[CLOSED] Samsung 28'' Pure Flat Widescreen With Integrated Freeview TV + Cabinet £33

thor

It would be Ebuyer getting their just desserts for screwing so many of their customers. No online(or offline) retailor is perfect but these clowns have been getting away with murder for years(search the Net for people's experiences of buying from them and you will see what I am on about). Putting them out of business would be doing a public service.

blueghost

gogsboy wrote:

Errors get made off course but come on, what do you want, companies losing money left right and centre just to keep you happy and make sure you get a product for nowhere near the retail value.

Mad if you ask me!

no, not just any company. i want ebuyer to suffer for: their poor service to many other customers in the past; their shoddy terms and conditions which they have broken in this instance; terrible general customer service.

if getting a tv for £33 is the way for them to improve their business then so be it

rogerramjet

gogsboy wrote:

Not really read into this as such, but guessing you are moaning and feeling hard done by that you never got this telly for £33?

Apologies if wrong but if thats the case then is this really what MSE stands for?

Errors get made off course but come on, what do you want, companies losing money left right and centre just to keep you happy and make sure you get a product for nowhere near the retail value.

Mad if you ask me!

I speak for myself here, maybe other will agree or disagree, but the TV is no longer the issue here. The fact is Ebuyer has totally disregarded their own Terms and Conditions, they took money from peoples accounts and sent confirmation emails which made a legal and binding contract.

Trading Standards, Watchdog, etc have let them get away with this, Other companies will use Ebuyers stance as a bench mark....maybe for a genuine mistake....maybe not. What this does mean is the consumer (This is you and me) will lose out as the laws to protect the consumer are not enforced by those empowered to do so.

Giving Ebuyer a *verbal* "improve your service" talk will mean nothing to the owners, they are probably laughing at the moment on the fact the Trading Standards department in Sheffied are a toothless animal with no will to protect and uphold the consumer rights which they are empowered to do so.

All that has occurred with this is Ebuyer will now push the bounderies even further when it comes to flouting consumer rights and logically why should they worry when this extreme breach of their own Terms and Conditions was not dealt with by those with more power than the lonely consumer?

NAR

If so many feel they are on strong ground why has no-one purchased the TV elsewhere and taken ebuyer to small claims court for a refund of the difference? It would only take one to be successful to open the proverbial floodgates.

shrek101

That is incorrect, one case doesn't set a precedent. Each county court judgement is set on its on merits and how the judge interprets the law.

NAR wrote:

It would only take one to be successful to open the proverbial floodgates.

NAR

Where did I say that a precedent would be set? However a successful claim, should allow others to "borrow/use" the same circumstances to achieve further successful claims.

shrek101

That still amounts to the same thing, mearly if you claim that Mr X won his case then on that basis Mr B should win there's.

Each case in on there own merits and of course on how a judge would interpret the law. Ebuyer are quite blatently wrong here, I have that on Trading Standards advice.

However on that basis that doesnt mean he/she would win, its a gamble at the end of the day.

It isnt expensive to go to court a little time consuming perhaps.

NAR

shrek101 wrote:

That still amounts to the same thing, mearly if you claim that Mr X won his case then on that basis Mr B should win there's.

It doesn't, stop using tunnel vision! If you present strong facts to the court, borrowed/shared or not, most cases will be won is what I am saying. Where did I say about quoting Mr X's case in anybody else's case? I said use similar/same evidence.

Ebuyer are quite blatently wrong here, I have that on Trading Standards advice.

So why not take them to court and prove it. The adverse publicity you can give Ebuyer afterwards would surely be invaluable.

thor

Do you really think that Ebuyer are bothered about bad publicity? As long as they can get new customers who have not researched a company's past history then they won't miss all the ones they have !!!!!! off over the years. As someone has already stated, they are laughing at us and taking them to court will be a big gamble as I've seen lots of cases where the little guy gets stomped on no matter what the merits of the case.

redfox

thor wrote:

As long as they can get new customers who have not researched a company's past history then they won't miss all the ones they have !!!!!! off over the years.

any business that works to that theory won't be in business for very long no matter how many new customers they think they will get! Ultimately, they will fail. Customers are not a right for any business, they have to be earned (and kept!) and poor customer service loses customers - fast