Reply With QuoteIf you are happy with the watch and timekeeping is consistent why not get a trusted independent to regulate it for you?
Shouldn't cost you more than c.£50.
Gents,
I recently bought an AP (not from this forum) which the seller assured me was 5-10 seconds out per day - apparently almost "spot on" with no significant issues. However, I have been timing the watch since collecting it and much to my dismay it is slow by around 2 minutes per day.
I don't believe the seller set out to mislead me; he said he didn't wear it much and the condition is testament to that. My feeling is that he was lazy, didn't bother timing it like I asked and assumed it was fine. However I'm quite frustrated by this as an in-house service by AP will be very expensive indeed, and quite unnecessary as otherwise the watch is beautiful - no refurbishing etc. needed so I won't really be getting full "value" from a service.
I was thinking of sending the seller a message and asking him for his suggestions as to how to resolve this.
Just wondered if any of you have encountered this sort of issue before (as a buyer or seller) and if so what sort of approach might yield the best results, or what kind of compromise would be reasonable.
Grateful as always for your collective wisdom!
Dan
If you are happy with the watch and timekeeping is consistent why not get a trusted independent to regulate it for you?
Shouldn't cost you more than c.£50.
The main question: are you happy with this watch? Since it is bothering you already i would ask seller to cover servicing. Clearly the information provided by him was inaccurate and 2 minutes per day is too much to forget about.
If he does not want to cover, condition was reflected well in the price and you want to keep it then send yourself.
From my experience, i wouldnt be happy with buying expensive item that i have to part with straight after due to need for a service.
A watch two minutes out would not be something I would accept, but what do you want us to advise - obviously you should speak to the seller.
Private or trade?
If online, DST regulations mean you can seek a refund. Credit card payment etc...
Help us out...
That would be my lack of knowledge! Didn't occur to me (though it is rather obvious thinking about it!) that a consistent time loss could be simply corrected. I saw significant time loss and presumed it was a proper issue. I'll try that - thanks!Originally Posted by JeremyO
Apologies if I wasn't clear! I'm certainly going to speak to him - I was wondering more what would be a reasonable request/demand to make, i.e. asking him to pay for a service, an independent service, splitting the cost, paying in full, etc.
Cash deal with a private seller I'm afraid, so that's not an option, although he seems straightforward enough so I shouldn't expect I'd have to resort to that anyway.
How do you know it's not a 'proper' issue? It could still require a full service. How old is it?
Personally, I'd be asking for a contribution towards a service or sending it back for a full refund – not as described, etc.
Over the moon with the watch itself, barring the timing issue! I'd therefore rather resolve this amicably rather than go for a full refund etc.
- - - Updated - - -
It's from around 2001, and it had a very comprehensive $2500 service in 2011 by AP. The condition is still very very clean so clearly hasn't been worn much since then. I've no idea whether it is serious or not, but I'd hope that the service would have caught any serious issues.
Honestly - I’d seek a refund.
That is easier said than done, so would call seller and advise of problem and you are going to seek a quote from a watchmaker, but I certainly wouldn’t settle for the cost of regulation, as it could be something more sinister. All this takes far too long IMHO.
Thinking about it, I’d go for option 1!
Agree on a suitable inspection and/or service & repair facility and try to get the vendor to go halves on the bill.
This is a private sale, so distance selling regulations don't apply.
Going down that route would only complicate matters anyway. The buyer is not looking to return the watch because he's changed his mind.
This is a nice simple case of misrepresentation and breach of contract.
What you need to do first of all is make it clear you are not accepting the goods. Point out the misrepresentation, and assert that you are entitled to a full refund (including shipping costs). If the seller wants to come to some other agreement, such as partial refund, and you are happy with that, that's fine, but your starting point should be to make it clear you are entitled to all your money back anyway.
Obviously document the poor timekeeping, and save all correspondence from the seller where the poor timekeeping was misrepresented.
Even so, I'd still assert your right to a full refund. Even if that's not what you want, it should be the starting point for your negotiation with the seller. The point being you might not want to return the watch for a full refund, but the seller wants that even less, so it's well worth pointing out you're prepared to go down that route if they won't pay the cost of a full service.
