More Expensive Items Delivered - What's the law?

Hi All,

Just got a question for anyone who knows their consumer law. I'll outline the situation first.

I ordered some software from a very reputable company that I've used in the past. They sent me a multi-user educational package by mistake (so I can't re-sell it in the future, or use it for commercial purposes). That's fine, I realise that mistakes happen. The thing is, the package they've sent is worth £650, and the one I ordered was meant to be worth £400.

So, I called them up this morning after I received the package assuming they would bend over backwards to help me, because I'd actually been honest. However they said they could only do the following for me:

1) Collect the package on Monday, and they would only ship another out once they'd received it back. This means I wouldn't receive my new software until at least Thursday. It doesn't really help that I'm going to be away from home for the next 3 weeks, so it'll be at least a month before I get a chance to use what I paid for.

2) I can pay for another packge and they'd refund the returned one once they receive it leaving me £400 out of pocket for X amount of days. Erm, excuse me but I'm doing them a favour by trying to be honest. I told them this and they just said that's tough.

Now, I'm try to do the right thing, but this has left me with a very bitter taste in my mouth. I would have been very happy to do a swap on the door step with the courier on Monday fixing the problem entirely.

So, what's the law (rather than opinion) on me receiving the wrong goods? Do I have to send them back? I could sell this package on eBay for £500, but I've tried to do the right thing and had it thrown back in my face.

They are acting within their means, you dont actually think they would just let you keep it or trust you to send it back and send you out the other item in the mean time do you?

You haven't had it thrown back in your face, thrown back in your face would be paying £650, getting the £400 version and the company refusing to replace it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

They are acting within their means, you dont actually think they would just let you keep it or trust you to send it back and send you out the other item in the mean time do you?

---

Of course I didn't expect them to let me keep it, but I did expect them to attempt to fix the problem without treating me like it was my mistake. All I wanted was for them to treat me as a customer who's trying to do the right thing.

THEY made the mistake. They had no idea they'd sent out the wrong version, in fact it took me a few minutes to convince them they had sent out the more expensive version. They're coming to collect the package, so I don't see why they can't do a swap at the door. If I'm honest enough to tell them, you would think they might think I'm honest enough to give it back to the courier.

Instead they're saying that I should be out of pocket or wait for their bureaucracy to sort it out. I even offered to drop it back at one of their stores today, but they said they couldn't do a refund until it arrived back at their warehouse.

Sorry, but this seems like lousy customer service to me.

Sounds like a customer who needs a slap in the face to me.

They have offered to collect it then on receipt of the item they will exchange it for the correct item. Option 1 IS treating you as a customer trying to do the right thing.

They can't do a swap at the door because the courier will not be authorised to approve an RMA for a different company, how are they supposed to confirm the product is correct? You very well may be honest, but the courier will not know the condition the item is in, if it has been used or if it is the correct item. The courier company are responsible while it is in transit, not to issue a replacement.

Warehouse/store stock are different so I understand why they said that.

If you have such an issue only ever buy items in store from small companies next time. You don't seem to understand the different companies/departments involved in online shopping

Name and shame the retailer plox, kthxbai.

P.S. You should have smacked it on the bay :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Sounds like a customer who needs a slap in the face to me.

They have offered to collect it then on receipt of the item they will exchange it for the correct item. Option 1 IS treating you as a customer trying to do the right thing.

---

No it isn't. He ordered a piece of software; presumably the delivery time was quoted when he ordered (it tends to be). He assumed that he'd receive his £400 worth of software and be able to use it immediately- this is not an unreasonable assumption.

Quote:

---

They can't do a swap at the door because the courier will not be authorised to approve an RMA for a different company, how are they supposed to confirm the product is correct?

---

They didn't know the product was incorrect until gmarno got in touch to say that they'd sent him a product that was more valuable than the one he was paying for.

A quick stockcheck should prove they're up one and down the other.

Anyway, couriers deal in sealed bags, and if gmarno was running some kind of elaborate scam to try and get his software twice, a simple video of them opening the return package at their end would probably cover it.

Edit: and....wut? If you're going to steal software, even profit by it, I can think of easier ways than quibbling with retailers over what they've delivered. If I were to suggest an easier business plan: bittorrent--->DVD--->bootsale TBH. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Quote:

---

You very well may be honest, but the courier will not know the condition the item is in, if it has been used or if it is the correct item. The courier company are responsible while it is in transit, not to issue a replacement.

---

Like I say, sealed bags.

TBH gmarno, flog what you have on ebay, and buy the software you need from someone else. If that's the way they treat their customers, they don't deserve your effort.

Years ago I was a Dreamcast obsessive- 2000 this would be I guess, the year after it came out. I was in the habit of buying rare/non-uk games from CEX. One time I received my package, and it contained the game I'd actually bought, plus some sort of Japanese horse racing simulator. I never bothered to check if it was valuable on ebay, I just called CEX and told them they'd sent me a game I hadn't ordered, they then sent round a courier at my convenience to pick it up. Cost to them- a fiver I guess? To get back a game worth probably £40. I very rarely buy from CEX any more, but that's not because I dislike their attitude to the customer;).

I'm with finlay666 on this. If you want to do the honest thing then it is going to delay you for a couple of days. If you are happy being dishonest, then sell or use the software. But from a legal standpoint I'm not sure if they can charge you the extra money or not...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Sounds like a customer who needs a slap in the face to me.......

---

Sounds to me like you don't understand the term "customer". Customers are people who keep you in business in case you didn't know. Generally speaking you should try to keep them happy so they spend more money with you in the future. It's a tricky concept I'll grant you, but it's important anyway.

This isn't a case of me ordering the wrong thing or changing my mind. I'm telling them they sent a more expensive item so the "right" thing to do would be to do a straight swap. I spent over £5k with this company last year, but obviously that counts for nothing. Sure, I may not be a big fish in terms of expenditure, but I can guarantee I won't be recommending or buying from this shop anymore.

The simple fact is, I've done nothing wrong in this process (or have I?). I deal with plenty of companies who are willing to bend their procedures a little when it's their mistake. I've been in this situation in the past and unsurprisingly (to me at least) the company were very happy to swap at the door.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sumanji

Name and shame the retailer plox, kthxbai.

P.S. You should have smacked it on the bay :P

---

I won't name and shame until I've had a chance to get this fully resolved :) If things don't turn out right I'll N&S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rave

No it isn't. He ordered a piece of software; presumably the delivery time was quoted when he ordered (it tends to be). He assumed that he'd receive his £400 worth of software and be able to use it immediately- this is not an unreasonable assumption......

---

Thanks for the support Rave, and like you said a simple stock check should be able to prove my innocence (or apparent guilt in Finlays eyes). All I want is the product I paid for with the minimum of hassle. I accept mistakes happen, but this company have just alienated a (previously) good customer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiM

I'm with finlay666 on this. If you want to do the honest thing then it is going to delay you for a couple of days. If you are happy being dishonest, then sell or use the software. But from a legal standpoint I'm not sure if they can charge you the extra money or not...

---

That's kind of the point though.

Honest Approach = 1 week delay minimum
Dishonest Approach = Immediate use plus more licenses or at least £100 profit on the bay

I'm going to do the honest thing, but why should that result in me being penalised? I just can't find a good reason for me to have to wait around for a week to get this sorted because I was honest.

This could all be resolved with a simple swap at the door. Yes, they'd have to place a little trust in me, but I would hope that would be demonstrated by me owning up to getting a more expensive product. I'm not running an elaborate scam here, I just want the product I paid for without having to wait in, and then wait for their bureaucracy to catch up.

The problem is they do not know you are not lying to them an trying to get a second item while hanging on to the first. I would have suggested a different tack.

Tell them the item you have order has not arrived, they have sent you a different item as an unsolicited good. Ask them to send you your item (unsupplied item) or refund your money, then arrange the return or just allow you to keep the mistake insted.

phone companies have done swaps on the door for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oolon

The problem is they do not know you are not lying to them an trying to get a second item while hanging on to the first........

.......phone companies have done swaps on the door for me.

---

Yeah, I appreciate what you say. But like Rave said, there are FAR easier ways to get free software or scam companies out of their goods. I'm also a pretty regular customer with them, so I had hoped that my previous purchases would go in my favour.

I've also had swaps at the door (i.e a courier wouldn't hand over the goods until he received a package back).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

Sounds to me like you don't understand the term "customer". Customers are people who keep you in business in case you didn't know. Generally speaking you should try to keep them happy so they spend more money with you in the future. It's a tricky concept I'll grant you, but it's important anyway.

---

No need to be a patronising idiot, I have worked in retail for 5 years and customer service for 18 months. You do want to keep most customers happy, however the stupid impatient ones are usually more hassle than they are worth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

This isn't a case of me ordering the wrong thing or changing my mind. I'm telling them they sent a more expensive item so the "right" thing to do would be to do a straight swap. I spent over £5k with this company last year, but obviously that counts for nothing. Sure, I may not be a big fish in terms of expenditure, but I can guarantee I won't be recommending or buying from this shop anymore.

---

They are doing a straight swap, because it happens on their end it's still a straight swap. Do you want someone to hand deliver it to you? Get off your high horse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

The simple fact is, I've done nothing wrong in this process (or have I?). I deal with plenty of companies who are willing to bend their procedures a little when it's their mistake. I've been in this situation in the past and unsurprisingly (to me at least) the company were very happy to swap at the door.

---

Different companies, different policies. Both fully within the law

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

or apparent guilt in Finlays eyes

---

Re-read my posts, I never said you were innocent or guilty, merely that the company doesn't know if you are being honest or dishonest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

That's kind of the point though.

Honest Approach = 1 week delay minimum
Dishonest Approach = Immediate use plus more licenses or at least £100 profit on the bay

I'm going to do the honest thing, but why should that result in me being penalised? I just can't find a good reason for me to have to wait around for a week to get this sorted because I was honest.

This could all be resolved with a simple swap at the door. Yes, they'd have to place a little trust in me, but I would hope that would be demonstrated by me owning up to getting a more expensive product. I'm not running an elaborate scam here, I just want the product I paid for without having to wait in, and then wait for their bureaucracy to catch up.

---

Oolon, OP has already stated company is aware of it, and will collect the item then send out the correct item on receipt of the wrong one, selling/use now is essentially misappropriation of items OP does not own

What is it with people being such rude, dishonest, narcissistic b*stards?

Jesus calm down, I don't think it's unreasonable for the company to go the extra mile in this case considering they're currently down £150.
Seems like they're not willing to spend a few extra quid on securing the swap especially considering they're the ones at fault, if it were my company I'd be gagging to get the swap done before the customer decided to ebay it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Oolon, OP has already stated company is aware of it, and will collect the item then send out the correct item on receipt of the wrong one, selling/use now is essentially misappropriation of items OP does not own

What is it with people being such rude, dishonest, narcissistic b*stards?

---

Narcissistic? I see no self love here. Dishonest? I never suggested he should have just kept the better item and not told them, I just said how I would have handled the conversation, clearly the firm shipping is going to do would suggest terms that was best for them. I would have tried to be on the front foot instead.

He is not entitled to those goods, they are not entitled to his money as they have not supplied the correct goods, why should they have access to his money while the return is going on? They are not entitled to withhold his goods he has paided for. If they don't believe they sent the wrong goods which is why the wish to have them returned first then state in writing he will accept these as a replacement. After all they could have not supplied enough items in with case there would be nothing for him to return, would they then have not tried to fore fill the order correctly?

He could have kept quiet and after a reasonable amount of time if they had not asked for them back they would have been his. So either are not entitled to anything at that time, if they wish to believe they have sent the right good and not do a return that would have been acceptable.

I have had amazon send replacement items before the original was returned before its not "unreasonable", I was to be a present, so I wanted to present it, and not miss the date even if I had to take it back and swap the item after Christmas. Whats the problem about this particularly for a customer in good standing?

Another alternative would be to tell the company you wish to cancel your order as they have sent the wrong goods (which is well within his rights) and then do a new order for the correct goods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

......What is it with people being such rude, dishonest, narcissistic b*stards?

---

Seriously? I mean seriously? You're talking about people being rude after, and I quote:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Sounds like a customer who needs a slap in the face to me.

---

I had a funny feeling you had worked in retail/customer services as you seemed a little too vehement in your defense of this company. I understand why you came out fighting their corner as you did though, because I'm sure you get to deal with this stuff day in, day out. Maybe you need to take a step back and make an impartial evalution of this situation.

Just so you know, I didn't give anyone any abuse at this particular company, I'm always very conscious that these people are there doing their job and they don't need someone at the end of the phone abusing them. I never raise my voice, call them names or use language I wouldn't use in front of the pope ;)

However, if a company is not treating me in the same way that I would treat my own customer base, I make sure that I express my distaste for said companies policies. I'm not out to make their lives a misery, I'm merely out to get what I paid for in a timely and hassle free manner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

....They are doing a straight swap, because it happens on their end it's still a straight swap.

---

Sorry, that's not a straight swap in my book. A straight swap would be me sending them the wrong package and them sending me a replacement so it crosses in the post. If we're talking division of time here, that is a fairer swap. A swap at my door would be in my favour, but as I'm the only party not at fault here, I don't see that as a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

....Do you want someone to hand deliver it to you? Get off your high horse....

---

FYI yes, I would like it hand delivered, ideally by a courier company. If it's not to be hand delivered, I'm not entirely sure how the courier company can train a ferret in time to cart it down my driveway :mrgreen: Either that or they could design some kind of faux father christmas machine to loft it down my chimney (I'm thinking some kind of trébuchet contraption with a hint of tinsel). Either way would be kick ass :rockon2:

At the end of the day, this company (IMO) isn't treating me with respect. Building a rapport with customers is what business is all about. You don't have a business without customers. At this point in time, I'm going to ship the product back, get a refund and buy somewhere else (preferably in store as per Finalys suggestion;)).

I can see understand why companies may be weary, they may be down £250 now, but they could be down £1050 in the worst scenario. But I can sympathise with gmarno, assuming that he is telling the truth. I would not be amused with needing a piece software, yet ending up unable to use it for 3 weeks because I need to solve a mistake that wasn't mine to sort in the first place. Still, if that was the main issue, then suggesting that he sells it is not going to help as the time it takes to flog it, get paid and purchase another copy would still result in the OP not getting the software he presumably needs. Any 'profit' could be viewed as 'compensation', albeit not a very honest one still. If I was managing the store, I would look at his purchase history to assess how likely it is to keep his word and weight it with the £250. It's not a straight decision, but the ball is in their court, and I do not think he needs a slap in the face for being put in a situation he did not ask for, not initiated in the first place.

I don't know the law but this is how I see it,
They have not sent the item you paid for, ask for it to be sent asap, or give you your money back, if not claim it back from your ccc.
The item they sent you is now yours, I don't see how they can get it back if you don't want to give it back.
Sounds like a company that needs a slap in the face.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filbert

The item they sent you is now yours, I don't see how they can get it back if you don't want to give it back.

---

The unsolicited goods act covers this, you didn't buy the product, and have to return it if requested (not sure if you have to inform them about it). However it has to be returned at their expense. If not asked for them back they are yours after 6 months, however you are not allowed to use them and you need to keep reasonable care of them during that time. This is clearly not the case with the OP, as the retailer would like them back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

I had a funny feeling you had worked in retail/customer services as you seemed a little too vehement in your defense of this company.

---

Yes I must have worked in retail given that I am vehemently defending the company you have not named, so I'm obviously also an employee of that company :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

I understand why you came out fighting their corner as you did though, because I'm sure you get to deal with this stuff day in, day out. Maybe you need to take a step back and make an impartial evalution of this situation.

---

Again, re-read my post, I said I have, not that I did currently work in retail/customer service. I merely have a reasonable amount of experience from both sides of the argument. Because I am offering a counter-opinion does not mean I agree with what the company has done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

However, if a company is not treating me in the same way that I would treat my own customer base, I make sure that I express my distaste for said companies policies. I'm not out to make their lives a misery, I'm merely out to get what I paid for in a timely and hassle free manner.

---

So you would send out an expensive item, to a customer trusting they would return a more expensive item you sent out by mistake. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

Sorry, that's not a straight swap in my book. A straight swap would be me sending them the wrong package and them sending me a replacement so it crosses in the post. If we're talking division of time here, that is a fairer swap. A swap at my door would be in my favour, but as I'm the only party not at fault here, I don't see that as a bad thing.

---

A straight swap is a straight swap. The only difference is you do not seem to be able to comprehend that just because it does not take place at a time and location convenient to you does not stop it being a straight swap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gmarno

At the end of the day, this company (IMO) isn't treating me with respect. Building a rapport with customers is what business is all about. You don't have a business without customers. At this point in time, I'm going to ship the product back, get a refund and buy somewhere else (preferably in store as per Finlays suggestion;)).

---

They have treated you with respect. You want a lack of respect go back in time and deal with overclockers, they were a piece of work to deal with. The company you have dealt with has offered a solution to you and you feel put out because you expect much more than they have to, will and should give you. That is your issue not theirs.

oolon, narcissistic in the sense of feeling that they should be treated better than everyone else because they are better than other customers :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

So you would send out an expensive item, to a customer trusting they would return a more expensive item you sent out by mistake. :lol:

---

If it was my mistake and the person was a regular customer, you bet your behind I would. It's called good customer service, and I could be pretty sure that I would retain a good customer who spends money with my company regularly. That's usually a good thing when you're in business and it's actually not that unusual in the business world. Other companies manage it, I'm just disappointed this particular company doesn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

A straight swap is a straight swap. The only difference is you do not seem to be able to comprehend that just because it does not take place at a time and location convenient to you does not stop it being a straight swap.

---

Seems to me that you're the one who doesn't comprehend a straight swap (seriously it's not that dificult is it?). I would define a straight swap as a fair swap, which means both sides benefit. The current situation puts all the advantages in this companies corner. I get no advantage whatsoever from this scenario. Fair's fair at the end of the day. Straight swap = trust on both sides. The swap you're suggesting is heavily favoured on the side of the company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

oolon, narcissistic in the sense of feeling that they should be treated better than everyone else because they are better than other customers :)

---

My word you do make some mighty large assumptions don't you? I'm not even going to bother attempting to address this point. I've neither the time nor patience quite frankly.

Thus far your posts have consisted of telling me how unreasonable I'm being, and the odd bit of name calling. Whilst I welcome a good honest debate, I'm looking for some help and advice. If you've neither to offer, kindly refrain from posting in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

So you would send out an expensive item, to a customer trusting they would return a more expensive item you sent out by mistake. :lol:

---

I don't see what's so 'funny' about this. The very nature of distance trading, mean that one party would have to take a 'risk' parting with their possession before the other. Usually, a customer wants the goods, and therefore make the first part of the exchange by paying first. Through repeated customs, the customer would begin to trust the retailer, and I would expect that it is somewhat mutual. So when the retailer makes a mistake, and the customer has the honesty of reporting that mistake, what's so wrong with having the company take some of that 'risk'? Alternatively, yes they could write off the loss, all while insulting the customer's honesty. And no, I do not think there is anything narcissistic as an honest customer who regularly trust the company by parting with their cash first, to expect that the company would do the same when it is to sort out it's own mistake.

Of course, the company also need to weight the chances that the customer is trying to a scam. That's why I think the manager ought to consider the customer's shopping history. Honestly, I would have concerns if the OP only spent say, £10 once before. But if he has already spent lot more..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oolon

The unsolicited goods act covers this, you didn't buy the product, and have to return it if requested (not sure if you have to inform them about it). However it has to be returned at their expense. If not asked for them back they are yours after 6 months, however you are not allowed to use them and you need to keep reasonable care of them during that time. This is clearly not the case with the OP, as the retailer would like them back.

---

Erm ..... no.

There is no such thing as an unsolicited goods act. It's the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971, but the consumer provisions have been replaced.

The previous provisions were repealed and replaced by para 24 of the Distance Selling Regs. If these goods were unsolicited (and they aren't) and unless gmarno is a business, then gmarno is not obliged to return them, period. It doesn't matter if they ask for them back and you don't have to wait 6 months. If unsolicited goods (within the meaning of the Regs) are sent, the recipient can treat them as an "unconditional gift".

However, in any event, they aren't unsolicited. They are merely a mistake, which is not at all the same thing.



gmarno, I sympathise with your position which, if I understand you correctly, is they they goofed and yet you are the one having to suffer the inconvenience, in the form of the hassle and the delay. And I agree. It's galling. And it's not exactly sensitive customer service.

As for advice about just flogging them on eBay, I'd advise reading the definition in s.1 of the Theft Act first.

Quote:

---

A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it;

---

It seems to me that flogging goods you know were a sent in error meets each of the elements of that. I'd think it unlikely that such a charge would result, but as they now know you have the goods, failing to send them back is likely to result in an invoice at the very least.

Were I in your shoes, and I was a s unhappy as you evidently are, I'd simply instruct them that I cancelled under the Distance Selling Regs (assuming you aren't a business customer) and that as the incorrect goods had been sent, the cost of collection is down to them. Get your refund, and buy elsewhere.

Two problems. First, the refund will take time and meantime, you're down by the value of the payment you made. Second, from the way you phrased your opening post, I suspect you are a business buyer, in which case, that won't apply. Probably the best you can achieve is to order the replacement, pay for it and get the refund when they get the original back. If you can't or won't agree to that, then I guess you'll have to put up with the delay, and simply never shop there again if you're that annoyed, which it seems is the decision you've already made.

It's not ideal, but in the end, it is simply the result of an honest mistake on their part.

Also, as to why the company doesn't do a "straight swap" is most carrier companies don't offer this as a service, and even if they do have the provision, it's something that has to be setup on your contract before you even get started. What's more even then, 50% of the time they don't pick up the goods!

So yes, frustrating and annoying it may be, you are legally obliged to give them the wrong goods back and they are still legally obligated to fulfil their contract of sale. Personally I'd try and blag a small discount off your product for your inconvience or as a "reward" for your honesty, providing you haven't already gone off on one on their CS staff.

Thanks the for the informative reply Saracen, it's much appreciated :) I'm not a business user, but either way, they are desperate to get the goods back so the ball was in my court in terms of cancelling the order. I've arranged for them to collect the items and just refund the money. Whilst the refund may take a while, I'd rather buy from elsewhere from now on.

It's a shame they couldn't do a swap at the door, but I guess that's life and I know what this particular company does when something goes wrong on their end.

I'll write a letter of complaint stating why I'm unhappy and just leave it at that (after the refund has gone through). I think Lucios suggestion of trying to blag a discount is a good one, but it's highly unlikely I'd ever use them again except in emergencies.

It also turned out they didn't have any commercial copies left in the company, and the sales guy was trying to push an educational version of the software on me (which I don't think he should be as I'm not a student/educational worker). Obviously an educational copy is in the market place for a reason, but he was repeatedly telling me it had the exact same EULA as the commercial copy. I know for a fact there are restrictions of use on the educational version but he was having none of it.

