Approved Food - general discussion thread

mcallister1

Wolfsbayne wrote: »

The key problem here appears to be the management of the website in terms of stock control. Does anybody reading this forum have advanced website experience that could perhaps lend Dan a hand with coding, etc to try and get these problems sorted? It's just a suggestion . . .

I think he has sorted that aspect out now and the amount of stuff on the website is linked to the amount of stock.

mdecker_london

Wolfsbayne wrote: »

The key problem here appears to be the management of the website in terms of stock control. Does anybody reading this forum have advanced website experience that could perhaps lend Dan a hand with coding, etc to try and get these problems sorted? It's just a suggestion . . .

The problem was too many orders in a short period; the company does not have the staff and infrastructure to deal with large numbers of orders. It had the choice on 17th January, knowing this, to either continue taking orders it must have known it couldn't deliver, or to stop taking orders until it had the situation under control.

Nothing to do with the website - simply not enough infrastructure in place.

mcallister1

mdecker_london wrote: »

The problem was too many orders in a short period; the company does not have the staff and infrastructure to deal with large numbers of orders. It had the choice on 17th January, knowing this, to either continue taking orders it must have known it couldn't deliver, or to stop taking orders until it had the situation under control.

Nothing to do with the website - simply not enough infrastructure in place.

The thing is, he suspended the website the week before when the first rush of orders happened. As a result, when he re-opened, things went even worse. I agree, with the benefit of hindsight, maybe things could have ben done differently. But he was unexpectedly overwhelmed with orders. He tried suspending the site- that resulted in a build up. Then he tried working on expanding the operation to cope- introducing the stock control and taking on the staff to manage. I think his communications with the non mse customer have not been good- its a shame that people have waited so long without information.But the mse effect, plus the fact that the story exactly fitted the criteria for a good credit crunch story in the papers, led to a sudden and unexpected growth in orders.I agree that, with the benefit of hindsight, he could have handled the delays better. But that is forgetting the sheer scale of what happened and the number of different issues he was dealing with.
Imo the stuff is so good, if and when you get it, that I find it hard to be angry with him, and that is the experience of several people who have been on here, furious at the delay, then got a box and been happy. Hopefully we will have a long and fruitful relationship with the company. If people are so upset that they don't want to forgive them, that is a valid position. But not one I want to take- and for the record I am waiting for a half complete order to be delivered too.

Mistymaid

mdecker_london wrote: »

Originally Posted by frosty
I ordered nearly 3 weeks ago and I still havent received my order.I know they are really busy,I received an email today and over half my order is out of stock,its such a shame because the prices are fab,I dont think I will order again.


I think this is a bit harsh. I feel the same way as the original poster; I placed my second order on 24th January, expecting a delay of a few days (as stated on the front page of the site at that time) but two weeks later I've heard nothing, and it's only by coming to this website that I find out a) that I'm very unlikely to get most of what I ordered and b) that the company knew on 16th January that it would have a serious problem in fulfilling a huge number of orders placed on that particular day.

My own view is that it is likely that the company knew on 24th January that it would be unlikely to have in stock items it was advertising at that time, and that it was misleading for the company to fail to point out to buyers on 24th January that much of one's order would likely be out of stock. I and others wasted time poring over a list and selecting items that weren't going to be in stock weeks later when our orders were picked and packed.

While, clearly, we have lionised this vendor and adopted him as one of our own, we must not be blinded to the fact that some people have waited more than three weeks for orders that have arrived half-fulfilled. By any measure, and however big the bargains, that is unacceptable.

The correct solution for this vendor should have been to suspend his website on 17th January; the day on which he realised that he would have a severe problem fulfilling orders made the previous day. This would have meant that when he fired it up again (around 1st feb) it could have a far more accurate indicator of stocks. Instead, people like me and you placed orders for stock that may have physically been in stock on 24th Jan but there wasn't a hope in hell that they'd be in stock by the time the vendor got around to packing that order.

I wasted a lot of time putting together a large order (plus £15.75 postage/packing), only to be finally told (not that anyone's bothered to tell me yet) that most of my order will be missing, or that I'll be getting some money back. It's simply not true to imply that substitutions are perfectly acceptable, or that people shouldn't dare to complain because 'hey, cheap food'. However cheap the product, there are still simple steps that vendors can take to ensure the best experience for customers.

I can therefore entirely empathise with the original poster, and I too won't be ordering again unless I can be assured that a) orders will be delivered within an agreed period and that b) the stock offered on the site is available to me even after all orders prior to mine have been filled, and c) if there is any change then I'm contacted as soon as the vendor becomes aware of the problem. These are not unreasonable requests.

