No more posts until there is an outcome from various bodies like Trading Standards . All I was doing is to point out there are options open to the buyers, based on various consumer protections laws. If nothing else, it will answer a few threads if it is legal or not, guess I will find out for sure.
Well good luck with your action, I am glad someone is finally testing the legality of these actions by the dealer, I think you have a decent chance of success.
I don't know where this idea came from, that traders have carte blanche to set any terms they want and if you buy on that basis then you have no redress.
That is not so. You cannot sign your consumer rights away.
If a trader sold on line and stated that, if you bought you understood that distance selling laws did not apply to that item, if he got you to sign in triplicate, one of them being in your own blood, that you agreed to these conditions, do you think he can do now refuse to accept the item back? Well he can't.
Whatever condition he tries to set it has to comply with consumer legislation, he is in breach otherwise and you cannot sign away your legal rights.
I think someone needs to lay a complaint with Trading Standards about a possible breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and quote from Part 1 of Schedule 2 of said Act (which lists probable unfair contract terms) particularly section 20..............
"20. A term which has the object or effect of excluding or hindering the consumer’s right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, in particular by—
(b)unduly restricting the evidence available to the consumer",* (* In this case the warranty card and being able to prove you have legal remedy)
Mitch
I will be watching this with great interest.
I hope the AD comes a complete cropper.
Last edited by 33JS; 12th August 2018 at 11:32.
Good pick up and glad you beat the flippers because in general they are the people moaning about card retention by AD, obviously affects their resale margins when they immediately move it on looking for the profit.
Cannot see any issue with waiting 12months for the card and the argument that if I need to cash it in due to unforeseen circumstances, if you have to sell a watch to bail you out, you maybe should be prioritising rainy day savings rather than wrist flash.
I don’t find it offensive, but the owner’s rule isn’t there to stop me being offended, it’s to stop the unregistered wider public seeing language like that. I was merely trying to be helpful and save you a ban, some people eh? Of course you are free to PM him and voice your disagreement with his policies if you wish.
F.T.F.A.
Out of interest what is the obsession with warranty cards for watches? We don't seem to care with things like TV sets and sofas that cost similar money and certainly not with cars etc so why the fuss? The watch is still under warranty whether you have the card or not
Because someone, somewhere a few years ago probably sold theirs as a ‘full set’ and it took off from there.
There’s two sides to this:
1. We’d all rather own the ‘full set’ I guess as it makes it more complete. That’s probably more of an emotional/sentimental thing. And to hopefully get a few more quid if it’s sold.
2. Reality though is unless you’ve bought it from an AD how do you know eh? Also have you ever seen anyone show you their Rolex, then proceed to open their wallet and say ‘and here’s the warranty card if you want to have a look fella’?
I don’t spend £6k on a TV or a Sofa personally and I’d be suspicious of a two year old car if the Service Book, Handbook etc weren’t present :)
When spending a lot of money on a watch I’d appreciate it coming as a complete set and not having to worry that the AD may misplace my Warranty Card somewhere in the 500 or so others that he’s retained within the past year. It’s part of that premium customer experience that we pay for.
FWIW, there have been a few brand new SS Rolex (116610LN and 116710LN) listed recently on eBay complete with cards - specifically watches sourced from Aurum Group ADs who, as I understood it, started the whole card retention thing. Maybe that's their way of saying that 116610LN and 116710LN aren't that difficult to get hold of. (Doesn't stop the eBay chancers, mind you.)
I'm pretty sure it was DMR who started withholding warranty cards first. As recently as April, Aurum Group did not have this policy in place - it started on 1st May 2018 in their stores.
It's unclear which models it does and doesn't apply to - and even their own staff don't seem too sure. I watched a guy buy a TT Sub in May and they insisted on holding the card for that, which imo is just stupidity. There's no way you can make a profit on a TT Sub purchased at full price in the UK (well, not without a VAT refund anyway).
Never mind, silly question.
Last edited by ChromeJob; 13th August 2018 at 14:55. Reason: Stupid question
Rolex should just stop using warranty cards, there was a point in them 20 years ago, but now everything is electronic, why not just have AD's log into their rolex login and register online, it's not exactly rocket science and stops all this messing about.
(nodding) Yep. This year it’s the warranty card that the AD must retain like Gollum, next year it’s a hang tag, after that it’s the COSC certificate.
Could not give a jot about the Guarantee card, we are protected by the Law of the land. On the other hand, my insurer wants me to prove the watch is Authentic . There lies the issue , thy need a picture with the card next to it!
Only your Official Rolex Retailer can place a guarantee card inside the box that certifies your watch’s authenticity.
Something the clever sausage that came up with policy may not appreciate, content value with all risk above a certain amount, has special terms imposed. Easy to bust a 6 figure content value, if you have a big collection and out side of a big city that has Safe Deposit Boxes.
Where does this leave your bullet-proof legal challenge?
