Arguing with online retailer - am I in the right?

deaston

visidigi wrote: »

You're lucky.

I've even been asked for directions to a city center office!

Anyway...

So the OP posted this on the first post...



then in post 43 said this...



So...the order wasn't late when the email to say they were leaving was sent. it was 26 minutes before cut off and unless the OP lives next to a supermarket they were in there 21 minutes after deadline when the retailer replied.

They emailed to cancel 26 minutes before deadline and went shopping!

Sorry but this isn't coming across well...

In writing this thread (the morning after this all happened and a bit angry from the reply from the seller) I incorrectly wrote the delivery was 9-6, but it was actually 8:30 - 5:30pm. The order was (just about) late.

deaston

Leo2020 wrote: »

You have contradicted yourself, you say that they had up to 6pm and your contacted them 10 mins later. You then say that you emailed at 17.34 saying it was late.

I was incorrect - cut-off was 17:30 and I emailed at 17:34.

unholyangel

visidigi wrote: »

You're lucky.

I've even been asked for directions to a city center office!

Anyway...

So the OP posted this on the first post...



then in post 43 said this...



So...the order wasn't late when the email to say they were leaving was sent. it was 26 minutes before cut off and unless the OP lives next to a supermarket they were in there 21 minutes after deadline when the retailer replied.

They emailed to cancel 26 minutes before deadline and went shopping!

Sorry but this isn't coming across well...

I'm not disagreeing OP wasn't exactly taking the best course of action by cancelling over it - after all, he's going to have to wait on it being delivered by someone else anyway, may as well have let the original retailer reattempt delivery rather than burn bridges and (from the sounds of it) get the original retailers back up while original retailer (or their agent) still has possession of both the money and the goods.

But none of whats mentioned so far seems to affect the legal position - just the moral one.

bris

deaston wrote: »

Dalby Firewood are very unpleasant people to deal with.

A bit like unreasonable customers then.

wealdroam

deaston wrote: »

I was incorrect - cut-off was 17:30 and I emailed at 17:34.

Wow!! For minutes late and you cancel the order?

I'm speechless.

visidigi

unholyangel wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing OP wasn't exactly taking the best course of action by cancelling over it - after all, he's going to have to wait on it being delivered by someone else anyway, may as well have let the original retailer reattempt delivery rather than burn bridges and (from the sounds of it) get the original retailers back up while original retailer (or their agent) still has possession of both the money and the goods.

But none of whats mentioned so far seems to affect the legal position - just the moral one.

You may be right, I personally believe the phone number is a fundamental part of the ability to deliver.

The courier was trying to reach the customer. The courier was also trying to call the customer. They did everything to mitigate the failure of the delivery that was within their control.

The seller has clearly got their back up and I feel for them in this scenario.

From their perspective you can see the cost to them is significant when they have actually done nothing wrong...

deaston

wealdroam wrote: »

Wow!! For minutes late and you cancel the order?

I'm speechless.

Because I knew I was not at home for the rest of the week to accept delivery, so there seemed to be no point in trying to reschedule. And don't forget, although it was only four minutes past the cut-off, I'd been waiting for nine hours.

visidigi

deaston wrote: »

Because I knew I was not at home for the rest of the week to accept delivery, so there seemed to be no point in trying to reschedule. And don't forget, although it was only four minutes past the cut-off, I'd been waiting for nine hours.

But you wouldn't have been waiting 9 hours had your phone number been correct.

As the retailer has already informed you, they were actively trying to reach you to achieve delivery....

wealdroam

deaston wrote: »

And don't forget, although it was only four minutes past the cut-off, I'd been waiting for nine hours.

But that was the arrangement you agreed to.

The only 'inconvenience' was four minutes. How log did it take to compose the email - more than four minutes?

deaston

visidigi wrote: »

You may be right, I personally believe the phone number is a fundamental part of the ability to deliver.

I actually agree with you on this. I made a mistake and they couldn't contact me by phone - but they could have emailed me. But the delivery was 1 hour ten minutes late and I'm afraid I don't believe the driver spent that long looking for my house. At worst, it would've taken him a few minutes. It's a straight road with houses on one side. I'm number 7 with number 6 on one side and 8 on the other and the numbers are very clearly displayed on almost all houses.

But all that aside, I've changed my mind and wish to cancel, so the seller should refund. But because I was honest and complained about the fact the delivery didn't turn up, the seller has decided to withhold my refund for at least 28 days and charge me £56+VAT, as well as declare he's "gathering evidence" as if he's preparing to take legal action (although he's not explicitly said this). I'd say those are all threatening tactics to try and scare me into accepting a product I no longer want.