Advice wanted: Threatened with Small Claims even though I agreed his terms on time

LeeSouthEast

Return & Refund. Simples.

db21111

LeeSouthEast wrote: »

Return & Refund. Simples.

I fear he damaged it, and that it could be "damaged" again on the way back. I don't particularly want a damaged camera back :S

db21111

wealdroam wrote: »

Yes but have you any confirmation that the camera is damaged?

This guy just wants your camera and a significant discount, which for convenience he will call a 'repair bill'.

He sent photographs. So all that confirms is that a camera is broken that is in his possession. It wasn't broken when I sent it. Even if I sent him a photograph of the camera here, in unbroken condition, that doesn't prove that it wasn't sent broken.

So in like manner him sending me a photo of it broken now doesn't conclusively prove to me that he did it. That's why I went through RM. His messages have made me think otherwise of course.

He clearly wanted a discount, ignored that I paid twice as much to ship it and included items which I hadn't listed which are worth about £50. And is now ignoring that I decided to meet halfway with his offer of £100.

My beef is there now, I agreed his offer.

DCFC79

db21111 wrote: »

I even have images taken with that camera the day before it was shipped. They show it was working perfectly and also they contain data about the camera etc. Of course that doesn't include physical damage to the buttons.

So you do have a copy of the serial number ?

Do as suggested (by Tony) and ask him to return said camera and he will get a refnd once you have checked it works and is the camera you originally sent.

db21111

DCFC79 wrote: »

So you do have a copy of the serial number ?

I do have it yes

db21111

DCFC79 wrote: »

So you do have a copy of the serial number ?

Do as suggested (by Tony) and ask him to return said camera and he will get a refnd once you have checked it works and is the camera you originally sent.

But what about damage that I suspect he has caused? Royal Mail are not playing ball. I have to send images the damage and the box and the buyer isn't sending any packaging photos that suggest damage or tamper but if it was RM i believe it would have been when they opened it mid route to check the batteries. I had never heard of this myself, but the lady at the post office after quizzing me about the contents said that as it contains batteries, it is subject to inspection. So I imagine it would be neatly packaged back to together and could have been damaged at that stage. If it was RM indeed.

I would receive a broken camera. Which would require a £200 + repair bill to be dealt with before I could resell it. And who knows what further damage the buyer/RM have caused or will cause.

wealdroam

Are you sure the damaged camera that you have seen pictures of is the camera you sent?

It is possible, maybe even probable, that the buyer already had a similar camera, but damaged, and sees yours as a cheap way to get a good replacement.

Now that he has refused your offer, you are free to withdraw it.

How about suggesting that he gets it repaired and sends you the bill to pay the repairer directly?
I'll put a fiver on that offer being unacceptable too.

I'll say again, do all this in writing just in case it does go to court... though I'm pretty sure it won't.

db21111

wealdroam wrote: »

Are you sure the damaged camera that you have seen pictures of is the camera you sent?

It is possible, maybe even probable, that the buyer already had a similar camera, but damaged, and sees yours as a cheap way to get a good replacement.

Now that he has refused your offer, you are free to withdraw it.

How about suggesting that he gets it repaired and sends you the bill to pay the repairer directly?
I'll put a fiver on that offer being unacceptable too.

I'll say again, do all this in writing just in case it does go to court... though I'm pretty sure it won't.

I agree with you. In fact he stated on 14/9 that if he didn't hear from me within one week he would be sending it for repair.

Then clearly 4 days later he starts the claim proceedings. So surely that's lying?

halibut2209

Your 'agreement' is meaningless because he withdrew from it by asking for more

db21111

halibut2209 wrote: »

Your 'agreement' is meaningless because he withdrew from it by asking for more

But why make an agreement in writing if it has no strength? He is making it meaningless yes, but it was what he asked for. It's like saying ok mate, £50 and it's a deal. Then when the chap goes to pay the £50 saying, i've changed my mind.. i want £100 or i'm going to duff you up. (not disputing you but you see my confusion now)