Either way I was polite but firm, and the guy wished me a good trip when we'd finished the conversation. Whilst there were some pretty abrasive replies in this thread, it's great to see that as a whole Hexus is a pretty friendly place to ask a question, and get some good information in the process.

Thanks for the help guys:mrgreen:

Since they are messing you around and making their problem yours, I'd siggest cancelling the order completely and letting them know they can pick up the incorrect goods at your convenience. You are under no obligation to gom out of your way to make yourself available during the times their couriers are available for pick up, though I would offer to have it available for pickup at work.
Ignore finlay666. He hasn't a clue what he's talking about and seems to believe that it's good customer service to make the mistakes of retailers the customers problem. I don't care if he works in retail - it just shows how bad at his job he is ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

......

Again, re-read my post, I said I have, not that I did currently work in retail/customer service. I merely have a reasonable amount of experience from both sides of the argument. Because I am offering a counter-opinion does not mean I agree with what the company has done.


So you would send out an expensive item, to a customer trusting they would return a more expensive item you sent out by mistake. :lol:


A straight swap is a straight swap. The only difference is you do not seem to be able to comprehend that just because it does not take place at a time and location convenient to you does not stop it being a straight swap.



They have treated you with respect. You want a lack of respect go back in time and deal with overclockers, they were a piece of work to deal with. The company you have dealt with has offered a solution to you and you feel put out because you expect much more than they have to, will and should give you. That is your issue not theirs.
.....

---

That all depends on perspective. I can see where a supplier is coming from in not wanting to send out the second copy on 'trust' but ..... there's another way of looking at it.

gmarno ordered goods, and paid for them in advance, in accordance with the companies requirements, in the expectation that it would meet it's obligation and sent the goods in the indicated time frame. And they didn't. I've had companies do this to me, and it's caused me problems because I was expecting that they'd do as they promised. For instance, a customer asks me to get x product, so I buy it and then tell them when I've been promised delivery. When I get let down, I have to disappoint my customer and typically, I get the blame, not the supplier whose mistake it was.

I've also had companies tell me stuff is in stock when it isn't, and have quoted on the basis that supply is available at that price. When it turns out that the supplier that promised supply can't meet that promise, I either have to buy elsewhere (and on occasion, make a loss as a result), or I have to let my customer down in turn, resulting in damage to my reputation with my customer. My customer, quite rightly, expects me to meet my commitments, and I expect those that supply me to do so too.

So ... while gmarno has done everything he is expected to, in paying for the goods and being their to receive them, the company has screwed up, causing him inconvenience. And yet, they expect to cause more inconvenience by sticking to their rigid policies despite the error being theirs.

I look at it like this. gmarno entrered into a contract, to purchase goods. The company failed to supply the goods that were paid for. So damn well supply them already.

As a separate matter, their mistake resulted in incorrect goods being shipped. He;s notified them of that and given the opportunity to collect, but it doesn't change the fact that they have not supplied the goods he ordered and paid for, and are now refusing to do so until they get their goods, sent by their mistake, back.

My attitude would be I want the goods I ordered and paid for. Period. We can correct their mistake at leisure, but I want MY goods ASAP, as I am due.

Quote:

---

So you would send out an expensive item, to a customer trusting they would return a more expensive item you sent out by mistake. :lol:

---

If I have a long-term, repeat customer, and especially one honest enough to come forward to tell me he's received goods to more value than he's paid for, yes. That latter fact strongly suggests an honest customer, does it not? Because otherwise, I stand a good chance of losing a good customer.

Many years ago, I bought quite an expensive product. It doesn't matter what. After about 2 months, it died. The shop did not have a direct replacement available, and the owner of the shop lent me his personal one until a replacement could be found. As it happened, it took several months to get. Eventually, he contacted me to let me know my brand new replacement had arrived, and I took his one, now about a year old, back and collected the new one. That is customer service. And the result was that I spent many thousands with him over about the next 25 years, even when I knew I was sometimes paying more than I needed to. I could have saved some (though not huge amounts) buying at discounters or in later days, online, but didn't because I felt I could trust him to look after me if there were problems. I also recommended him to countless others, because of the service.

Also, some years ago, I ordered an expensive laser printer (not the same company). By expensive, I mean about £4000. They sent the wrong one. When notified, the were terribly apologetic and had the correct one delivered next-day. Several weeks later, they got around to collecting the one sent in error. Again, good customer service, and again, from me at least, it resulted in good customer loyalty.

I don't know who gmarno's supplier is, and don't particularly want to know. But it does strike me that it's typical of the pile-em-high, sell-em-cheap mentality of many internet-based box-shifters. Some, like Scan, seem to take customer service pretty seriously (though you can't please all of the people all of the time, and some customers will rip you off given a heartbeat of a chance), but, boy, some others sure don't.

One reason I buy most of my computer bits locally, where I can, is precisely because of the core of this thread .... customer service. I'm lucky enough to have a local shop that, by and large over the years, has been reasonably priced, often matching internet sellers (for me at least), but WAY outstripping most of them on service. Even when I have to pay a bit more, I'd rather do that and be sure of service when I need it.

And that, I think, is gmarno's point. When he needed service, he got dumped on.

I've often said you can't tell much about a supplier when things go right (other, perhaps, than how often they don't go right), but you sure can get an eye-opening when they go wrong. If a supplier cares about their reputation ,and about lost customers, they (like Scan generally do) will put effort into sorting out the problems because that small percentage of times that things go wrong can make a HUGE difference to how your customers perceive you.

Treat me well, and I'll come back for life. Treat me badly, and I won't buy from you if you're the last supplier on earth. I'll go without first. I'll give you some chances, but screw up too badly, or too often, and I blacklist you permanently. And the reason for that, nearly always, is poor customer service.

gmarno has said he won't use this firm again, except for emergencies, and that's about where I'd be too. I'd be miffed with them, but not to the point that it'd be terminal. Tesco, on the other hand, annoyed me years ago. I had a problem, raised with with Customer Service at Head Office and they promised to look into it, and I never had the courtesy of hearing from them again. Well, as a result, I've not bought so much as a Mars bar in Tesco since. I now driv e past Tesco to get to Asda, or Waitrose, or Sainsbury, or even Morrisons on the next town, but the Tesco I can walk to? Like hell. And not because of the subject of the original argument, but because of the ignorant actions of customer services.

Do Tesco care about my little boycott. I doubt it. Do I care if they care? Hell, no. But every customer they lose, permanently, like this, reduces their turnover by a few grand a year. They spend lots of money to attract and keep customers, only for crappy customer service to undo all that. Some CS department.

And that is how damaging a lousy customer service attitude can be.

One online retailer I could name has had a lot of bad comment over the years. I have to say, in my personal experience from a limited (handful) of transactions it's undeserved, because despite a couple of problems, they resolved everything promptly and to my satisfaction. But nonetheless, all that negative comment still puts me off because while I might dismiss a few gripes as sour grapes, a constant stream of it leads me to suspect that there's no smoke without fire, so I haven't used them in years. Again, it's the corrosive effect of bad CS, or at least, reports of bad CS.

And that, I think, is why gmarno is right and you're wrong. The supplier screwed up, yet they expect him to suffer the inconvenience because of it. It would irritate me if they did it to me, and while I wouldn't go as far as permanently blacklisting them (yet), I sure would be looking elsewhere next time, if possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by badass

Ignore finlay666. He hasn't a clue what he's talking about and seems to believe that it's good customer service to make the mistakes of retailers the customers problem. I don't care if he works in retail - it just shows how bad at his job he is ;)

---

Congratulations on being unable to read, I bet your parents are very proud of you.

Just because I provide an argument does not mean it is my personal view, it means I am capable of understanding and appreciating balanced discussion

And if you bothered to learn to read he whole thread before posting you would clearly see I said I DID work in retail, not currently (and for the record I left for a better position at the time in a different sector with a very good relationship with my employer and an open job offer should I wish to return)

Saracen:
it may not be good customer service that I pointed out, but it is to the best of my knowledge within the law. Whether I have been a new customer or a regular customer with a retailer has little impact on my decision to take my business elsewhere in future should it happen to me.

I have had a few online retailers go above and beyond in service and I recognise this and will give them my custom, even if they are a little more expensive. It is customer loyalty. If a company treated me in an adequate manner I might not use them again

I am not saying I don't agree with what the retailer has done as a customer, as I have said before in the matter of a legal issue I believe they are acting within the law, which is what the thread title is after all, not whether we agree with how the company operates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Sounds like a customer who needs a slap in the face to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Congratulations on being unable to read, I bet your parents are very proud of you.

Just because I provide an argument does not mean it is my personal view, it means I am capable of understanding and appreciating balanced discussion

---

Really :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Congratulations on being unable to read, I bet your parents are very proud of you.
....

---

Will everyone please dial back the sarcasm a bit. It does not help the thread. I may have quoted an example from Finlay, but this is not just addressed at him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

....

Saracen:
it may not be good customer service that I pointed out, but it is to the best of my knowledge within the law. Whether I have been a new customer or a regular customer with a retailer has little impact on my decision to take my business elsewhere in future should it happen to me.

I have had a few online retailers go above and beyond in service and I recognise this and will give them my custom, even if they are a little more expensive. It is customer loyalty. If a company treated me in an adequate manner I might not use them again

I am not saying I don't agree with what the retailer has done as a customer, as I have said before in the matter of a legal issue I believe they are acting within the law, which is what the thread title is after all, not whether we agree with how the company operates.

---

As far as I'm aware, they've acted perfectly legally too.

And, as you say, that was the initial subject, as per the title. But the OP has moved beyond that, as shown by his comments about how he feels about how he's being treated. It's also now covering customer service, as per the bits I quoted, like

Quote:

---

A straight swap is a straight swap. The only difference is you do not seem to be able to comprehend that just because it does not take place at a time and location convenient to you does not stop it being a straight swap.

---

and

Quote:

---

So you would send out an expensive item, to a customer trusting they would return a more expensive item you sent out by mistake. :lol:

---

I'm not saying your wrong, Finlay. Merely that on subjects like customer service, there's more than one way to look at it. The company may be entitled to act as they have, and they may have reasons for doing it. But from the customer's perspective, it's high-handed, because he is being made to suffer inconvenience while they correct their mistake. Legal, it may be, but good customer service if they wish to retain customers, it ain't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

I'm not saying your wrong, Finlay. Merely that on subjects like customer service, there's more than one way to look at it. The company may be entitled to act as they have, and they may have reasons for doing it. But from the customer's perspective, it's high-handed, because he is being made to suffer inconvenience while they correct their mistake. Legal, it may be, but good customer service if they wish to retain customers, it ain't.

---

I appreciate there are (hence why I have been trying to provide an alternative view however many seem to take this as my personal view), however as always it's worth negotiating in a firm but fair manner. In cases like this I would if possible order a replacement then get a refund on the other item, ideally with some discount due to the inconvenience and as a regular customer.

I understand a mistake is a mistake and more could be done to rectify it, however there does not seem to have been much communication from the customer and supplier, and this is where it can fall down. Negotiation skills in this area are a very valuable skill, and if you don't like the service I would always suggest to speak to a more senior member of the team to try and resolve it, you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.

On the honey/vinegar front, absolutely. I entirely endorse that. If nothing else, going from honey to vinegar in your negotiations is easy, whereas it's next to impossible to go from vinegar to honey. The vinegar will always leave a sour after-taste. However, if the honey doesn't work, sometimes the vinegar is the only option left.

I agree about escalating, too. But that also presumes that they will put you though to someone more senior. Large call centres seem to have procedures or policies designed to prevent this. I had one insurance company point blank refuse to put me through to a manager, despite repeated attempts. Letters were ignored, faxes were ignored and phone calls met with an obstinate brick wall. Their attitude was "that's what we'll pay, and that's that. Like it or lump it." They didn't use that phrase, but it was the gist of their message. I ended up with a Small Claims Court claim, at which point, a manager magically became keen to talk to me and "resolve the problem". They paid what I had been asking for, and my extra costs, though the "smile" they wore looked more like a sickly grin. ;)

In that case, honey failed, and vinegar worked wonders. :D

But I agree, try the honey first. For all I know, the OP did exactly that. And I can sympathise with why he's aggrieved that they screwed up, but expect him to be the one mucked about because of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

I understand a mistake is a mistake and more could be done to rectify it, however there does not seem to have been much communication from the customer and supplier, and this is where it can fall down. Negotiation skills in this area are a very valuable skill, and if you don't like the service I would always suggest to speak to a more senior member of the team to try and resolve it, you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar.

---

Thanks for the replies everyone :) You're totally right Finlay about catching more flies with honey than vinegar. I was always firm but polite and even had a laugh and a joke with the guy who was dealing with my case. There was plenty of communication but no room for negotiation on their end. I offered multiple compromises but they weren't able to do anything other than their standard operating procedure. Fair enough, it's their company, they can do what they want. However, it's my money so I'm going to take it elsewhere from now on.

In the end however, escalating to a manager wasn't going to do any good because it turns out they didn't have the product I wanted in stock anywhere in the company. They were trying to claim the educational version was the same as the commercial one and I should take one of those (at commercial price though). This is where the sales guy just gave up trying to help, because I said that I wasn't willing to accept the educational version due to its license restrictions. It didn't matter what I said to him, I even told him to check the website as the restrictions were on there.

I just told him to cancel the order and come pick it up as I wasn't going to take an educational version under any circumstances. Well, I sourced another copy of the software yesterday and lo and behold, it says in big black writing in the first few lines of the EULA:

"EDU versions are not allowed to be resold or transferred and can not be used for commercial purposes."

That seems pretty clear to me. I don't expect the sales guys to have intimate knowledge of every single product, but when a customer is telling him to look on the manufacturers website (as it's on there in black and white) and the sales guy won't, questions have to be asked. Whatever happens, I'm going to have to write to the customer service dept of this company and make sure they know that's going on. Selling educational licenses to non-educational persons (especially at full price) is going to cause someone a major issue in the future.

Personally, I'd feel inclined to let the software company know what one of their resellers is doing too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

Personally, I'd feel inclined to let the software company know what one of their resellers is doing too.

---

Trouble is there's very little proof other than my phone conversations with said company. I'll see how I get on with the company themselves, but if they ignore me I'll send a message to the manufacturer anyway.

if you ordered by credit card and you have sufficient credit limit, i'd reorder from another supplier and return the delivered item back under the DSR for a full credit, so you get what you want as quickly as possible, and the initial supplier loses out on a sale and incurs the additional costs of deliver and return shipping charges

the customer just wants what they want, usually at the best price and asap, and the supplier wants customers to make as much profit as possible from. the supplier has screwed up and disappointed the customer who may with to avoid doing business with them in future

in the past when i've received faulty/wrong items i've usually placed a new order rather than wait for goods to be returned, checked and replacements sent, in most cases i've ordered the replacements from the same company and let them known this so they can send the replacement the same day. obviously that's not possible in this case as the supplier doesn't have what you want

it's no wonder people pirate software if you can't even legitimately purchase software without hassle. you probably could have downloaded and had a pirate copy working in 30-60 minutes or less. if you do point out to the software company what the reseller did, it might be worth pointing this out to them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uni

if you ordered by credit card and you have sufficient credit limit, i'd reorder from another supplier and return the delivered item back under the DSR for a full credit, so you get what you want as quickly as possible, and the initial supplier loses out on a sale and incurs the additional costs of deliver and return shipping charges

---

Except you would be down cost of postage returning under the DSR if their T+C say you are responsible for postage back, and I wouldn't sent a product of that value by anything less than special delivery because of the insurance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

No need to be a patronising idiot, I have worked in retail for 5 years and customer service for 18 months. You do want to keep most customers happy, however the stupid impatient ones are usually more hassle than they are worth

---

Would you mind telling us who you work for, so I can avoid trying to get any customer service from them? :juggle:

The OP wishes to use the software he paid for, after the delivery time he also paid for. What exactly is unreasonable about this? In your company do you find it unreasonable if people expect to actually get what they paid for? It was their mistake, not his.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uni

if you ordered by credit card and you have sufficient credit limit, i'd reorder from another supplier and return the delivered item back under the DSR for a full credit, so you get what you want as quickly as possible, and the initial supplier loses out on a sale and incurs the additional costs of deliver and return shipping charges

the customer just wants what they want, usually at the best price and asap, and the supplier wants customers to make as much profit as possible from. the supplier has screwed up and disappointed the customer who may with to avoid doing business with them in future

in the past when i've received faulty/wrong items i've usually placed a new order rather than wait for goods to be returned, checked and replacements sent, in most cases i've ordered the replacements from the same company and let them known this so they can send the replacement the same day. obviously that's not possible in this case as the supplier doesn't have what you want

it's no wonder people pirate software if you can't even legitimately purchase software without hassle. you probably could have downloaded and had a pirate copy working in 30-60 minutes or less. if you do point out to the software company what the reseller did, it might be worth pointing this out to them

---

Thanks for the reply, and I've already bought the software elsewhere. It's just irritating that I'm going to have cover the cost of the software until a refund materialises as it was bought on a credit card (as I get points). It's more the principle of the matter than a cash flow issue.

They're picking up the software tomorrow, so it's their courier who becomes responsible for the package (in theory at least) as I didn't fancy sending a £650 package in the mail. Plus it means I'm not having to reclaim postage costs. Once I've got the refund, I'll pursue the mis-selling of educational licenses. I'd like to have the money back before I start telling them they need to review some of their sales persons selling practices.

It's safe to say at this point, I won't use this retailer again unless it's an emergency. :angst:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

Would you mind telling us who you work for, so I can avoid trying to get any customer service from them? :juggle:

---

Please re-read my posts, I'm getting bored of repeating myself 3 times now.

I was offering an alternative point of view and DID work in retail

If you had stopped with simply stating why the company might have taken the action it needs, I don't think that you would've been repeatedly requoted and for all I known it might have enlightened some people. However, the condescending tone you took in the first few posts (it escalated from the moment you implied that the customer could use with a slap in the face, did it not?), is what makes everyone think that you are squarely on the side of the company, and that their actions is the -only- one that makes sense. And even if you do believe that I don't think it would've been much of an issue (everyone entitled to their opinion etc.), but phrasing an view (alternative or otherwise) in an unpleasant manner, invite a similarly unpleasant response.

Anyway, I don't have anything more to add to this thread, so that'll be my last post here. Besides, the situation is pretty much over too, though I'd say that we have a 'lose-lose' situation from both the customer and company's perspective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Please re-read my posts, I'm getting bored of repeating myself 3 times now.

I was offering an alternative point of view and DID work in retail

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Sounds like a customer who needs a slap in the face to me.

---

Ah yes, the highly successful "slap in the face" school of customer service. They let you go from your CS post then, did they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

What is it with people being such rude, dishonest, narcissistic b*stards?

---

And then this, way out of left field. Your comments made little sense, and I called you on it, boohoo. Care to justify your random insults to the guy's totally reasonable expectations - I read all your posts twice, and really can't see anything to back up your hostility, or to suggest that the company shouldn't make a vague attempt to accomodate their error.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

Would you mind telling us who you work for, so I can avoid trying to get any customer service from them? :juggle:

The OP wishes to use the software he paid for, after the delivery time he also paid for. What exactly is unreasonable about this? In your company do you find it unreasonable if people expect to actually get what they paid for? It was their mistake, not his.

---

I actually do see the point finlay666 is making, for a company it is a risk to resend goods without first ensuring the original goods will be recovered. Unless you've got a long term customer who you've gotten to know, there's always a chance that they'll feel entitled to both the misent goods and the requested goods. Normally the best way to solve this situation is to arrange a swap over as soon as possible, but I know some companies don't have these facilities and then are left with the situations offered to the OP.


It's not particularly nice, after all who likes to hear that they aren't considered trustworthy especially after being honest about the situation, but it isn't unreasonable practice for a company not to want to have their product stolen.


As for Saracen's example of a shop owner lending out their own personal product, that's just insane to expect that as the norm. It's *far* too easy to take advantage of companies who offer that level of customer support and there's too many people out there who would do it too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

Ah yes, the highly successful "slap in the face" school of customer service. They let you go from your CS post then, did they?

---

*yawn* re-read the posts I made, you seem to be incapable along with others of doing this

Quote:

---

And if you bothered to learn to read he whole thread before posting you would clearly see I said I DID work in retail, not currently (and for the record I left for a better position at the time in a different sector with a very good relationship with my employer and an open job offer should I wish to return)

---

As a subtle dig all it did was highlight your inability to read, you and badass must have gone to the same school then.... or given the ability to fully read you probably didn't actually go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

And then this, way out of left field. Your comments made little sense, and I called you on it, boohoo. Care to justify your random insults to the guy's totally reasonable expectations - I read all your posts twice, and really can't see anything to back up your hostility, or to suggest that the company shouldn't make a vague attempt to accomodate their error.

---

Firstly, you called me on nothing, I never said it was unreasonable, I said some companies are unable to do it however it is legal

Certainly I will justify my comments, any company that would risk low margin stock with a high value totalling over £1000 on a customer that spent about 5 times that over a number of purchases and years is in my opinion far too trusting. A customer who agreed to the conditions of sale should not whine when they receive service to that standard when it is within the law.

I'm calling you out on being illiterate as twice you have misread my posts and taken the wrong meaning from two statements of fact.

TooNice: People can't accept anyone playing devil's advocate. The level of debate on this forum is quite frankly shocking. This is the second or third time I have taken a view that is against the 'norm' of this forum and got flamed because I chose to represent a different point of view. Just look at Matty supporting SOME of the BNP policies on the election thread and what people had to say about that because they didn't agree with his point of view. The internet gives everyone a voice and apparently blinkers to other peoples opinions (or they are that stubborn to start with)

The personal view that any customer who expects a business to bend over, lube themselves up and let a customer who isn't a high priority customer needs a slap in the face is my own personal view however formed from my experiences as a customer of countless years, as well as numerous years in working for a retailer in sales, working for a retailer in returns/customer service and as a supplier of services. If I acted in a pompous, rude and self righteous manner to any member of staff I wouldn't expect to get what I wanted short of forceful removal from the premise.



Kata, you want to know why I left the position (as I left of my choice a month earlier than planned)?
I was physically assaulted by a customer who funnily enough a similar kind of treatment when they caused self inflicted damage to their television set despite being told numerous times previously beforehand how to look after their set. They were offered a replacement as it was under 30 days old however they wanted a better, more expensive model delivered brand new and to keep the old one as compensation. Some people cannot handle being told what they do not want to hear.

Try being on the receiving end of a customer from hell before you start slagging off others for their viewpoint. I was professional, courteous and polite while I did my job (not to mention very good at it from reports and acknowledgement across the region of stores both in quality and quantity of service), it is not unreasonable to expect the same in return. I doubt you or many others could deal with a real high stress job like working in customer service, it can be demoralising, demeaning and it's usually reward-less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

As a subtle dig all it did was highlight your inability to read, you and badass must have gone to the same school then.... or given the ability to fully read you probably didn't actually go.

I'm calling you out on being illiterate as twice you have misread my posts and taken the wrong meaning from two statements of fact.

