Amazon Double Charging Me - What's my rights?

mattrev

I ordered a 55" TV on Amazon in November black friday sale.. it still didn't arrive 1 week after the delivery date, so I phoned and they said "don't worry, we'll send a replacement"... it arrives next day no problem and I install it.

I then go away for Christmas and while I'm away the the "lost" TV gets delivered and my housemate accepts the delivery, not knowing my TV had already arrived. On return I find out and  I call Amazon to say I have a duplicate order arrive and they said no problem we'll send UPS to pick it up next week.

In the meantime I get an email from Amazon with the words "As we communicated to you when we issued the replacement, the original item needs to be returned to us to avoid any charges detailed below, to your Mastercard" (at no point was this communicated to me and can't see any evidence suggesting it was).

Next UPS turn up and say "sorry, Amazon knows we can't pick up large TV's, I don't know what's going on. I cant accept this.". 

I phone Amazon and the customer service person says sorry I can't help, I'll have to get my manager to call you back. I get no phone call. I call Amazon again 3 days later and they say that they can only accept returns by UPS and I need to organise and pay for the return myself.

I have no problem with the company collecting the duplicate which I never ordered, but why should I organise and pay for the return and how can I stop them charging my credit card for something I didn't order in the first place?? What legal rights do I have?

Mark_d

Amazon tend to send the replacement item before they receive the first one back.  This saves a lot of time for the consumer but it does mean you might get charged for the first item if Amazon don't receive it back in the expected condition.

I'm surprised that Amazon are unable to collect the TV.  If I were you I'd arrange my own courier and then try asking Amazon to cover the cost of the courier.

It's not ideal that Amazon's usual processes don't work for the return of large items but Amazon haven't done anything wrong.  If you don't want to pay for the second TV then I suggest you return it.

user1977

Mark_d said:

It's not ideal that Amazon's usual processes don't work for the return of large items but Amazon haven't done anything wrong.

I would say that charging twice for the order and (so far) failing to collect the surplus item are both doing things wrong...

DullGreyGuy

user1977 said:

Mark_d said:

It's not ideal that Amazon's usual processes don't work for the return of large items but Amazon haven't done anything wrong.

I would say that charging twice for the order and (so far) failing to collect the surplus item are both doing things wrong...

The OP has 2 TVs at a minimum since early December, who do you think should have paid for the second? Seems rather generous compensation for a delivery being a few days late.

Certainly my experience of Amazon is that they do tell you that they'll send the replacement first but do say that you will be charged for it if the original isnt returned within 21 days but then I always use Live Chat rather than phoning which 1) makes it easier for them to use the pre-prepared scripts and 2) means I have a transcript so can see exactly what was said rather than trying to rely on my memory of a call from 3-4 weeks ago. 

user1977

DullGreyGuy said:

user1977 said:

Mark_d said:

It's not ideal that Amazon's usual processes don't work for the return of large items but Amazon haven't done anything wrong.

I would say that charging twice for the order and (so far) failing to collect the surplus item are both doing things wrong...

The OP has 2 TVs at a minimum since early December, who do you think should have paid for the second?

Amazon, given the delay is at their end and they (apparently) didn't have the OP's authority to charge their card twice.

saajan_12

What's the precise timing of these? eg when was the 2nd TV delivered and how long after did you contact them to get it collected? A long delay between these isn't reasonable on the OP's part, as it deprives Amazon of the TV in their stock to sell to other customers over that time and could make any claims they have against their courier harder. Even if the housemate accepting the delivery was understandable, I'd expect they message the OP pretty quickly and the OP reach out to Amazon within days. 

Having said that, Amazon's courier issues eg whether UPS can transport large items isn't really the OP's fault. I'd think its up to Amazon to figure out collection (in the absence of a different agreement when the replacement was sent out). 

DullGreyGuy

user1977 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

user1977 said:

Mark_d said:

It's not ideal that Amazon's usual processes don't work for the return of large items but Amazon haven't done anything wrong.

I would say that charging twice for the order and (so far) failing to collect the surplus item are both doing things wrong...

The OP has 2 TVs at a minimum since early December, who do you think should have paid for the second?

Amazon, given the delay is at their end and they (apparently) didn't have the OP's authority to charge their card twice.

Need to make sure you're never a customer of any of my clients if you think a free TV is reasonable compensation for a delivery being delayed!

Looking at Amazon's returns pages it states you will be charged for the replacement if you fail to return the original by the required date. Undoubtably the OP has agreed for their sales to be bound my the amazon terms and policies. It may have been good for them to have reminded the OP at the point of ordering the replacement but not strictly required. 

GDB2222

At no point has the OP said that he wants to keep the second TV. In fact, he says precisely the opposite! All he wants is for Amazon to collect their TV.  That seems reasonable enough. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

DullGreyGuy said:

The OP has 2 TVs at a minimum since early December, who do you think should have paid for the second? Seems rather generous compensation for a delivery being a few days late.

Right but isn't OP an involuntary bailee here?

If that's correct obligation for the OP is to make the goods available for collection which has been done, Amazon has no right to charge their card for the value of the TV because their agent failed to collect.

Pragmatically OP I would write to Amazon UK's head office, CS are script based and it seems your issue is off script. 

DullGreyGuy

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

DullGreyGuy said:

The OP has 2 TVs at a minimum since early December, who do you think should have paid for the second? Seems rather generous compensation for a delivery being a few days late.

Right but isn't OP an involuntary bailee here?

If that's correct obligation for the OP is to make the goods available for collection which has been done, Amazon has no right to charge their card for the value of the TV because their agent failed to collect.

Pragmatically OP I would write to Amazon UK's head office, CS are script based and it seems your issue is off script. 

The OP states the order was placed in the Black Friday sales (so mid-late November), that it hadn't arrived after 1 week so they ordered a replacement via customers services on the phone which arrived next day. The OP went on holiday, the original was delivered whilst away. Amazon contacted them saying as the original hadn't been returned it would be charged for the replacement so they contacted Amazon for it to be returned, which failed and we are now 8th January. 

We dont have exact dates, certainly when I've had a replacement sent I've been given either 14 or 21 days to return the original to avoid double charging. Potentially it was well beyond this for the OP now. It's unclear how long they sat on having the original at home given it was the talk of being charged which they say triggered them to try and deal with the return rather than the delivery. 

I wouldn't say they are an involuntary Bailee, they ordered 2 TVs and received 2 TVs, the second was ordered because of the delay of the first and as such Amazon gave them 14-21 days credit to allow them to return the first before it was charged. Sure the need to order the second was driven by the delay in delivery but the free credit is more than a reasonable response to a delayed delivery; most would have told the OP to pay for the 2nd one up front and deal with a refund on return of the first. 

GDB2222

DullGreyGuy said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

DullGreyGuy said:

The OP has 2 TVs at a minimum since early December, who do you think should have paid for the second? Seems rather generous compensation for a delivery being a few days late.

Right but isn't OP an involuntary bailee here?

If that's correct obligation for the OP is to make the goods available for collection which has been done, Amazon has no right to charge their card for the value of the TV because their agent failed to collect.

Pragmatically OP I would write to Amazon UK's head office, CS are script based and it seems your issue is off script. 

The OP states the order was placed in the Black Friday sales (so mid-late November), that it hadn't arrived after 1 week so they ordered a replacement via customers services on the phone which arrived next day. The OP went on holiday, the original was delivered whilst away. Amazon contacted them saying as the original hadn't been returned it would be charged for the replacement so they contacted Amazon for it to be returned, which failed and we are now 8th January. 

We dont have exact dates, certainly when I've had a replacement sent I've been given either 14 or 21 days to return the original to avoid double charging. Potentially it was well beyond this for the OP now. It's unclear how long they sat on having the original at home given it was the talk of being charged which they say triggered them to try and deal with the return rather than the delivery. 

I wouldn't say they are an involuntary Bailee, they ordered 2 TVs and received 2 TVs, the second was ordered because of the delay of the first and as such Amazon gave them 14-21 days credit to allow them to return the first before it was charged. Sure the need to order the second was driven by the delay in delivery but the free credit is more than a reasonable response to a delayed delivery; most would have told the OP to pay for the 2nd one up front and deal with a refund on return of the first. 

Nowhere does the OP say that he placed a second order. So, you start with a false premise.