141–150 of 381 posts
>I ordered the Switch on October 16th from Nintendo’s UK online store. I wanted to buy direct primarily to support Nintendo This seems like an odd impulse to me. It isn't like Nintendo is some small mom and pop business or even that they are struggling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a great post, and Nintendo does indeed owe you. But, at this point, I do recommend engaging counsel. As I understand it, truth is not a defense against slander under UK law. Edit: I meant "libel", not "slander". Also, I was wrong about truth not being a defense. It's just that you need to prove the claims.
It is a complete defence, but the burden of proof rests on the defendant.
Under US law, the burden of proof rests on the plaintiff.
I have never, ever dealt with any above mid-sized company that handles customer service and delivery well. There seems to be a set of standardised industry practices that are completely and utterly customer hostile. The moment regular company employees stop dealing with customer issues, delivery, etc., and hands it over to "specialists", it's basically a crap shoot whether you can get any issue resolved at all, becau…
Apple
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read further and you'll see that if they're sent by accident you're obligated to arrange their return at no personal expense.
But that means that they cannot force you to stay home waiting for a courier. He could've asked them for a return label to send it back. Refusing to stay at home for a day because of that is valid as it should constitute a personal expense (no lawyer).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks, I appreciate your comments today as I've been getting a little worried here that the traction this article is getting this morning is going to come back to bite me in the backside. Whether it's Nintendo or a UK-local entity they sub-contract (it's a bit unclear - either way the address is store.nintendo.co.uk and Nintendo-branded), the policies could use some work.
It's a great post, and Nintendo does indeed owe you. But, at this point, I do recommend engaging counsel. As I understand it, truth is not a defense against slander under UK law. Edit: I meant "libel", not "slander". Also, I was wrong about truth not being a defense. It's just that you need to prove the claims.
Some will point out (and some have!) that I could have quite easily saved myself a lot of time, hassle, and lost earnings at this point by just quietly holding on to the extra Switch and saying nothing to Nintendo about it. It certainly would have saved me a lot of stress, but it was morally not something I’d ever consider. That's his mistake right there. He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for…
> That's his mistake right there. He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for them......If you truly have a guilty conscience, then just throw the extra package out, because it is abandoned property. Do you really want to live in a world where everyone does this? Imagine you are a small start-up where every penny counts and make the odd mistake here and there and people take advantage of that, dest…
Some will point out (and some have!) that I could have quite easily saved myself a lot of time, hassle, and lost earnings at this point by just quietly holding on to the extra Switch and saying nothing to Nintendo about it. It certainly would have saved me a lot of stress, but it was morally not something I’d ever consider. That's his mistake right there. He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for…
> That's his mistake right there. He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for them......If you truly have a guilty conscience, then just throw the extra package out, because it is abandoned property. Do you really want to live in a world where everyone does this? Imagine you are a small start-up where every penny counts and make the odd mistake here and there and people take advantage of that, dest…
There's no obligation to be nice to the machine, it can't recognise it, and it won't be grateful to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite often the reason for receiving two items is that the first got stuck somewhere in transit, the customer complained so the company sent out a second item, and eventually both turn up. It seems reasonable under those circumstances for the company to ask for the second one back (politely of course, threatening the customer is never right).
I disagree. The company is now imposing on you for something that is absolutely not your responsibility. They have money set aside for losses like this. It sounds like Nintendo should ask the courier company to fix things, not you. In a way, he is also a victim of the courier company's bad service, except that the mistake was in his favor. And also, think about what that implies. How far are you supposed to go if the…
I was surprised by this - I thought it would constitute unsolicited goods but it does not due to the extra item having been sent as remedy for a broken item. If someone sends you something out of the blue and then demands payment it is unsolicited goods and you have the right to keep it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in France and in the working hours of the delivery guys I'm at work in a different city. I ordered a number of things to my personal address, and the story is typically like: "package delivered" with some strange message from the delivery guy where to find it, or no message at all. Out of the last 3 things I ordered, 2 didn't get to me (I made a claim on Amazon and they reimbursed me, no questions asked - at l…
Believe me, even if you are home 100% of the time, packages will still not get delivered because "nobody was home". IIRC DHL is especially prone to this. I think the drivers try to catch up time or whatever.
When you call dhl you only get lame exuses. "Maybe you doorbell isn't working?" Sure, DHL, sure.