Lawsons-His credit card policy - YOU NEED TO KNOW

[Bean]

I find Axminster a little inconsistent, it took them 2 weeks and several phone calls to pick up a faulty tool, their courier simply did not turn up. But at the same time Rutlands picked up the day after contacting and I had a repaired tool 2 days later. The axminster repair took longer that the pick up repair and delivery by rutlands

Bean

 

[Anonymous]

you can sort of understand why they do it though. for them to send you a machine without any sort of charge would leave them in a dark spot as far as recovering the money is concerned, as if it was a dishonest customer he could just deny receipt of the machine. while it could be taken to small claims court this is often more expensive than the actual loss of the machine for the suppliers. by taking the money and crediting you all they are doing is ensuring that they get paid, as you could take them to court for credit fraud, which would land them in a hell of a lot more trouble should they actually be guilty. its a bit of a black hole as far as the law is concerned, but in practice it works.

 

[RogerS]

I have to agree with Argus. These companies handle on a daily basis thousands and thousands of orders. For delivery they are dependent on third parties over who they do not exercise any direct control..true, their contract may have penalty payments and such but on an individual delivery basis, each one is an event in its own right and certainly, from time to time, messups can occur. They're annoying when they do happen and I've had my fair share.

How the company resolves the cock-up is really where we look for service IMHO. Screwfix have, in this respect, always been, on balance, very good in my case..often compensating me with a voucher or some such.

For a missing item or faulty item they will despatch but charge you again but they do tell you. I can kind of understand that if you're not able to be there to return the faulty item on the spot but it does kind of annoy if you can since Screwfix are putting the onus of a correct delivery on you..and if, as said earlier, the delivery company messup or lose thereplacement then you are now down by two credit card payments and still no goods.

WiZeR also makes a good point but again, to be fair, they have to draw the line at some point.

ScrewFix DID have at one time a very misleading website message that implied that if you ordered before 6pm then you would get next day delivery... but the ordering page did not update itself and even though you might place an order after 6pm it would still say you'd get the goods the next day. In fact, if you order after 6pm on a Thursday you won't get the stuff until Monday (unless you pay extra for saturday delivery). I campaigned successfully for them to change the wording on this.

 

[kityuser]

WRT the origonal post this is a clear case credit card FRAUD.

I would get straight onto the CC company, and FAST.

as far as CC auth. is concerned, you can auth. a transaction in three ways, chip+pin, signature and (where the company has the certain permissions from the CC compaines) verbally over the phone.

If you did'nt do any of the above then this is clearly a fraudulent transaction and is thus a criminal offence.

you do need to be very careful when reading the smallprint for internet transactions however it is illegal for somebody to contract you out of your legal rights, therefore they can't infer in the smallprint that "in case of a problem you automatically authorize another transaction".
This just would'nt hold water legally.

This is exactly why you should NEVER EVER use switch over the phone or on the internet, CC companies legally obligated to defend you in these situations.

good luck

regards

steve

 

[Anonymous]

is it CC fraud though? is there not a chance that by agreeing to have the second machine sent to him and have the initial machine taken away, theres consideration for an entirely separate contract?

i think being that its a different package it would be treated as a valid contract, wrong as it may seem. my knowledge of contract law is pretty thorough, but not perfect. any professional insight welcome

 

[kityuser]

is it then taken for granted that the terms of a second contract are the same as the first?

ie by authorising the first transaction is he then authorising all future transactions at the same time?


anyhow
it sounds like he agreed to have the old machine picked up and a replacement sent, a rectification of a failed contracted agreement... NOT A NEW PURCHASE i.e. I don't see how this is a new contract.
surely a new contract is formed when a new purchase agreement is confirmed, this does'nt sound like the case described.

regards

steve