Amazon supplier

sunshinegirl1_2

I bought a piece of jewellery from Amazon. Two of the diamonds have now fallen out. Because this was bought about 9 months ago the Amazon warranty has expired.

I took it to a jeweller to have it repaired but he could not source the stones.

How can I find out who the original supplier was so that I can contact him regarding repair/replacement.

The ring was not cheap and I need to get it fixed.

Do I have the right to be told the source of Amazon's supply?

pmduk

I doubt it, your contract is with Amazon, Their supplier will be unlikely to agree to deal with you and has absolutely no obligations to you.

bod1467

Have you reported the fault to Amazon? They may require you to obtain a report to confirm the fault was not due to accidental damage, but assuming such a report finds in your favour (if they even ask for one) then they are liable under the Sale of Goods Act to provide a remedy.

Such a remedy can be repair, replacement, or refund. Any refund could be partial to account for your usage, but after only 9 months I'd be expecting a full refund.

sunshinegirl1_2

Hi,

I did report this to Amazon and they just stuck to the fact that their period of cover had been exceeded.

I pointed out that with a diamond ring it was reasonable to expect that the stones stayed in place during normal use. Their response was that they had no obligation to me, but they would send £15 as a token of goodwill. This is obviously not enough to cover any repair. I am not asking for a new ring, but need to get this one repaired and to do that we have to know the name of the supplier so that they can arrange to set it with the same stones. I wasn't even asking them to accept responsibility for the cost of repair, although I agree with you a diamond ring should last longer than 9 months.

Can I insist they supply the information I need?

wealdroam

sunshinegirl1 wrote: »

Can I insist they supply the information I need?

Of course you can.

However, they can refuse to give you that information, perhaps claiming that it is commercially sensitive.