Customer Has Returned Damaged Goods

steampowered

I agree with pinkshoes and others.

Surely it was the customer's obligation to return the printer with its packaging.

If the customer threw away the packaging and therefore returned the printer in a condition unfit for transit, I'd think that is the customer's problem, and they should only be refunded the difference between what the broken printer is worth and what it would have been worth if it had been returned.

I suppose the customer may claim that the printer was broken in the first place, so they were only returning a broken printer rather than the £450, so the only thing deducted from their refund should be the value of a broken printer (rather than the value of a new one).

societys_child

steampowered wrote: »

I suppose the customer may claim that the printer was broken in the first place, so they were only returning a broken printer rather than the £450, so the only thing deducted from their refund should be the value of a broken printer (rather than the value of a new one).

I agree, except the customer claimed it didn't work, not that it was broken.

Makes you wonder if it's definitely the same printer . .

macman

The customer is surely required to return all the supplied components (except the packaging), so the absence of the install CD's, manuals etc, means that the OP can refuse a refund. And hope that the customer has chucked them away along with the packaging...