Thing is, Dan has been on the site numerous times and told people to phone up if they feel their order has been too long in delivery or they want substititute items - he even put on an additional number for us to phone - what more do you want?

He's also explained that a lot of stuff showing 'out of stock' on the site, is simply to stop people ordering more, sometimes he still has that available - or he's waiting for another delivery. Taking into consideration the weather 'down south,' some of these deliveries have been delayed, this I know because I've spoken to him this week.

So he has tried to rectify the problem, he has given you the opportunity to telephone him in person and get substitutions, and given that (quite possibly due to us) he has been inundated with customers - and still people are sat back saying, 'nothing has been done for three weeks and I'm only getting half my stuff.'
Yet you don't actually know this because you haven't spoken to anyone.
Well, erm, pick the phone up then!

Oh, and before I forget he has been refunding most people the majority of their postage - he had no need to do that.

Yes we are getting items more cheaply, but I don't think anybody is 'putting up' with poor customer service to be in receipt of the same. The company experienced a surge in orders, they have done their best to remedy it, and we are trying to be patient and understanding because this is a two way street - he's providing us with cheaper food in a situation that has proved unexpectedly difficult and we are being appreciative of his attempts to remedy the issues.

As my nan would have said, "What do you want, jam on it?"

mdecker_london

Mistymaid wrote: »

Thing is, Dan has been on the site numerous times and told people to phone up if they feel their order has been too long in delivery or they want substititute items - he even put on an additional number for us to phone - what more do you want?

He's also explained that a lot of stuff showing 'out of stock' on the site, is simply to stop people ordering more, sometimes he still has that available - or he's waiting for another delivery. Taking into consideration the weather 'down south,' some of these deliveries have been delayed, this I know because I've spoken to him this week.

So he has tried to rectify the problem, he has given you the opportunity to telephone him in person and get substitutions, and given that (quite possibly due to us) he has been inundated with customers - and still people are sat back saying, 'nothing has been done for three weeks and I'm only getting half my stuff.'
Yet you don't actually know this because you haven't spoken to anyone.
Well, erm, pick the phone up then!

Oh, and before I forget he has been refunding most people the majority of their postage - he had no need to do that.

Yes we are getting items more cheaply, but I don't think anybody is 'putting up' with poor customer service to be in receipt of the same. The company experienced a surge in orders, they have done their best to remedy it, and we are trying to be patient and understanding because this is a two way street - he's providing us with cheaper food in a situation that has proved unexpectedly difficult and we are being appreciative of his attempts to remedy the issues.

As my nan would have said, "What do you want, jam on it?"

I don't think there's any need to be rude, and I think you're missing the point. I didn't order as a result of seeing anything on MSE, and no-one's ever pointed me to MSE as the conduit for people to find out what's happened to their order. That's why I'm fairly annoyed to discover on some forum what the delay is with my order, rather than have the vendor email/call me.

The point is that this vendor took orders, and money, for items that he knew AT THE TIME he wouldn't be able to deliver. Apart from anything else, that's a breach of the CPA.

What he should have done was shut down his operation until he'd caught up with the backlog. If, as you claim, the moment he switched it on again he was inundated then he should have switched it off again after a couple of hours, fulfilled those orders, then switched it on again for a couple of hours. That would be the sensible way to proceed.

mdecker_london

mcallister1 wrote: »

The thing is, he suspended the website the week before when the first rush of orders happened. As a result, when he re-opened, things went even worse. I agree, with the benefit of hindsight, maybe things could have ben done differently. But he was unexpectedly overwhelmed with orders. He tried suspending the site- that resulted in a build up. Then he tried working on expanding the operation to cope- introducing the stock control and taking on the staff to manage. I think his communications with the non mse customer have not been good- its a shame that people have waited so long without information.But the mse effect, plus the fact that the story exactly fitted the criteria for a good credit crunch story in the papers, led to a sudden and unexpected growth in orders.I agree that, with the benefit of hindsight, he could have handled the delays better. But that is forgetting the sheer scale of what happened and the number of different issues he was dealing with.
Imo the stuff is so good, if and when you get it, that I find it hard to be angry with him, and that is the experience of several people who have been on here, furious at the delay, then got a box and been happy. Hopefully we will have a long and fruitful relationship with the company. If people are so upset that they don't want to forgive them, that is a valid position. But not one I want to take- and for the record I am waiting for a half complete order to be delivered too.

I'm not angry, just disappointed and irritated. This is my second order, and I was pleased with the first one. But it arrived within the times stated on the website at the time of my order, and there were only a couple of minor substitutions, one breakage/leak, and a lot of inedible stuck-together raisins. I can put up with that; the food's cheap and the guy's building a business.

