Jewellery loss by company

[Stuartstu03]

This is a bit of a long post but just to give the background on the issue. We purchased an engagement ring from a well known jewellery chain and later had to take it back to be resized by them as it was too big, this was carried with no issue and returned to us however a few months later a friend who works for a jewellers had a look at the ring and commented that it had no hallmark and this was illegal so we returned to the jeweller and were told the ring would have to be sent off to have the hallmark applied and agreed.

A couple of weeks later we were sent an email by the jeweller to tell us the parcel had gone missing by the courier whom it had been sent with (or stolen as we believe) and they were going to make us a new ring however we were very upset by this as this was not the original ring which was used for our proposal and they had lost our property. They have now made us a replacement and offered us £150 in compensation however we do not feel this is nearly enough as they will claim the courier and also business insurance for the loss of this package which will be much more than £150 and I would like to get some advice as to where we stand on this matter and what sort of compensation should be reasonable to offer.

The jeweller is also trying to make the point that the courier lost the package and not them but we are trying to nake the point that if they had not missed the hallmark on thr ring when it was being resized then the ring would not have been with them in the first place.

[atticus]

You are getting a replacement ring, presumably same spec and value as your original. I doubt a court will award significantly more than £150 for the distress.

[echat11]

How did you pay for the ring?

When did you buy the ring?

[Stuartstu03]

The original ring was paid for by credit card over 1 year ago now. Our main issue was that if it had not been for the error of the company then this ring should not have been with them in the first place to go missing or be stolen which we are still unclear on.

[echat11]

The original ring was paid for by credit card over 1 year ago now. Our main issue was that if it had not been for the error of the company then this ring should not have been with them in the first place to go missing or be stolen which we are still unclear on.

Contact your card provider, make a Section 75 claim. I'm not sure what further compensation you are seeking, but put your case to the card provider, they will ask you.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/co...edit-provider/

[atticus]

There is no s75 claim. Please think clearly: what would the s75 claim be for?

The ring that was purchased with the credit card was supplied. That contract has been completed: there is no breach of that contract by the supplier for which the card company might be jointly liable.

If I am wrong in that the hallmark is a contractual requirement, then that breach has been remedied by the provision of a replacement with hallmark.

As to the later loss of the original ring, a few months later, well the lost ring has been replaced. The only question is as to the adequacy of the additional £150 that has been offered. I have given my view on that.

[echat11]

There is no s75 claim. Please think clearly: what would the s75 claim be for?

The ring that was purchased with the credit card was supplied. That contract has been completed: there is no breach of that contract by the supplier for which the card company might be jointly liable.

If I am wrong in that the hallmark is a contractual requirement, then that breach has been remedied by the provision of a replacement with hallmark.

As to the later loss of the original ring, a few months later, well the lost ring has been replaced. The only question is as to the adequacy of the additional £150 that has been offered. I have given my view on that.

The card provider may take the same view as you.

It is for the OP to be able to justify the compensation he / she seeks, as they feel the compensation is inadequate.

[atticus]

My advice to the OP would be not to make a s75 claim about this. It will damage his credibility should he ever need to make one on proper grounds.

[echat11]

My advice to the OP would be not to make a s75 claim about this. It will damage his credibility should he ever need to make one on proper grounds.

All Section 75's 'unfortunately' have that effect.

I can't think of a single card provider who is happy to process a Section 75 claim.

That's why Section 75 is not well known.

[Manxman]

All Section 75's 'unfortunately' have that effect.

I can't think of a single card provider who is happy to process a Section 75 claim.

That's why Section 75 is not well known.

There can be no s75 claim against a credit provider unless the consumer first has a claim against the retailer.

What are you suggesting would be the claim here against the retailer?

The OP paid for a ring and has a ring. Where is the breach?

The resizing was organised several months after the purchase was concluded and is an entirely separate transaction from the original purchase, and the debtor-creditor-supplier chain no longer exists.

Regarding the OP's desire for "compensation" of £150, compensation for what? Even if the OP did have a valid claim, s75 doesn't provide for claims of sentimental value or hurt feelings.

[echat11]

There can be no s75 claim against a credit provider unless the consumer first has a claim against the retailer.

What are you suggesting would be the claim here against the retailer?

The OP paid for a ring and has a ring. Where is the breach?

The resizing was organised several months after the purchase was concluded and is an entirely separate transaction from the original purchase, and the debtor-creditor-supplier chain no longer exists.

Regarding the OP's desire for "compensation" of £150, compensation for what? Even if the OP did have a valid claim, s75 doesn't provide for claims of sentimental value or hurt feelings.

Section 75 allows for a consumer to claim 'consequential losses'.

The OP isn't happy, say he gives his reasons to his Credit Provider for wanting more compensation,
they say exactly what you've said above. He's had a final response / deadlock letter from the Credit
Provider, he still isn't happy, so makes a complaint to the FOS. What they say is the following:

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org....-inconvenience

[atticus]

Consequential losses can only arise from a breach of contract. That is a necessary first hurdle to clear. No breach, no loss, no consequential loss, no s75 claim.