So not caveat emptor then? In the case of a private seller not being interested in helping resolve the situation, I'd have thought the buyer wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
side-note: People might be using it as short-hand for the same thing but it's worth noting the distance selling regulations were replaced in 2014 by the consumer contract regulations.
Caveat emptor no longer applies in consumer law in the uk as it relates to private individuals purchasing goods from either businesses or private sellers.
Under the consumer rights act 2015 the buyer has a minimum statutory period of 30 days to reject goods which do not conform to the contract. If goods are clearly not as described they do not conform to the contract. The buyer is entitled to a full refund in such cases, private seller or no.
Have you actually been wearing the watch during that time? My experience has been that it sometimes takes a few days wearing a watch before it operates at peak accuracy. My simplistic thought is that it may take a while for the lubricants to do their thing properly, though there'll probably be somebody along with a more technical explanation (or refutation).
That would be my course of action. It's also what I do first on the rare occasion that I have problems with eBay purchases. It's surprising how often a simple "There is a problem - what do you suggest?" type email will elicit a satisfactory response, without any need to make threats or mentioning legal action. Of course, if you don't receive a satisfactory response from the seller, then you can always take things to the next level.
Of course, the above is only enforceable in court, and you probably both want to avoid the hassle of that, so the key is to firmly state your case, then come to some agreement.
The only point I'm making is that you should not worsen your negotiating position by asking nicely for the seller to chuck you a few quid to get it regulated.
Id speak to the seller first about covering/contributing to service costs if youre otherwise happy.
Depending on the outcome of that then theres full refund or sucking it up.. that seems to be your only option and a decision nobody else can make for you im afraid.
I bought a watch timing machine, specifically to validate the performance of pieces that I buy, and to give confidence to a potential buyer when I eventually flip a watch.
This will give you independent evidence of the timing stats in several positions, and cannot be disputed by the seller.
I work in London for a couple of days each week, and I am happy to loan you the timing machine if you want to collect and return to Holborn area.
Let me know by PM.
If you only recently received it, it could take a while to settle down. I know a few watches I bought on SC were out by as much as 10s per day, which over a period of a few weeks regulated to 2 or 3.
It could have been just lucky or it could have been coincidental but that was my experience.
2 minutes is too much out. If it persists when worn, I would send it back.
Sounds like it might be magnetised. If that is the car it is a simple fix for your local watchman.
Disagree. Ideally, the watch will just need regulating, but 2 mins/day is a lot and it's likely to need more than simple regulation.
My advice is to check it carefully over a couple of days, ensuring it's fully wound initially, and note exactly what it's doing. It's likely the watch will need servicing in my opinion, and I`d be having a serious chat with the seller. He's claimed it keeps time to within a few seconds/day and the OP's bought it on the basis that this statement is correct.
Ideally, get it on a timegrapher and see what it's really doing.
Paul
Thanks for clarifying, I wasn't aware.
Not likely, otherwise it'd be running faster, not slower.
Agreed - keep the seller informed but don't rush into making hard and fast decisions until you time it properly yourself (on & off wrist) and see what the amplitude is like from the timegrapher you've been generously offered the lend of.
Many thanks for the suggestions and thoughts here, and the very kind offer of a regulator, and apologies for the lack of update.
I should also have mentioned that I'm in Singapore, so unfortunately the strong protective buying/selling laws of the UK do not apply here. I'm not quite sure what the situation is over here but am investigating.
I messaged the buyer politely asking for his suggestions as to how to resolve. Disappointingly, I then received an angry phonecall during which he became quite aggressive and (initially) outright refused to be of any help. Bizarrely, his argument for this was that (1) his timing was "just an estimate", (2) watches should be serviced every few years anyway, and (3) being several minutes out is not an issue as expensive watches are jewellery and not for telling the time.
Obviously I was none too happy with this. I tried to be reasonable and pointed out that all I was after was splitting the cost of a service (independent if possible), but he wasn't really having it.