---

Given the fact that so many people are "misreading" your posts, I would suggest that the problem is with you "miswriting" them, and that they don't actually say what you seem to think they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Try being on the receiving end of a customer from hell before you start slagging off others for their viewpoint. I was professional, courteous and polite while I did my job (not to mention very good at it from reports and acknowledgement across the region of stores both in quality and quantity of service), it is not unreasonable to expect the same in return. I doubt you or many others could deal with a real high stress job like working in customer service, it can be demoralising, demeaning and it's usually reward-less.

---

Yeah, it's SO hard ;) As a student I worked in CS for the county train car parks, and as you can imagine, all the customers were really happy to have received parking tickets. But as it turns out, I treated the ones who had a legitimate complaint with respect, and they left happy; I didn't even have to slap them in the face! The idiots were politely but firmly told why they would be paying; CS is not exactly a high stress job. Your attitude, it seems, would aggravate things; going purely on the impression you have given here. Seems that my interpretation is in the majority, as I say.

But yeah, on my last project in my current career I was only responsible for a budget in the low billions (so, not one of our bigger ones), and in my time off I pilot small aircraft in and out of 'etertainingly small' airstrips. Neither of those even come close to the stress levels of selling TVs! I salute you, warrior of the shopfloor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

But yeah, on my last project in my current career I was only responsible for a budget in the low billions (so, not one of our bigger ones), and in my time off I pilot small aircraft in and out of 'etertainingly small' airstrips. Neither of those even come close to the stress levels of selling TVs! I salute you, warrior of the shopfloor.

---

Ooooh you are in charge of what gets bought, I'm very impressed... Cheese and onion or salt and vinegar crisps? Coke or pepsi?

Seeing as your leisure activities are fairly expensive I'm sure part of the reward is the very high salary and perks meaning you must be overpaid as your job clearly isn't as demanding as other jobs. Compared to a job pulling in just over minimum wage with no additional benefits and no paid overtime or other perks that is.

If you want to wave your e-peen I have worked on, and managed projects billion $ projects myself AS a student working for the largest software company in the world. Your comments are pretty unrelated except to boast about how great you must be and how extreme your leisure activities are. How you word something does make a difference to how it can be portrayed depending on the reading style and context. Saying you pilot aircraft in such a manner as you did could suggest you flew single engine aircraft, were a drug smuggler or played a lot of flight simulator games, I assume it's the first, another person may assume differently.

The way I treat people is the way I feel I get treated. With exception of the "slap in the face" comment (again people who read posts must have incredibly short attention spans as the rest of the post is never commented. I doubt you even read it to be honest as again it answered the OP) the first 2 replies were not disrespectful. This thread was on the LEGALITY of it, OP stated the company offered to arranged collection at their convenience, which is within the law, the fact that it descended into customer service is beside the point. MY posts were to the question of the legality not whether or not it's customer service. Misreading my posts, the context of them and the position of the reply shows a lack of care and attention, hardly deserving of respect.

I notice you didn't quote or comment on the fact that I left my last job early because I was assaulted by a customer, neither did you comment on the fact that I was recognised for the work I did. Obviously being assaulted by a customer while you are at work doesn't cause any stress at all. Neither does having to meet set criteria which is near impossible to meet week in week out just to retain your job. Guess those don't apply when you work in an unrelated industry doing an unrelated task.

I also can't help but notice all you have done is come in and address old points and start unrelated discussions? TBH it was resolved at the end of the 2nd page, or were you just slow in reading and want to let everyone know how awesome you must be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Blah blah blah

---

I mentioned these activities purely to point out how pathetic your moan was about how how "I doubt you or many others could deal with a real high stress job like working in customer service". My intention was to demonstrate that I am perfectly capable of handling tasks with far higher stress and responsibility, and therefore 100% relevant to countering your point.

Working in a customer service job like that is a piece of cake for any vaguely capable person; I've done it, and so have hundreds of thousands of other people. If you found it so stressful, perhaps you just need to "man up". Sure, it might not be a dream job, but its hardly high stress.

I'd love to know what billion dollar projects an IT student actually 'manages' :mrgreen: You were in charge of Windows 7 perhaps? :bowdown:

I'm not sure what you expect me to comment on, with regards to your leaving the job. "Bad luck, being assaulted sucks"? I'm sorry that it happened to you, but it doesn't change my views on this situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

I'd love to know what billion dollar projects an IT student actually 'manages' :mrgreen: You were in charge of Windows 7 perhaps? :bowdown:

---

VOD Metadata and account/billing testing on Microsoft Mediaroom actually. I co-led the former with teams in the US, India and China and worked on the second

Ah, of course...

This is a bit OT now, but stress isn't a linear one dimensional thing guys.

For instance I have no problem with certain kinds of stress, managing my multi-million dollar budget was a piece of piss, as 80% of it went to a certain French software house anyway, I had no choice in that matter.....

What I found the hardest was dealing with crap employees, firing one was the biggest relief and reduced my stress levels greatly, he was just such a little douche constantly ignoring what I told him to work on whilst he was assigned to me. I used to get almost mild anxiety working with him, because I was so scared of having to actually say "no we need to fire this prick" that it caused me tremendous stress.... Funny I know.

Dealing with the stress of having a 20 year man investment go completely wrong, that you get handed at the 11th hour I found surprisingly easy by comparison, for me my happy place is logic and simple maths afterall. I just hate people because on the whole, and I know how arrogant this sounds, they just can't think of things as quickly or as easily as I can, that impedes communication because I have to slow down, I'm also dyslexic with a short term memory, so when I'm left dealing with people who are below the 90th percentile, I find it difficult and very awkward so therefore stressful. This is not normal, I accept that and its an area of my personal development I've been focusing on of late.

So cut the epeen waving, stress is one of those highly personal things, its not commutable or easily transferred.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

So cut the epeen waving, stress is one of those highly personal things, its not commutable or easily transferred.

---

Good points :) Hence the rather ridiculous nature of claiming that most people here couldn't handle the stress of selling TVs :O_o1:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

Good points :) Hence the rather ridiculous nature of claiming that most people here couldn't handle the stress of selling TVs :O_o1:

---

Meh I'll go and make one of my sweeping yet often all too accurate generalisations.

I could cut doing it at a richer sounds in Knightsbridge, but not Romford.
(even then selling the £75 HDMI cables might make me die inside, I'd sooner sell people coke)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

Meh I'll go and make one of my sweeping yet often all too accurate generalisations.

I could cut doing it at a richer sounds in Knightsbridge, but not Romford.
(even then selling the £75 HDMI cables might make me die inside, I'd sooner sell people coke)

---

Ah...but just think of these cables as a little resourcefulness test! A tax on those who don't do a little bit of research ;)

I agree that having to push that kind of thing is a miserable time of things; my experience has been that the main source of stress in that type of job can be rubbish management more than rubbish customers. Makes a big difference.

I think I can still see the OT, if I look hard enough, way over there.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

Good points :) Hence the rather ridiculous nature of claiming that most people here couldn't handle the stress of selling TVs :O_o1:

---

Why not ask Behemoth how much he enjoys his job then? Things have changed since you were doing those kind of jobs.

And I never said it was just the selling but the customer service side that was the stressful part.

Kata, I somehow doubt you believe what I said about what I did, if you don't believe me fine, your loss.

I don't know very much about the software development world, so it's hard for me to make an opinion on that, to be honest. I did a very little bit of google "research", and software projects of over $1b value seem extremely rare, particularly for something of the nature you mention as opposed to large scale stuff like the NHS computers; but hey, you certainly know more about it than I do, so who am I to decide. It's the internet, I guess I might as well take you at face value.

Us software / system people often quote the money at risk rather than the budget, not just because we almost always end up delivering more than originally asked (sounds better than 'over budget') and also because it makes it look cooler.

