay anyway, but it gives us a good feeling to go further than the customer expects.

None of that applies here.

Basically I don`t like selfish people.

 

The fact is that if the boot was on the other foot we wouldn`t equivocate, we`d accept it was our fault and take a hit it on the not inconsiderable cost to send a replacement order out TNT. That`s £8 plus VAT plus (because of the high cost of a third party collection) often writing off the first order.

 

What upsets me is why does it all have to be one way ?

If it`s our fault we pay.

If it`s the customers` fault we`re also supposed to pay.

Anyone out there who thinks that`s fair, well it`s a waste of time discussing it.

[Guest]

Do you actually know that it's the customer's fault? From the speed with which he set about returning the package he could have opened it, realised the item was damaged, packaged it back up and sent it off on its way to you. It's what I would have done. And, incidentally, I would not have asked the delivery driver to hang on while I checked a parcel's contents; I doubt he would have done so anyway, as they're always in a rush and they're probably aware that the signature is required to confirm delivery not content condition.

 

I must say, you've done a top job of shining a light on your company and how you do business. You've called your customer unreasonable, a prat, selfish, and an arsehole; you've implied that he's a liar and a poor class of customer; you've failed to offer a full refund, and a refund on carriage, for return of a damaged item; and you've moaned about how it's all the customer's fault even before you've received the item back. I'm stunned that you've done all that on a local, public forum, that's stuffed full of potential customers, all while helpfully displaying your company's details in your signature.

 

You might have been ripped off. That would be a crap experience for any company. But what you've done here is comprehensively rubbish a customer on what seems to be insubstantial evidence. You don't ever do that in public, even if your poor opinion did turn out to be justified; it's simply not professional.

[Evei]

What upsets me is why does it all have to be one way ?

If it`s our fault we pay.

If it`s the customers` fault we`re also supposed to pay.

Anyone out there who thinks that`s fair, well it`s a waste of time discussing it.

 

I do feel for you but as a customer you want an item to be perfect when it is delivered (even if it will work perfectly well bent) as that is what you have paid for. I do think they are wrong returning the whole lot but this is a cost/ risk that has to factored in when selling online.

 

I recently had to return a light fitting that had an arm snapped off. I rang the bloke up to tell him that half the order had arrived fine but the one fitting was broke, he was clearly gutted and told me that he would now be out of pocket but did stick to it and sent the courier to pick up and drop me another which came perfect and within 24 hours.

 

I have since ordered all my other lights from there and will continue to do so because of the service, when people ask were I got my lights I pass on the name. So taking the hit the first time has paid off for him as he has made more than he lost:)