This thread is a long read and I have already posted a thread about the actual watch...
https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...-complete-fake
This thread relates to the action I took to try and get a refund for the fake Favre Leuba watch.
15 September
Bought the watch whilst I was away for a few days and received a receipt stating 'Favre Leuba Seachief 60's Auto'. When I returned home on the 17 September I noticed the incorrect spelling on the dial and quickly established via the internet that the watch is a fake. I did not have a phone number or email for the dealer so sent him the following letter by 1st class recorded delivery.
__________________________________________________ ______________________________
18 September - my letter to dealer
Hello ??????,
I bought a Favre Leuba Sea Chief watch from you on Saturday - copy of bill enclosed.
After extensive research I have established that the watch is a fake!
One of the giveaways is the spelling of 'CHIEF' which is appears as 'CHEIF' on the dial.
I am going to return the watch for a refund but do not live near by so I will post it back to you as soon as you confirm that the name and address at the top of this letter is the correct one for the return.
On receipt of the watch will you please refund the £XXX paid by either Paypal or Bank Transfer. Let me know which details you require.
__________________________________________________ ______________________________
19 September - email from dealer.
I've also done some research around this particular watch and it would seem it's not on any replica makers list, I suspect it has had a face freshen up at some point and that was when the script was incorrectly applied. If you could arrange to inspect the movement it will have been supplied by Fabre Leuba. However, after checking the current price of this particular model It was heavily underpriced at £XXX so I would be more than happy to accept a return.
The only caveat would be that I'd need it back with the correct Fabre Leuba movement, I do have a picture of same.
__________________________________________________ ______________________________
21 September - email from dealer
I've just received the watch, thank you.
I've inspected the movement and it's a genuine Favre Leuba 17 Jewel model. In the several years I've sold vintage watches I have never allowed a "replica" to be sold as the genuine article.
Whilst I would happily accept a return if it had turned out to be other than genuine, in this instance this is not the case.
__________________________________________________ ______________________________
21 September - my response
Even if the watch is correct this is not going to be helpful to me.
As a watch enthusiast and collector the fact that the watch has had a redial is a killer for me especially as they could not even spell the model name correctly.
In any case you stated "It was heavily underpriced at £XXX so I would be more than happy to accept a return".
__________________________________________________ ______________________________
21 September - two emails from dealer
email 1
Really appreciate your position on this, how about I get the watch professionally validated as this was the original reason for the return, this won't take long as I'm off Monday/Tuesday. If I'm wrong a full refund will follow immediately, if however it transpires it is 100% genuine, can we have a conversation on the phone as to how we resolve matters to both our satisfaction? I'm really not trying to be difficult but the watch could have sold to some one else in the time you had it although I grant you you did take all steps to return it as soon as you could.
email 2
Whilst I appreciate your views on the watch face retouch, as you purchased the watch from a hard store and this allowed you every opportunity to closely inspect same, the rules of recourse are very different to buying remotely on the usual auction sites. If the watch had subsequently proved to be a replica, we could have had a conversion of course but as it's actually the genuine article (I've since spoken to a friend at Rolex HQ and he said they simply don't fake this brand as the values don't warrant it currently). This therefore seems to be a case of you changing your mind, again if we were dealing with new goods you would be quite at liberty to return the item inside 14 days for a full refund but as its vintage/antique goods this doesn't apply.
I really don't want to be difficult Jack, but as a store owner, we give the customer all the time they require to inspect the goods before electing to purchase, the item is what it purports to be, it is 100% fully functioning and keeping good time, cosmetically it is excellent, the only issue would appear to be the misspelling of the script which was clearly visible and not disguised in any way.
I really want to work with you on this as you seemed a decent enough guy but in the vintage/antique trade, once a customer has viewed an item and decides to buy, then it's there's.
So to reiterate, it's not a fake, the movement, case etc is correct, the dial whilst original has been the subject of a repaint.
__________________________________________________ _________________________
21 September - my response
You have raised a number of points which I am responding to.
A). I have to disagree with your friend at Rolex as there are many threads and pictures on the internet regarding fake Favre Leuba watches and movements. Value is not a barrier to the fakers. We could debate the fake or not issue for ever and would probably not agree but I am sure we both have better things to do.
B). I can assure you that it is not a case of changing my mind. I would take it on the chin if that was the case.
C). Again we both have better things to do than debate the laws regarding returning goods but for the record........
'You have the same rights if you buy second-hand products from an online trader or second-hand dealer as you would buying new, under the Consumer Guarantees Act'.
D). As agreed the watch has had a redial and a poor one at that and yes I had the opportunity to see this but concede that I didn't spot it whilst in the shop.
E). You stated in response to my letter that.....
"It was heavily underpriced at £XXX so I would be more than happy to accept a return".
You now have the watch back with you in the same condition as sold so no issues there.
And you say you want to work with me on this so will you please in the interest of goodwill do a refund.
__________________________________________________ ___________________
Over the next few days more emails were exchanged and finally I said if we could not resolve the matter I would contact Trading standards.
__________________________________________________ ___________________
26 September - email from dealer
Thanks for bearing with me.
I attach an article around buying antiques and s/h goods which you may find of interest.
I operate as a sole trader and also sell for other dealers on consignment.
If my understanding of the situation is correct, this is the same as a private sale, providing you've had sufficient time to inspect the goods on sale.
In light of this, I would comment thus:
You were allowed as much time as you wanted to inspect the watch, I even provided you with a loupe to assist in this.
It isn't a replica or fake, this can be verified. And I have offered to do this and provide supporting documentation. The watch is fit for purpose, genuine and I good condition, you inspected it at time of sale and appeared more than satisfied. If you needed more time to reach a deception and do research you could have asked me to hold it, this I would have done for you.
Legally, I don't have to do anything other than return your watch or allow you to call and collect it, however, I would be prepared to offer the following, without prejudice and in the utmost good faith:
1) a credit note valid for 6 months against any of the items In store.
2) consignment sale of your watch, at 10% over purchase price as a handling/merchant service fee.
3) an exchange against another watch.
I trust you will find the above to be in order and I look forward to hearing from you in due course.
__________________________________________________ _______
At this stage I asked the dealer to return the watch and on receipt I contacted Trading Standards.
Over to you guys - should I name the dealer?
Last edited by Jack Norman; 15th October 2018 at 18:18.
Yes. They don't reckon they have anything to hide and they're happy to supply watches that aren't correct without any qualms (or they would have refunded you without any questions asked). It's only fair you let everyone know who to watch out for while you have a chat with trading standards.
"A man of little significance"
Absolutely yes.
You've laid out the correspondence for everyone to read and to make up their own minds whether they would choose to buy from this dealer, so knowing the dealer's name would be helpful in that regard.
I think its fair to name the dealer, this is after all, just your experience with it. It may just be an honest mistake. There may be other members who have had successful dealings with them and so can go to their defense.
At the end of the day it is up to those reading about your experience to make up their mind on whether they want to deal with the dealer or otherwise!
Trading standards are about as much use as a chocolate teapot, contact your solicitor if you think you have a case
Last edited by Vanguard; 15th October 2018 at 15:28.
I would not have accepted the watch back from him. Now that's happened, yes name and shame.
And this!Originally Posted by Vanguard
He sounds like a total PITA, but he is correct in that he doesn't have to refund you for a purchase made in-store. Assuming that you accept the watch and movement are genuine then you might have grounds on the basis that the dial is a fake/franken/non-original? You might end up fighting a long battle to win a not very satisfactory war.
I feel your pain though - that would have p***ed me right off. Good luck.
I would name him .
This is outrageous name him,he can’t complain when he acts like this.
How much was it? Surely if it was ‘cheap’ it’s not worth the hassle (for either party you’d imagine) but if it were me I’d name him and then eBay it.
You’ve got to take some of the rap for buying it in the first place (meant in the nicest way)
Main question for me (looking in your other thread) is if it is actually genuine. A couple of posts in someone said the movement was the staple of fakes.
He says he will accept the return, now doesn't want to.
I'd name him though don't think he has to accept return as the watch could be considered genuine with a (poorly) refinished dial.
I'd exchange it for another watch or a credit until something comes into stock that you like
To answer a couple of points raised so far.........
1. The watch was not really expensive enough to warrant going to a solicitor.
2. As Kingstepper states "He says he will accept the return, now doesn't want to". This is the bit that I find most annoying.
3. Trading Standards have not even acknowledged my communication.
Jack
I can understand your frustration but please be very careful in what you do.
The dealer has acted as he said he would and he will argue that you had time to inspect the watch before purchase. Therefore it is caveat emptor.
If you name him citing this incident as evidence that he is untrustworthy, you could be opening yourself up for a legal retort.
Most people here will say name him, but it is you that is taking the risk and not them.
If I was in your shoes I would visit a lawyer and take their advice. The first visit is usually free of charge so in a sense you have nothing to lose.
Follow their advice about naming because if he is successful in claiming that you have damaged his reputation / business, the watch will be the least of your worries.
Mick
Thanks Mick,
The reason I posted this was to get a cross section of opinions. I am no longer angry or frustrated and have put the cost of this watch down to experience.
Naming him would not be an act of retaliation but I don't like the idea that he may just continue to act like this unchecked.
Jack
I don't agree with this:
"I operate as a sole trader and also sell for other dealers on consignment.
If my understanding of the situation is correct, this is the same as a private sale, providing you've had sufficient time to inspect the goods on sale."
or this:
"...in the vintage/antique trade, once a customer has viewed an item and decides to buy, then it's there's."
Nor does consumer protection for the purchasers of secondhand goods end with "caveat emptor."
There is an obligation upon those selling in the course of business to describe goods correctly.
There's always the Bear Pit...
H
What you say is true but the risk to the OP is that he could be taken to court for damaging a traders reputation.
He best bet is to spend 30 minutes with a Lawyer and go from there.
He is at no risk nor have any legal liability as long as everything he says is factual and true
His risk, but you know my view on calling a "Humbert & Ellis" a "Humbert & Ellis," when you have the facts and evidence.
I would direct him to this forum, and this thread.
Favre Leuba not known to be faked?? They are one of the most commonly faked and re-dialed watches currently ruining ebay, along with the dreadful Oris and Seiko 5 knock-offs which appear to come from the same source - usually India, occasionally Ukraine.
Seeing these on ebay I am going to presume it wasn't expensive? £50-ish?
Was it bought from ebay? If so just open a return - you don't even need a reason (though clearly in this case you have one!)
I have never seen a more clear cut case of "item not as described" and bigger shyster for trying to weasel his way out of a refund.
Whether he is a bricks and mortar dealer or ebay trader I would name him, shame him and post your experience on every piece of social media he is involved with.
If his "reputation" isn't worth what you paid for this watch, then good luck to him.
100% name him. I personally have little doubt that your watch is a "Mumbai special" and has never been anywhere even close to Switzerland.
The dealer could well argue that given more time and more evidence, he would have made a full refund and issued a full apology.
However if Jack was to name him right now, he could be accused of being unreasonable by not allowing sufficient time to bring the matter to a conclusion.
It is not you taking the risk, so if the Lawyers advice is to name and shame, then fine, but until then, it is best to remain silent.
Strong irony
Yes his risk, and no one elses.
For the sake of a day or two to take legal advice, his is better to delay.
I don't suppose you paid by credit card?
Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.
Going by the title of the thread, having read through this, has it been established that it is a fake watch rather than a dodgy dial restoration?
If it is 100% fake then name, if not dont.
I can't see any issue with naming the dealer. You are simply saying what happened, you are not libelling anyone. If you were making up things about them that were untrue that would be a different thing, but you are simply stating the facts, which happen to show that this dealer is a shifty, argumentative twit.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with him selling a re-dialled watch as such, and it's not the same thing as a fake, so he can argue that that's simply what you bought for an appropriate price. But he should have made it clear that's what it was, and he was obviously happy to keep his mouth shut and let you think the dial was original. If he wasn't aware himself, then the gentlemanly thing to do would be to apologise for the mistake and refund it without all this nonsense. It sounds very much as if, now you've pointed out the misspelling on the dial, he's realised he'll have a hard time getting rid of it again for any price, and anyway he's already spent the money at the dog track.
Yes, let him out. Pitchforks are sharpened and the tar is on a low flame !!
Well, even if the watch was 100% genuine, based on the attitude of the seller and their after sales service, I personally wouldn’t want to buy from a dealer like that so I’d like to know where not to buy from.
Last edited by Motman; 15th October 2018 at 17:02.
Yes,name him. There are no issues if everything is factual and to the point.
agree - name him - may save someone else making same mistake
Name them! You haven’t lied or mis-represented them with a dishonest account of events so there shouldn’t be any reason to worry.
If it saves others from making a mistake then it can only be a good thing.
If he's quibbling about a cheap watch - I seriously doubt he's going to pony up the tens and maybe hundreds of thousands to take a legal action of the sort that various people are hinting at...
Name & shame.
Actually, on second thoughts, the thread title says ‘fake watch’, and a re-dialled watch is not a fake watch, unless you are 100% sure the case and / or movement are fake. If the thread title was, ‘Should I name a dealer who sold me a badly restored watch and is now being a complete d*ck’, that would be a different matter, case closed.