But my second order included items that weren't ever going to be in stock by the time my order was picked and packed, and the vendor KNEW that at the time he took my money. THAT'S what annoys me the most. Well, that and the way my wife's going to say "I told you so" when the second order eventually arrives and is half-empty. Much though I love a bargain, it'll be a lot easier to just take her to Tescos in future...

Mistymaid

I'm not being rude, mdecker - at least I'm not trying to be so, that's a plus.

Thing is, you could have taken control of this situation whether you knew about MSE or not.

Looking at it from your point of view, if I'd have gone into the site and seen that a) stuff I'd ordered was no longer in stock, and b) My order went over the guideline dates given on the homepage ... and considering the weather down south ... why didn't you just phone up?

No need to be nasty about it, just a polite phone call to enquire about the status of your order.

Now what are you doing; quoting rules and regulations, breach of contract, all manner of stuff that could have/should have, been easily remedied.
Dan did not know the stock was not available when he advertised it. Dan put up on screen, as soon as the new system was in place, that items were out of stock.(sometimes just to stop more orders)
When he lists stuff it is there and available. The problem is he has been overwhelmed with orders. He explained, quite clearly, that he orders a couple of pallets of items, if they sell well, he suspends the trade until he has got more.

You can't go into Asda's site or any other supermarket and place an order and then start yelling breach of contract if they then inform you it is out of stock, so why AF?

People are also going into the store and buying direct from him, this is something else you have to bear in mind - it's not just an on-line service - and they don't know who is going to walk in every day.

Sorry, but yelling breach of anything, just gets my back up. Particularly when you haven't made any move yourself to resolve the problem.
You may expect the company to phone you, that is your right, but it is also your responsibility to first try and resolve any problems - that's just the mature way to behave.

You're not the only person to have had a few problems - quite a few of us did - but we worked with the company, sorted them and are more than happy with the end result. You could be too ...

knithappens

well i emailed , and my delivery has now been dispatched, so thanks Dave ( i think it is)

Sarahsaver

AFAIK the contract between you and AF is completed when you receive the goods, as it would be when you order from a catalogue, or online supermarkets.
I mean good grief the amount of times major supermarkets therefore 'breached' something - substitutions, missing items etc...

Please may i remind you before i get some much needed sleep to be nice to all moneysavers and be nice to one another. Dan is one guy with a massive surge in business to deal with and I think that needs support from us at MSE.

mdecker_london

Mistymaid wrote: »

I'm not being rude, mdecker - at least I'm not trying to be so, that's a plus.

Thing is, you could have taken control of this situation whether you knew about MSE or not.

Looking at it from your point of view, if I'd have gone into the site and seen that a) stuff I'd ordered was no longer in stock, and b) My order went over the guideline dates given on the homepage ... and considering the weather down south ... why didn't you just phone up?

No need to be nasty about it, just a polite phone call to enquire about the status of your order.

Now what are you doing; quoting rules and regulations, breach of contract, all manner of stuff that could have/should have, been easily remedied.
Dan did not know the stock was not available when he advertised it. Dan put up on screen, as soon as the new system was in place, that items were out of stock.(sometimes just to stop more orders)
When he lists stuff it is there and available. The problem is he has been overwhelmed with orders. He explained, quite clearly, that he orders a couple of pallets of items, if they sell well, he suspends the trade until he has got more.

You can't go into Asda's site or any other supermarket and place an order and then start yelling breach of contract if they then inform you it is out of stock, so why AF?

People are also going into the store and buying direct from him, this is something else you have to bear in mind - it's not just an on-line service - and they don't know who is going to walk in every day.

Sorry, but yelling breach of anything, just gets my back up. Particularly when you haven't made any move yourself to resolve the problem.
You may expect the company to phone you, that is your right, but it is also your responsibility to first try and resolve any problems - that's just the mature way to behave.

You're not the only person to have had a few problems - quite a few of us did - but we worked with the company, sorted them and are more than happy with the end result. You could be too ...

I'm buying a little bit of food for less than £100 - I don't have the time to devote to what should be a simple, small transaction: why should I "go back to the site and see items are out of stock, phone them, discuss and agree substitutions, 'work with the company', 'sort them'" etc?

You seem to have a somewhat odd idea of the relationship between buyer and seller - but I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, given that you have posted fifty times on this site, and around 90% of those posts are written in support of Approved Foods! Without wishing to appear to point a finger, as of course it may be coincidence, but you only joined MSE a month after Approved Foods first started being mentioned here....... And whether you like it or not, it's unlawful to take money for goods you know you cannot deliver.

May I politely suggest you take a step back, and have a hard think about whether you *really* think it's acceptable to take money for goods you know aren't going to be in stock, and then fail to tell customers for a couple of weeks that their order is a) going to be late and b) is only half-there?