Good news; just a shame it had to take so long.
Good news; just a shame it had to take so long.
Last edited by Dave+63; 14th August 2019 at 16:20.
Bravo!
Great to hear you got your money back but after all that it must feel like you've had to earn it back in wages for all the work.
Glad it has been sorted for you. Still a bit stressful.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sounds like it might have been a payday loan then.
Regardless is good that you eventually got your money back and if it’s the seller I think it is, they are well worth avoiding in future.
Can you leave a post in H&V, as it would be good for all to know who this was so they can make an informed decision before dealing with?
As an aside, a very embarrassing show from one individual in this thread.
Last edited by Matt8500; 14th August 2019 at 17:37.
Glad for you. Undeserved worrying.
I hope the vagueness over the seller doesn't result in the 'innocent' being suspected.
Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk
Glad you got this sorted. Must be a relief
Glad this is resolved.
Posting in H&V would enable the seller to give his version of the story and provide an explanation.
All very strange, the ‘payday loan’ theory sounds implausible but possibly the seller was selling the watch to raise funds quickly, when the watch gave problems it put him in a difficult situation if the money had been used. We don’t know the full story, the only way the seller can hope to redeem himself is by giving his side, which I hope he will.
Pleased for you Vortgern - Trust is everything on this forum along with the need for good communication from people we deal with
Good to hear you got your money back, I second/third the notion re H&V post.
Nice gesture to chip in to the Fundraiser.
This will be my second and last post in this thread.
Fas est ab hoste doceri
I would say the exact opposite, it sounds extremely plausible. I don’t think for one second it started out that way, but delaying repaying effectively turned it into an interest free payday loan. Even more so considering that one of his excuses was not having enough money in his account to refund the OP.
I agree though after asking for advice on a thread here and getting 6 pages worth of responses the OP should post in H&V. Firstly to hopefully ensure no one else loses out by not be aware of what’s happened - at least they can make an informed judgement before choosing to deal with the seller. Secondly as you say, to give the seller a right of reply should he choose it.
It’s having 3 different and totally varied excuses that doesn’t stack up and whatever the real reason, we’ll never actually know regardless of what we may be told - there’s a very small outside chance it could have been all 3.
Anyway glad the OP has his money back.
I raise my glass for a toast to you. Well done, and very relaxed management of the situation
Bws
Franco
I’m glad this has resolved as it should, OP. I’ll add my voice to the chorus asking for a full H&V post; aside from those whose posts commend them to such a list, it’s really helpful to know other members whose behaviour fails to measure up. I’ve never had an issue on SC and I don’t want to start now.
Glad you got it sorted and well done for keeping your dignity in the process, despite the totally unnecessary dialogue from another member intended to gloat on the situation. Memories are long on the forum.
Relieved to hear that you get your money back. That sort of misbehaviour can be quite damaging to the general level of confidence most of us here enjoy in the integrity of the TZ-UK marketplace for goods, and services.
Last edited by HappyJack; 14th August 2019 at 23:53.
I'm glad this got sorted Vortgern
It leaves a bad taste regardless and should serve to remind us all how trustworthy people can be until they are not.
Someone who can't be trusted with upwards of 1k should be named.
Sent from my POT-LX1 using Tapatalk
I'm curious to understand the point of this thread as quite clearly the seller comes across as a chancer that many would sooner not deal with, but we still await a name, or did I miss that?
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
Yes it appears you did miss that number 2. He was named early on in this thread. This is what made me livid. The guy was given no time to defend himself. Vortgern did the same to me a few months ago having refused to discuss the matter privately first by phone or email. I have repaired hundreds of watches for members of this forum over the last nine years and can count complaints on one hand. In my case I was accused of returning a cheap Rotary watch not working after I had spent a considerable time getting it right.
I don't want to see anyone lose money on a deal but I still feel that the OP rather rushed to publish the seller, causing a public storm on what used to be a reasonable forum, when the matter may well have been amicably sorted between them.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Basicallly it's an apology without actually apologising. The kind of apology where you realised you've dropped a large one. The kind of apology when you were a little kid and your mum makes you apologise to your little sister for gobbin in to her cornflakes. The kind of apology where you apologise but you don't really want to......you know the one.
Or the kind of apology where you still blame the customer for having the audacity to criticise your work?
That’ll be the one where you charged him double the estimated cost because you had to buy a second movement, having damaged the first by trying to squash it into a space too small for it to fit.
The thread that keeps on giving.
Last edited by oldoakknives; 15th August 2019 at 08:15. Reason: Grummer
The OP clearly doesn’t want to hoist the seller onto the scaffold in H and V. Anyone who wants a private lynching can do so by using the sellers name, the model of watch disclosed earlier in the thread and the search facility to reach the sales post in question. Wouldn’t it be better to move on from this sewer of a thread?
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Please show where in this thread I have named the seller.
I started this thread to ask for advice without naming the seller. I have received advice. I have made a small donation to the fundraiser in appreciation of the help and support I received.
The seller was given time to refund me and has made fair restitution in the given timescale.
As far as I am concerned the matter is now sorted.
I did discuss privately with you by email on 5 May, 7 May and 8 May. You emailed back on 8 May and out of the blue accused me, your paying customer, of having an ‘extremely ungrateful attitude’. Only then did I post here asking for advice. If you hadn’t decided to insult me I would not have posted here.
You then published my customer data online without consent, called me a liar online several times before admitting you had no evidence for making that statement, and left voicemails at my place of work.
On 28 May I donated the £95 which you refunded me to the fundraiser to resolve the matter.
On 10 August you posted that you saw ‘Karma at work’ when my £1375 was not refunded, and you twice again accused me of being a liar without providing any evidence.
On 11 August you posted:
I am really not the one ‘causing a public storm’ here.
Webwatchmaker, I am prepared to put all of this behind us and move on in return for your apology and a donation by you to the fundraiser.
That’ll be the one where you charged him double the estimated cost because you had to buy a second movement, having damaged the first by trying to squash it into a space too small for it to fit.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely. The original movement was obsolete and the replacement advertised as a substitute did not fit. OP was made aware of the extra time and cost involved and agreed to it. I was happy describing the problem I had with the first movement.
'No good deed goes unpunished' is the bottom line here. When the watch was returned it was working.
The point being that I was published without first having any opportunity to resolve the matter.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
OK. I'm happy to put this matter behind us as well and apologise for saying that I hope you lose your money. That was spiteful. Since you claim the watch still does not work I will look at it again to see why, as it is of great sentimental value to you.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
@PH
because he REALLY can't see what a complete dick he has made of himself , and believes it's EVERYBODY else!!!!
Brendan. You're getting members chipping in here now, myself included, that have had NO dealings with you whatsoever in the past. That in itself should be telling you something.
I'm fairly sure most everyone who's read this or the previous posts on the same subject will have made their minds up one way or the other by now.
Continually repeating yourself ad infinitum, insulting the TZ membership, childish ha-ha's about mis-spelt words, spiteful comments that are retracted then reasserted; apologised for then re-stated.. It comes across as vindictive, and possibly a little unstable.
You seem utterly bent on having the last word, with no regard or perception of the consequence. You've gone at pains to tell us you don't need anyone on this forum's business, yet here you are, and you must have spent an inordinate amount of your time over the last few days posting and re-posting what amounts to the exact same comments and accusations.
Anyone who was going to take your side (if that's what you're hoping) will have 100% done so by now. It really is time to end the vendetta and move on, for your own sanity as much as ours.
FFS, Brendan, time to put the spade down now, son.
Double post
Last edited by EJL25; 15th August 2019 at 10:28.