This reminds me, a friend bought a vintage watch in a market which stopped working the very next day. When they refused to take it back, he simply stood there telling everyone browsing not to buy from them and telling the story. The dealer became quite aggressive and stood up threateningly, and my friend suggested he sit back down again before he got a black eye. He sat back down. A battle of wills ensued, with the dealer sitting there sullenly as my friend chased his customers away for the next half hour or so. Finally he got his money back.
‘
As others have said, telling us a series of truths together with the name of the other party involved doesn't constitute damaging his reputation. Keep it factual and name him.
[QUOTE=Itsguy;4912522]Actually, on second thoughts, the thread title says ‘fake watch’, and a re-dialled watch is not a fake watch, unless you are 100% sure the case and / or movement are fake. If the thread title was, ‘Should I name a dealer who sold me a badly restored watch and is now being a complete d*ck’, that would be a different matter, case closed.[\QUOTE]
I agree with this. A fake is very different from a redial, and the watch might be the latter.
I’m keen to know who the dealer is (to avoid in future) but I suggest that you don’t name and shame just yet, until you are sure exactly what it was that he sold to you. If you decide to name the dealer, it may be prudent to start a new thread with a more carefully worded title.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
OK guys a lot varying views as I had expected.
The watch was purchased from a bricks and mortar vintage dealer who had a smallish display of watches for sale together with other vintage items.
I have been convinced from the moment I noticed the redial and did my online research that this watch is a fake. I continue to believe this and started my original thread to give a TZ member the opportunity to say I am wrong. The seller stated he was going to "get the watch professionally validated" but never did.
If I can be convinced me that it is not a fake I will change the thread title as has been suggested.
I have now emailed the dealer with a link to this thread and am happy to add his response if he chooses to reply.
Jack
Jack, you would appear to have been reasonable and also appear to have been treated shabbily. I don't think the dealer's defence of "you had time to inspect it" is, in the circumstances, acceptable. I think it unlikely that most people would spot a tiny spelling mistake as described.
I don't really understand the dealers' belligerent and shifting position but anyway good luck getting it resolved, I would think the odds are stacked in your favour if the push comes to shove.
If I’m reading correctly it’s a forum person to boot.
You need to name and shame.
I have had bad experiences luckily not from the forum!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Edited to add: Having read through your correspondence again I wouldn't bother with trading standards, I'd summarise for a solicitor, establish exactly where you stand with respect to consumer related law and if it's favourable to you, issue a "Letter Before Action". You've been reasonable, tried to resolve it, and you've been given the run around. You can honestly say you've tried to resolve it but are getting nowhere.
If the law is on your side then use it.
(Didn't seem to be able to save my post edit, strange)
I before E, except after C...
Don’t they teach that in school anymore? What is the world coming to?
As far as I am aware the dealer is not on the forum.
This is like 'pulling teeth'.
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
It sounds like this is a guy with a modest bricks & mortar antiques business that includes a few watches, so it's probably unlikely that many other forum members will be shopping at his premises anytime soon--it's not like it's WF we're talking about here. That being said, the way this thread is playing out, it seems the OP is primarily interested in using it as a way to pressure the dealer into refunding. 'Forum spirit' would dictate the OP name the dealer so that all the people who've voiced an opinion of wanting to avoid this fellow can do so. I think there's been only one person (sigh) who's suggested not naming him, so as per the thread title, "Should I name the dealer that sold me a fake watch?", YES, NAME HIM!
The H&V forum would be the appropriate place for all this, although it may not have got as much coverage.
He should be named.
There's hundreds, probably thousands, of these dodgy watches on eBay right now. The most common faked vintage brand is Oris but there are plenty of Fortis, Jaeger, Titoni etc. The vast majority are complete fantasy watches that don't actually resemble any original models. Try searching for an old knackered example of the NOS eBay watch and see how far you get! Basically you're looking for shiny new vintage-style cases with crappily painted dials and the good old FHF/ST 96 movement which has usually been very badly stamped on the bridge.
Also, I'm not really a Favre Leuba expert but I'm pretty sure all models from that era had in-house movements.
I'd see what his responce is to this thread before you name them.
Give them a chance to respond without already having been antagonised by being named on the internet.
Then, if the responce isn't good. Name them.
Every good drama must have it's suspence after all
Ahem. That saying is just so.........ancient.
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Cat...t_after_C_rule
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote