Virgin Wines - ordered one case, got two, now email received

Zandoni

Poppy9 wrote: »

I would email them saying they can collect them after 5.30pm and offer 3 dates which is more than most companies offer when you are awaiting delivery!

Good idea

It's bad enough waiting in for your delivery when you order something, so waiting in for someone elses mistake is unacceptable.

If you house is empty most days then all you can do is what Poppy suggested.

ThumbRemote

mountainofdebt wrote: »

Am rapidly getting fed up of these sort of postings. :mad:

Since when has MSE been a site for people to find loopholes when both legally and morally they know the answer to the situation.

Moneysaving is one thing but this is a totally different thing altogether.

These forums are chock full of people dealing with bad companies, who use every legal loophole they can find (and frequently illegal means too) to extract or keep hold of money to which they are not entitled. And as for morals, I'd swear some of these companies have customer service departments run by Satan himself.

I hardly think occasional threads from posters wondering if they can get something for nothing is a major problem.

mountainofdebt

No what you'll find is a load of people who couldn't be asked to read the t&c before ordering/signing up.

And just for the record I'm including posts where the OP has been paid twice, knows they've been paid twice and then moan like hell becuase they've been asked to pay it back and can't because they've spent the money - oh and that's not even including those posts where the OP has been undercharged and then moan when asked for the correct payment.

tomwakefield

ThumbRemote wrote: »

These forums are chock full of people dealing with bad companies, who use every legal loophole they can find (and frequently illegal means too) to extract or keep hold of money to which they are not entitled.

These forums are chock full of people [strike]dealing with bad companies,[/strike] who use every legal loophole they can find (and frequently illegal means too) to extract or keep hold of money to which they are not entitled.

Zandoni

tomwakefield wrote: »

These forums are chock full of people [strike]dealing with bad companies,[/strike] who use every legal loophole they can find (and frequently illegal means too) to extract or keep hold of money to which they are not entitled.

These forums are chock full of people dealing with bad companies who use every legal loophole they can find (and frequently illegal means too) to extract or keep hold of money to which they are not entitled.

Your underlining moved, I corrected it for you

ThumbRemote

As a fairly representative sample, on the first page of the Consumer Rights forum now:

Beware Npower billing system error - company error
BT landline BILL - company error plus consumer financial problem
This thread
Ebuyer supplied grey market hard disk and now won't replace it - dodgy goods from company
Do not buy from Nicecans.co.uk - dodgy company
Engagement ring - faulty - lost stone - Faulty product
Purchased wrong concert tickets - consumer error with query about rights
1 year contract 1and1 dedicated server - unknown where the error lies
Trouble with Dell support - Company taking money they aren't entitled to
accidentally refunded twice... - Consumer wondering about keeping money
Faulty toy purchased from Disneyland Paris - Help! - Company refusing refund
Direct debits to a company in administration - Consumer query
courier fails to deliver - dodgy company
Newvista cheque return demand! - company error
Have I paid under false pretenses? - company error with unclear T&Cs
Small Claims - Transfer of Proceedings - query over court system
Credit Expert - ignoring emails to stop payments, WHAT CAN I DO? - Consumer hasn't read T&Cs
PC World £50 Voucher - Consumer hasn't read T&Cs
Argos - Waiting for Refund! - Consumer who wants refund quicker than Argos will give
Next Directory - Unsolicited Credit Check - Consumer not reading T&Cs

By my reckoning, 3 where a consumer hasn't read T&Cs, 2 (including this thread) where a consumer would like something for nothing, 10 about dodgy companies/product, and 5 other (general queries over rights or unclear where the problem lies).

So hardly 'a load of people who couldn't be asked to read the t&c' - some, I'll grant you, but the majority of posters have genuine issues with companies.

Either way, if you don't like the content of the forum, why not just stop reading it?

redpete

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Either way, if you don't like the content of the forum, why not just stop reading it?

Because it's a discussion forum and quite appropriate to voice an opinion. Not even the site rules say that you should only respond (let alone read) if you agree with the OP.

Leif

Arrange collection, or a discount. You know it makes sense to be totally honest, since they do have the right to claim it back. And they might be happy to sell at cost to avoid the cost of collection.

tomwakefield wrote: »

They're not yours.

The Theft Act 1968 states


read into that what you will

Are you trained as a solictor/lawyer or do you have some other legal training? Having read the links you post, and as a non legal type, I have no idea if they apply.

jwg_2

I have just come across this post after finding myself in the same position. While I would agree with responses from other people that to morally/legally correct thing to do is to return the wine, I wonder how far we are expected to accommodate their mistake.

The OP and I have been offered the option to return the wines which is an option I originally took. I told Virgin Wines my partner and I are almost always out but they could pick the wines up from outside of the house. However the weather is bad and box was likely to get damaged. I attempted to protect the case from the rain but there is no shelter outside of my house and a black plastic bag will only keep the rain off for so long until water leaks in. I don't have anything else to protect the box with. The operator at Virgin Wines informed me that he understood the limitations, accepted them and would have the courier come as quickly possible with a new box that he could use if necessary.

The first time the courier failed to turn up. Virgin wines apologised and said that they would send a second courier. According to Virgin Wines, the second courier turned up and refused to take the box because it was too damaged, even though the operator had instructed him to take a fresh box in case this exact situation arose. My partner returned to find wine bottles rolling around the street. The box is completely destroyed by water, although the black plastic bag was originally tied up so the wines should not have escaped. I guess the courier tried to lift the box and the bag tore but I'm only guessing.

Now, I have sympathy for both individuals and companies making mistakes but their mistake is becoming a large inconvenience. While looking into my problem I found a description on the law of inertial selling (source out-law dot com/page-430)

It is an offence under the Regulations [UK distance selling] for a supplier to send unsolicited goods and then demand payment or threaten legal proceedings to get payment for the goods. The recipient of the goods may use, deal with or dispose as if they were an unconditional gift.

The second case was unsolicited. Virgin wines have demanded (all be it quite politely) either payment or the return of the wines. However, they do not take the wines and keep trying to arrange for them to be collected which is causing a growing inconvenience to me. I'm not trying to look for a loop hole here - I'm trying to get this problem to go away as quickly as possible and at present the best option seems to be to tell them that they are in violation of inertial selling laws by trying to bully me into buying the case. Must I give them more attempts before I do this and buy a waterproof container to put the wines in or take a day off work so that the delivery man can collect them? At what point do their mistakes become passive aggressive attempts to get me to buy the wine?

tomjonesrules

jwg wrote: »

I have just come across this post after finding myself in the same position. While I would agree with responses from other people that to morally/legally correct thing to do is to return the wine, I wonder how far we are expected to accommodate their mistake.

The OP and I have been offered the option to return the wines which is an option I originally took. I told Virgin Wines my partner and I are almost always out but they could pick the wines up from outside of the house. However the weather is bad and box was likely to get damaged. I attempted to protect the case from the rain but there is no shelter outside of my house and a black plastic bag will only keep the rain off for so long until water leaks in. I don't have anything else to protect the box with. The operator at Virgin Wines informed me that he understood the limitations, accepted them and would have the courier come as quickly possible with a new box that he could use if necessary.

The first time the courier failed to turn up. Virgin wines apologised and said that they would send a second courier. According to Virgin Wines, the second courier turned up and refused to take the box because it was too damaged, even though the operator had instructed him to take a fresh box in case this exact situation arose. My partner returned to find wine bottles rolling around the street. The box is completely destroyed by water, although the black plastic bag was originally tied up so the wines should not have escaped. I guess the courier tried to lift the box and the bag tore but I'm only guessing.

Now, I have sympathy for both individuals and companies making mistakes but their mistake is becoming a large inconvenience. While looking into my problem I found a description on the law of inertial selling (source out-law dot com/page-430)

It is an offence under the Regulations [UK distance selling] for a supplier to send unsolicited goods and then demand payment or threaten legal proceedings to get payment for the goods. The recipient of the goods may use, deal with or dispose as if they were an unconditional gift.

The second case was unsolicited. Virgin wines have demanded (all be it quite politely) either payment or the return of the wines. However, they do not take the wines and keep trying to arrange for them to be collected which is causing a growing inconvenience to me. I'm not trying to look for a loop hole here - I'm trying to get this problem to go away as quickly as possible and at present the best option seems to be to tell them that they are in violation of inertial selling laws by trying to bully me into buying the case. Must I give them more attempts before I do this and buy a waterproof container to put the wines in or take a day off work so that the delivery man can collect them? At what point do their mistakes become passive aggressive attempts to get me to buy the wine?

The second case was not unsolicited within the meaning of the law. Stop looking for loopholes that do not exist.