Proving my innoncence

SimonSays

wealdroam wrote: »

And Paypal also offer a product that works in exactly the same way as "Barclaycard EDQ IE Merchant Services".

The point being that neither you nor I know which Worldpay product the OP used.

When asked, I qualified my answer in a later post.

As you can see, even The Financial Ombudsman has trouble deciding whether S75 applies in this type of case, so I am not sure how you can emphatically state "A chargeback or S75 would be accepted as there is a direct link".

Better not chargebacks against tesco.com who use you guessed it Worldpay!

Worldpay is the same as using a machine in a shop provided by Barclaycard/Cardnet/HSBC so the issuer would have to accept one due to it not being your warped "oh its worldpay must be like paypal. Issue stock answer 8"

wiltsguy_2

well, this thread goes to prove that there is always two sides to every story since the seller has posted on the thread.

Keep_pedalling

Lets face it we are unlikely to ever know where this watch is and who the villain is, but someone is going to lose out big time. If it turns out to be the OP who is the big loser then he is in part to blame for his loss because of the idiotic way he handled it.

Hermione_Granger

The watch may well have been in the box when collected by the OP and removed before they finally opened it, which is why I asked this a couple of days ago

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

Another question is where was the package kept between the time it was delivered and when it was opened? and could anyone else have had access to it?

But the OP hasn't responded to it yet.

wiltsguy_2

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

The phone may well have been in the box when collected by the OP and removed before they finally opened it, which is why I asked this a couple of days ago

But the OP hasn't responded to it yet.

phone, don't you mean watch? but valid point, could someone have took it out of the package whilst at the OPs address?

I guess we will never know.......

Hermione_Granger

wiltsguy wrote: »

phone, don't you mean watch?

Well spotted.
I've amended my earlier post.

Toxicity

Waiting a couple of days to open an 8k watch is I suppose a little bit believable (a little bit, if you are REALLY busy.)

But you had the time to go and collect it, not once but twice, then opened the 'outer' packaging and then took the rubbish down to your bin but still not having time to at least glimpse at the watch? sorry I cannot believe that.

It is quite sad really, one of you is going to get shafted. Either the poor seller who is genuine and sent the watch and the buyer really does have it (though seller was silly by not taking out adequate insurance), or the poor naive buyer who paid 8k for a watch and really didn't receive it (who was also silly as they waited days to open package and threw half of it away.)

shaun_from_Africa

Toxicity wrote: »

(though seller was silly by not taking out adequate insurance)

But as already mentioned, the seller's listing stated that insurance will be provided by their 3rd party insurers (and the seller also confirmed that this was the case in their post which has now been removed for posting as a business without prior approval).


Even if this is correct and the item was sent with full insurance, there isn't any chance that they would pay out for theft as the package was delivered and signed for with no mention at the time of possible tampering and the only possible proof of this has now been discarded.


RM or the sellers insurers might have paid out without any proof of the package being opened prior to delivery if it was for a watch costing £8, but not for one valued at close to £8k

somethingcorporate

Toxicity wrote: »

Waiting a couple of days to open an 8k watch is I suppose a little bit believable (a little bit, if you are REALLY busy.)

But you had the time to go and collect it, not once but twice, then opened the 'outer' packaging and then took the rubbish down to your bin but still not having time to at least glimpse at the watch? sorry I cannot believe that.

I'm with you here. Evidently the packaging looked a bit suspect - the first thing a sensible person would do would be to spend 30 seconds opening it to check that your eight grand watch is fine.

Even if the OP is telling the absolute truth they have acted so poorly I cannot see them convincing anyone that this course of events is indeed true and if I was a betting man expect the OP to have to swallow the loss.

arcon5

The police searching your home proves nothing i'm afraid op