world's biggest shop getting worse at returns, and at the basics

I ordered a fancy monitor on Amazon.  It cost 3298.55 GBP including delivery (for those reading from the future, this is several weeks' average income in a developed country as of 2022).

 

The monitor arrived.  You connect power and video to an external box, called a "One Connect".  This then provides the power and video, via a proprietary cable, which has different proprietary connectors at each end, to the monitor.  Thus, instead of "One Connect", a better name would be "N+2 Connect", where N is the number of different types of cable connector previously in your life.

Instead of being a simple monitor, it is an annoying one running its own computer inside.  It started into a list, with "Hi" at the top, and "Aloha" and things in other languages below.  I selected "Hi" for English.  Music was playing.  Then it drew a strange rectangle across the top of the screen.  Shortly after, it went blank.

I thought I'd try connecting a computer from its HDMI port.  The computer detected the monitor at the right resolution (3840x2160).  But no picture appeared.  I tried each of the 4 HDMI inputs, one at a time.  No picture.  I tried a different cable.  I tried from 3 different computers.  I tried power-cycling everything.

I then wrote this all up in a report to the vendor on Amazon, the vendor's name being PAM-TECH.

 



Amazon vendor PAM-TECH have now tried to fob me off, by referring me to Samsung tech support:

 

 

They say "it's probably related to the configuration that you have not managed to do correctly".  No, it's defective.  There's no picture.  There's no opportunity to engage in any configuration activities.  I have already followed the instructions, such as they are, in the setup guides that came with the monitor.

So I click on leave feedback, and this happens:


It was to a different purchase.  I only noticed after I'd submitted it.  In addition, I was unable to see how to delete a negative feedback from Amazon after submitting it.  So this poor seller now has a negative that they didn't deserve, because Amazon doesn't know how to do basic hyperlinks to the right thing.

I went back to the message, and there is also no reply button.  There is no way to reply.  Amazon UK are starting to seem like a rogue trader at this point.

I clicked on leave feedback again, and feedback came up for another one of my orders again, a different one again.

After removing the plastic protection layer, which has a padded band down the left and right hand sides, I discovered a lot of physical damage.  There was a triangle of discolouration in the top-left corner, and an area of damage, including possibly broken liquid crystals, in the bottom-left corner.  Perhaps the thing had a big impact on its way here.

Regarding PAM TECH's attempt to fob me off to Samsung, this brings up a basic point of UK consumer law, and probably contract law more generally.  My contract is with either PAM TECH or Amazon UK (in my opinion, Amazon's claim to operate a "marketplace" in which the contract is between the buyer and the supposed seller is dubious, because the impression is clearly given that the buyer is dealing with Amazon themselves.  This is in contrast to ebay, where the situation is always clear, and ebay do not do direct sales from themselves at all).  But my contract is not with Samsung.  The retailer is responsible for providing me with a product that's of satisfactory quality, fit for a particular purpose, and so on.  If they fail, it is the retailer's responsibility.  They may not attempt to hand off responsibility to one of their suppliers, including the manufacturer of the product.

Next, I requested a return via Amazon's interface, and I guess Amazon forces the so-called "seller"'s hand here.  When I went to get the postage label, there were the following issues:

  • what got printed was not what was on the screen, and seemed to contain less information
  • it seemed to be just an address label, and not a prepaid postage label.  I am apparently expected to pay the return postage
  • various terms contrary to UK consumer law were displayed.  It is an offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 to make any attempt to mislead a consumer about their rights

I will have to document more fully in due course the discrepancies for the so-called "postage label", and the specific attempts to mislead me about my rights.

I've recorded a video for the retailer, demonstrating lack of picture, as well as the physical damage, at [0].

[0] <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpff_plaNg8>.

I tried to raise the issue with Amazon.  As a typical large corporation, they make it deliberately difficult to contact them, unless it's a preset action that they approve of via their web site.  I was unable to find a function to write them a message on the web site.  I chose a callback.  This arrived straight away, but was an automated system.  It got me to confirm that my call was about the Odyssey Ark, and it then automatically said something like "we're sorry but we can't refund the money until the seller receives the returned goods", and that was that.








Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

the persistent idiocy of "privileged ports" on Unix

TCP and UDP have ports.  These are 16 bit; there are 65535 or so per IP address. These protocols don't care to differentiate between the ports.  Elsewhere, IANA presumes to operate a process to allocate "well-known" ports in the range 1-1023, "registered ports" in the range 1024-49151, and to reserve the remainder, 49152–65535, for "ephemeral" ports.  The caller end has to have a port, which is how replies get back within the virtual connection, and these are conventionally picked from the ephemeral range by the OS's networking stack. The whole idea of ports is ridiculous, because it allows ISPs to arse around presuming to decide which services they will "not allow".  Anything that allows IPSs to do anything other than shift opaque packets will allow ISPs to meddle and break things, and due to the Law of Meddling, if they can, they will.  I am currently working around an issue with Claro, a pretend ISP, blocking port 5060, allocated to SI...
Read more

JT "their my" nonsense

Image
Another example of the "your my" nonsense produced by corporations calling customers' things "my" things. Let's mark this for pronouns: In total, I've identified 12 correct pronouns, 6 incorrect pronouns, given from the wrong perspective, and one direct clash between a correct one and an incorrect one, in the form of "their my JT account".  This should be a dead giveaway that something is wrong. As well, observe this perfunctory, bossy, yet passive tone that they take.  "all customers are required" to such and such.  Let's try this.  "All telecoms providers are required to provide ipv6 service".  Oh, that didn't work.  "All entities are required to desist from calling other entities' things 'my'".  Oh, that didn't work either. This is the real pronoun crisis.
Read more

easyjet: repeated entry of information they already have

Image
As I observed earlier today, airline web sites are obsessed with making people re-enter information, apparently arbitrarily. The following seems to be required for Easyjet, for an "existing" customer relationship, every time: country of residence selected from big list, involving skidding around on the screen that makes the victim feel sick should be remembered. If it has to be changed, should be type-and-choose victim is taunted with the text "tell us about you", when they thought they had logged in form with the following on one page: business / leisure title, first name, last name, age there is a button to "copy from contact details", but this doesn't do the "age" field.  Since they have my date of birth, they are of course able to calculate my age.  As well, the only values for this field are "18+", "17", or "16".  Is it a deliberate decision, to not fill this field based on the customer data, and to make the...
Read more