We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Please help, amazon admitting wrong but still leaving me out of pocket!!
Comments
-
Just to clarify you would have preferred to keep a "soiled dress" than for your ex to get his £30 back?
As you've not really lost anything I wouldn't waste too much time on this.This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0 -
-
cockaleekee wrote: »No contract was formed between you and Amazon because you provided no consideration. In lay terms, something needs to pass both ways in order for a contract to be formed.The situation here is the only mistake made by Amazon was when they informed the OP they would get the gift card.
Considering the very good points made above, I would revise my earlier suggestion that a new contract was formed.
Instead, I would suggest that Amazon breached their duty of care to the OP, and due to their negligence the OP is out of pocket.
As such it is still incumbent on Amazon to rectify the problem.0 -
You have no contract with Amazon, you chose to return a dress your ex bought you, and he got his refund. As he was the buyer nothing wrong has been done.
Seems a bit snide to return a present your ex got you and expect to get the refund - as he bought the item he's entitled to the refund, not you.0 -
Annoying but not the end of the world.Don't grow up. Its a trap!
Peace, love and labradors!0 -
ThumbRemote wrote: »
As such it is still incumbent on Amazon to rectify the problem.
They won't.This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0 -
ThumbRemote wrote: »Considering the very good points made above, I would revise my earlier suggestion that a new contract was formed.
Instead, I would suggest that Amazon breached their duty of care to the OP, and due to their negligence the OP is out of pocket.
As such it is still incumbent on Amazon to rectify the problem.
It is nothing to do with Amazon. They were not the sellers.0 -
ThumbRemote wrote: »Considering the very good points made above, I would revise my earlier suggestion that a new contract was formed.
Instead, I would suggest that Amazon breached their duty of care to the OP, and due to their negligence the OP is out of pocket.
As such it is still incumbent on Amazon to rectify the problem.
Amazon has no duty of care to the OP!0 -
It is nothing to do with Amazon. They were not the sellers.
But they provided the incorrect advice, which the OP relied on.cockaleekee wrote: »Amazon has no duty of care to the OP!
Of course they do. They owe a duty of care to pretty much everyone they have contact with as a business. It doesn't matter that the OP was not previously a customer.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_of_care_in_English_law for much more on the subject.0 -
There are many unanswered questions.
The OP must have had access to the ex's Amazon account and/or email.
Because you are required to be logged in when you contact Amazon about an order or send a message to the seller, either the OP was in the ex's account or had contact details for the seller from the email.
1 If logged into the ex's Account you can see where the confusion would happen
2 If contacting the seller or Amazon directly, neither would be able to reveal information about the ex's account and so they would have to accept the OP's word that it is a gift. It would only be when the refund is processed that it becomes apparent it wasn't bought as a gift
The other question is this, how does the OP know so much about what happened in the background. Either the OP has access to the Amazon account or the emails. (Given that the OP had no contract with the ex) or Amazon/seller have been freely breaking the DPA.
When you add together the conflicting information in the OP's posts, the many questions they raise and the implications. I personally think what had happened is that the OP'S well intentioned efforts to sort this have been muddled and resulted in confusion and, ultimately, the wrong outcome.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards