Tweet
In a nutshell my son contacted Mazuma about selling his mobile phone - a price was agreed (I think £110), a padded addressed envelope received and the phone posted off.
A few days later an email received saying there was a problem with the phone - (wifi not working) - and that they were only prepared to pay the non-working value (£45).
We thought this was rubbish and that they were trying it on and so we clicked on the revised offer REJECT link on the email, and thought no more of it. But no phone.
About 10 days later, we received a notification by email that the £45 had been paid by FPS bank transfer payment.
As it was out of hours by then we filled in a web enquiry form on the Mazuma website (there was no valid email reply on the notification) stating that we had rejected the revised offer and that we wanted the phone back, and requesting details as to how to return the £45.
Three emails later and a higher up Customer Services person responded to say the system was automatic if no response had been received. No record of a 'Reject revised offer' response had been received although they tried to phone my son unsuccessfully (apparently he provided an incorrect phone number - he doesn't remember supplying any phone number only his email address) - it was his responsibility to make sure that correct contact information was supplied - so in the circumstances sorry but nothing else they can do. (It seems they are totally ignoring that previous contact had been successful via email...)
So as far as they are concerned it seems that's that.
This is totally unsatisfactory - and I would like to take this further - but I'm unsure what tack to take. Does arms length/initially online/ then postal phone recycling like this have any protections for when things go wrong. Looking at Mazuma's small print it seems that the whole contract is weighted heavily toward the company - for example if I've read it correctly title to the phone passes to Mazuma as soon as you post it to them in their padded envelope.
I'm assuming that by now the phone itself is probably irrecoverable anyway but once again grateful for any thoughts on this.
Thanks
Andy
A few days later an email received saying there was a problem with the phone - (wifi not working) - and that they were only prepared to pay the non-working value (£45).
We thought this was rubbish and that they were trying it on and so we clicked on the revised offer REJECT link on the email, and thought no more of it. But no phone.
About 10 days later, we received a notification by email that the £45 had been paid by FPS bank transfer payment.
As it was out of hours by then we filled in a web enquiry form on the Mazuma website (there was no valid email reply on the notification) stating that we had rejected the revised offer and that we wanted the phone back, and requesting details as to how to return the £45.
Three emails later and a higher up Customer Services person responded to say the system was automatic if no response had been received. No record of a 'Reject revised offer' response had been received although they tried to phone my son unsuccessfully (apparently he provided an incorrect phone number - he doesn't remember supplying any phone number only his email address) - it was his responsibility to make sure that correct contact information was supplied - so in the circumstances sorry but nothing else they can do. (It seems they are totally ignoring that previous contact had been successful via email...)
So as far as they are concerned it seems that's that.
This is totally unsatisfactory - and I would like to take this further - but I'm unsure what tack to take. Does arms length/initially online/ then postal phone recycling like this have any protections for when things go wrong. Looking at Mazuma's small print it seems that the whole contract is weighted heavily toward the company - for example if I've read it correctly title to the phone passes to Mazuma as soon as you post it to them in their padded envelope.
I'm assuming that by now the phone itself is probably irrecoverable anyway but once again grateful for any thoughts on this.
Thanks
Andy
Comment