Is it Goldsmiths, that polished palace of insincerity and yo-yo jewellery “sales” commonly staffed by drop-outs from Curry’s training school?
Purchase receipt should satisfy insurer. If not, receipt is deficient or insurer stupid. Please report back on this point.
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 15th August 2018 at 17:20.
'Fight their corner'....really? It's a complete waste of time and effort. The ADs have a commodity in huge demand, they set the conditions. The buyers are effectively supplicants. No amount of ranting on forums makes the slightest difference.
What would make a difference is a fall in demand. Then the power would return to the buyer.
There are no bullet proof cases, just presenting facts, documents and letting it run its course. I have temp coverage on insurance until it is sorted out, one way or another.
I am just wandering if everyone fully appreciates the impact of this policy beyond comments about flipping. Thinking a loud, is there a policy that AD employees also can not buy "professional" watches, in case they re sell ? Any one care to comment?
Yes it was subtle ribbing, all light hearted of course - not my fault that paskinner didn’t get it (always safer not to comment if you don’t understand but hey ho).
Seriously though at the moment the demand outweighs the supply multiple times over and Rolex AD’s can dictate their terms. It won’t always be that way but it is for the foreseeable. I’ve been with various insurers over the years and never had to provide evidence of a warranty card so I’d imagine a receipt will suffice.
Enjoy your watch :-)
Are you enjoying the watch? Just wondering......
There are some simple solutions to some of the problems that you appear to be having but either you are extremely unlucky or are looking for issues to raise. If your insurance company will not insure the watch change your insurers. I have quite a few watches and have never been asked to produce a warranty card or photograph of one for my insurers.
As it happens I was passing the AD where I get most of my watches from today and popped in to pick up two warranty cards for the two SD43's that I bought there. One was well over 12 months ago and I had forgotten all about it. The other was around six months ago. Both given over in a lovely envelope with a smile and a good chat, most of which was about this nonsense and how people that usually want to wear the watch don't have a problem. I have to admit I was gobsmacked to find that (a) nobody had mislaid the cards or lost them in that rather large safe that they are filed in; and (b) lots of the people that are on the lists for watches like this either don't have the funds when the watch actually arrives or the AD that has sourced it cant get a response from them after leaving multiple messages.
Really! Rejected what in writing. If you actually think that any AD or member of staff has to be underhand to sell one of these watches in this climate you need to give your head a serious wobble.
Enjoy the watch... Life is too short
Popped into my AD yesterday and collected this after a long month and half wait...
Didn’t leave with the card but I don’t care either.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Like many others I will be watching this outcome.
Just give them £10k or so and say keep the watch the lot Ill call you if I need to know the time and date!
Disgusting and unnecessary and the sooner people stop dripping on forums and at the AD (who does not have to remove the stickers its just advised by Rolex) the better in my opinion unless someone can give me a good reason why this is happening
RIAC
On insurance, temporary cover, forwarded letter from AD citing that, they withhold the authenticity card on purpose, so I can not prove authenticity.
So, some feedback for every one;
My only remedy from the credit card company is to get me a refund under section 75 consumer credit act.Lets see what happens there.
Trading Standards are investigating, but will not publish their reports to individuals.
The onus of proof is on the consumer to prove that they were not told of this policy, the retailer does not have any obligation to state their sales policy in writing. So in the case, it is the law that is the ass, as I have no way of proving what I was not told.
The information on Rolex website is non-binding on the retailer, as I have no contractual relationship with Rolex, only with the retailer. Advertising standards are looking in to it if indeed there is a breach, probably not ! Rolex have a disclaimer on their website, to this a bust as well !
My only remedy is the small claims court, as by every ones admission, including the AD they have de-valued my purchase, so small claims court here I come.
My recommendation to every one is, if you do not like this policy report it to consumer programs on TV and other media. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006mg74/contact
If any company understands bad publicity it is one that spends hundreds of millions on advertising, i.e. Rolex. If you agree with it shut up and put up :-)
Before any one mentions it, I have black listed Rolex, so no worries. Enjoying my Omega Grey Side.
Will report back after small claims court.
Last edited by W0rrybeads; 22nd August 2018 at 19:43.
Who are your insurers? Are you able to quote anything they have put in writing about this authenticity claim?
Retailer can challenge your attempt to obtain a refund using the credit card provider's shared liability; don't count on that for any different outcome.
If tested properly, the smart AD would respond (and many might agree) that they have not devalued your watch; rather, the timing of supply of a plastic card associated with the watch was agreed to be 12 months later than the time of supply of the watch. Game over.
Media consumer programmes will have no great sympathy or interest.
Rolex probably won't comment but will enjoy publicity proving how much demand there is for their watches.
I believe that you will lose any civil action in this regard. I'd suggest keeping some perspective, but will enjoy reading your updates.
![]()
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 22nd August 2018 at 12:41.
Is this really the sort of 'issue' which occupies your days? Lucky you.
I’d love to have the time to be so upset over so little.