Say your trying to pick up someone in a horrible club like Raffles on the Kings Road
"hello treacle, I work for a hedgefund and manage $2bn of money with my software"
sounds better than I have a $76M budget, $65 of which is spent by people outside of my control...

Hehehe, ok, all is clear ;) I was talking more about CAPEX, or money spent just to get the project ready to start production ; not that it really matters now, I think we're just about done!

I like the software way of saying things, maybe we should adopt it here :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

Say your trying to pick up someone in a horrible club like Raffles on the Kings Road

---

What is it with you and every story starting on Kings Road? :P

Just going on contract $$$:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...eliancePR.mspx That isn't even the main contract and there are IIRC at least 25 other telco contracts on top and one or two very large companies too. (And being MS can swallow up research/dev costs given that ED&D is the main profit maker in MS and ventures like this usually work well)

Other thing with software is that there is longer for the initial development but when released it's easier to keep generating profit while making other products

It is a very useful way of reminding people the scope of the project. IT projects suffer spec creap almost unheard of in the rest of engineering, when compared to something like architecture, no one would dream saying 30% of the way in, "actually we'd like it to be thrice as tall, with smaller footprint, located on a volcano in iceland" but we often get those sort of requirements change. The mark of a good systems architect is been able to design in such flexibility to allow this and hope that the project spec creeps so you can say "well you asked for something that would deliver $100M of value for $10M of capex, but we ended up realising we could deliver $300M for $20M" Works very well despite a 100% budget overspend. This is the bizarre nature of the beast, combined for me at least with investment finance level of monies.... When its good its just awsome, watching your system outperform a $80M system designed by a certain bank, when yours only cost $1M with a small overspend of about £30K..... :) This is another reason why we often quote the value of the system, often with the cost at interviews. There are plenty like the Labour's stupid tax and spend credit system, which for every one pound of value cost three to implement I read somewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

What is it with you and every story starting on Kings Road? :P

---

Because all the worst behaviour in humans is brought out by the kings road, alcohol and ahem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

Because all the worst behaviour in humans is brought out by the kings road, alcohol and ahem.

---

Women who will 'paint your house' in pairs? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Women who will 'paint your house' in pairs? :)

---

Tell us more :mrgreen:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kata

Tell us more :mrgreen:

---

It's an in joke

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Except you would be down cost of postage returning under the DSR if their T+C say you are responsible for postage back, and I wouldn't sent a product of that value by anything less than special delivery because of the insurance

---

No, you wouldn't.

Para 14(7) of the DSR stipulates very explicitly that if goods supplied are substituted by the supplier for the goods the customer ordered, then the paragraph (s14(5) ) that allows the cost of return delivery or collection to be deducted from a refund does not apply.

You would be quite correct if the goods supplied were as ordered, and you just used the DSR to change your mind. But not when what you got is not what you ordered. If a supply chooses to substitute, one of the implications is that they bear the cost if the consumer isn't happy with that.

If you think about it, it pretty much has to be like that. Otherwise, you order something (say, a 24" monitor), and the company send you a two-seat sofa as a substitute. To reject it, you'd have to pay the return cost. Not on.

Besides, if you ordered goods A and they supply goods B, then the goods generally won't match the description, and are therefore a breach of contract, and in that case, you aren't liable for the return postage anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucio

....

As for Saracen's example of a shop owner lending out their own personal product, that's just insane to expect that as the norm. It's *far* too easy to take advantage of companies who offer that level of customer support and there's too many people out there who would do it too.

---

My point was not that I would expect that level of service. Clearly, it's going to be the exception not the rule. My point was that it's exceptional customer service, to a long-standing customer, and one that earned that shop a considerable degree of brownie points with me.

But how could it be taken advantage-of. It wasn't a mail-order job. I bought product A. It failed. I went back, and they took the one I'd bought back, and lent me their own. When the replacement came in, quite some time (several months, in fact) later. I went back again, returned the loan product and got the brand new one.

To be specific, the item in question was a car alarm. When my (nearly new) one failed, the shop had the alternative of leaving me alarm-less until the replacement arrived, or supplying an alternative. Supplying an alternative of the same btrand meant going down-market, as I had a top end unit, or rewiring the car if they changed brands, and opposed to simply plugging the replacement in. So the shop owner took his unit off his brand-new Merc, and I got it. My bet is that he had something else put on his Merc.

But Richer sounds did the same thing with a MiniDisc recorder that packed up. They lent me a (better) unit while mine was being repaired. When mine came back, we swapped over again. It wasn't an owner's personal unit that was loaned, but the point was the same ... good customer service.

In both cases, I've been back many times. The car hifi pace is a fairly high-end outfit, so I'd expect commensurate service, but Richer's aren't renowned for being expensive and I would still say the service I've had from them, more than once, has been outstanding, exemplary. So I go back, loyally.

That was my point. Good, above and beyond legally required, service breeds customer loyalty, especially from regularly customers, whereas being jerked around breeds anger and resentment, and lost customers. Whoever this seller is has pretty much lost gmarno, when a different attitude could have turned a shipping mistake (or a try-on, if it was deliberate) could have turned it into a positive experience. That they didn't, and apparently didn't even want to try, tells me all I need to know about the supplier ... other than who they are, and really, that's not necessary for the purposes of this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

No, you wouldn't.

Para 14(7) of the DSR stipulates very explicitly that if goods supplied are substituted by the supplier for the goods the customer ordered, then the paragraph (s14(5) ) that allows the cost of return delivery or collection to be deducted from a refund does not apply.

You would be quite correct if the goods supplied were as ordered, and you just used the DSR to change your mind. But not when what you got is not what you ordered. If a supply chooses to substitute, one of the implications is that they bear the cost if the consumer isn't happy with that.

<snip>

Besides, if you ordered goods A and they supply goods B, then the goods generally won't match the description, and are therefore a breach of contract, and in that case, you aren't liable for the return postage anyway.

---

My point was to NOT return the goods under the standard use of the DSR as the wrong item was delivered

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

My point was to NOT return the goods under the standard use of the DSR as the wrong item was delivered

---

I think Saracens point was quite clear, the DSR are appropriate as the wrong goods were supplied, and even if the DSR didn't apply (my words, for example, if they had been supplied to a business user) then the goods could still be returned as thye supplier wasa in breach of contract.

However, the OP's query has been answered some time ago, and the thread has gone off the original topic anyway - so it is being closed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

My point was to NOT return the goods under the standard use of the DSR as the wrong item was delivered

---

It's not a standard or non-standard use of the DSR, it's simply using the DSR. And if you do, the seller's obligations are very clear-cut.

Uni said

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uni

if you ordered by credit card and you have sufficient credit limit, i'd reorder from another supplier and return the delivered item back under the DSR for a full credit, so you get what you want as quickly as possible, and the initial supplier loses out on a sale and incurs the additional costs of deliver and return shipping charges

---

You quoted that and said

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finlay666

Except you would be down cost of postage returning under the DSR if their T+C say you are responsible for postage back, and I wouldn't sent a product of that value by anything less than special delivery because of the insurance

---

And, as I pointed out, that is not the case. The supplier cannot exclude responsibility for postage goods because substitute goods were sent. As for sending it back special delivery, I'd either ask the sender how he wants his goods sent back or, better yet, just get him to send a courier to collect. If he wants them sent back SD, then he pays for it. If he doesn't, it's his risk. Either way, the buyer is not out by the cost of return postage. The buyer isn't out of pocket in any way.

In my opinion, the easiest way of dealing with this, provided you're acting as a consumer and it's not an excepted contract (which this isn't), and that it's done quickly enough to be a valid DSR cancellation, is exactly to use the DSR. Just cancel the contract, get your money including outbound shipping back, and tell the supplier to come get the goods that aren't what was ordered. Simples.