I have since received a text suggesting we meet in person, and we are doing so this evening. Hopefully we'll be able to get somewhere, but if not I'm fully prepared to pursue this down the relevant legal routes. By the latest readings, the watch is currently ~350s per day slow. With a (free) performance report from AP to this effect, and the seller's clear written assurances that there were "no issues" with the watch and it was within "5-10 seconds per day", I feel that I have a very reasonable claim. I'll keep you updated.
Last edited by ddm27; 5th January 2016 at 08:25.
I can only give you an account of my experience as a seller. I sold a Sub to one of our very well respected co-members here last year and was dismayed to hear that the timing was worse than I had found it to be after it being with him for a few days. I immediately offered a full refund, but in the end we agreed that the watch would go to Duncan at Genesis for a look and do whatever was needed, which was ultimately a recalibration only. We shared the cost of this and everything was conducted in an open, honest and gentlemanly way, I hope to the purchasers satisfaction.
Suggest contacting the seller to discuss- I hope he will deal with the problem in a similarly appropriate way; give him the opportunity to do so...
Good luck
Paul
Hadn't seen above when wrote this- fair play to you and good luck with the meeting....
It might be worthwhile bringing a friend with you (or at least meeting in a very public place...)
...or a gun!
Joking aside, if you received the watch through the post there is a good chance it has been knocked about a bit.
Personally I have incidents when I have bought watches from trusted folk that when they reached me in the post have lost or gained a lot more than they left the seller.
Two minutes a day is a lot though and too much for just normal regulation issues.
Cheers,
Neil.
Well, outcome of the meeting is that he is not willing to contribute any amount toward a service, but has offered a full refund, which I feel is a reasonable gesture. I'm going to get a quote for a service as I would rather keep it if it's viable, but good to know the option is now there.
At least the offer of a refund shows he's got a bit of integrity (which may have been lacking in your initial telephone conversation).
I've received one watch that wasn't as mechanically sound as the seller had portrayed, and like your situation opted to have it serviced myself. Even though the watch wasn't super rare it wasn't one that is readily obtainable, and having a service at my cost was less hassle then starting my search all over again.
As an update, the watch has now been serviced by an AP dealer here in Singapore at a cost of $500, and runs beautifully - it's lost 7 seconds over the last 48 hours.
I let the seller know, and said that it was up to him to decide if it would be fair or decent to contribute anything towards it. He's contributing $100, which is better than nothing.
Very happy with the outcome - got a lovely Royal Oak Offshore ticking away on my wrist. I should do a post!
- - - Updated - - -
As an update, the watch has now been serviced by an AP dealer here in Singapore at a cost of $500, and runs beautifully - it's lost 7 seconds over the last 48 hours.
I let the seller know, and said that it was up to him to decide if it would be fair or decent to contribute anything towards it. He's contributing $100, which is better than nothing.
Very happy with the outcome - got a lovely Royal Oak Offshore ticking away on my wrist. I should do a post!
A private sale or not, morally offering 20% of the service cost isn't good enough but hey ho if your happy then that is what counts but this guy sounds like someone I would want to avoid in future if I were you
Seems like it was running fine until it all of sudden needed service (2 min out per day) which meant it needed a service. How much does it cost to service that AP? That might have been the cause for prompting sale. All speculation I suppose but if I received such a watch that was 2 min out (could be a very expensive repair if this happened suddenly) I would return it as not as described/defective and move on.
But he'd previously offered a full refund which the OP declined.
Yep I saw that. However stepping up and supporting the buyer in getting it running as described and contributing fairly to that outcome is the right thing to do, refund or the offer of a substantial contribution to a service is the right thing to do, 20% of the cost to cover something that has clearly been misrepresented to me isn't doing the right thing
I agree with this as the seller would have had to pay 100% of the service cost had the OP taken the offer of a full refund. 20% is fairly derisory IMO.
You've been done up like a kipper, mate. (Actually, done yourself up, since you turned down the refund that was due you.)
Think you've done ok OP. You've now got a freshly serviced watch you seem very happy with for another $400. Seems reasonable for an AP (if USD).
Posting Permissions
