So, did you get a refund from the credit card co? I think that's the main issue.
If you didn't then you have a case, but if you did, then I don't really understand your complaint.

 

You have confirmed you received payments back from cc since 19th Dec. Base on Bob PMs, you ask me either refund you again or sent you a pair of new seats?

 

The payment was taken from Ray but the credit card company holds the funds until the issue is resolved. So to answer your question. No I have not received the funds yet...

 

It doesn't matter how many sides there are to the story, this just sounds bad for Rottec. Just think about it..the customer paid money upfront for an item that is car mod..meaning non-essential item. He wants to upgrade his current seats. Obviously he wants top quality, undamaged items. That is the whole idea of these mods. That is the business that Rottec is in. It is like Tiffany's diamond rings.

So if the seats are damaged on delivery, this has to be handled to the customers entire satisfaction...replace them or cancel transaction with out hesitation. I just don't buy Rottec story one bit. They mis-handled this and then the situation got out control because the customer got upset. This frankly turns me off Rottec. I was considering their front DRLs. I guess long distance customer service is not their forte. And I don't live in Vancouver.

 

I am glad others see my point and think twice before buying.

 

This is an unfortunate situation.

It sounds like Rottec is more than willing at this point to replace or issue a refund, however, the refund route has been eliminated due to the buyer (potentially prematurely) going the credit card route. Once the credit card route is initiated, there is really not much for Rottec to do.

One thing that surely complicates matters is the communication/ language gap. While Ray surely speaks and writes much better English than any of us speak or write his native language, I find his comments somewhat difficult to understand, and this eliminates the possibility of telephone communications which would no doubt have been easier.

If selling in the US is a long-term part of Rottec's strategy, they would be wise to consider sourcing an in-house English speaker to help with customer service communications.
CATTMAN

 

I agree, keep it in private. I am surprised that the mods allowed a flame thread to start, as well as continue this long, but I am not a moderator.

I sold a set of mufflers to a guy that says they were missing parts. I sold two mufflers, and nothing else. I got ugly, and the tread continued till I bit back, then they locked it down. I personally know Ray, and he is a straight shooter, however I haven't purchased anything from him, so cannot comment on his business dealings, positive or negative. I will say, there are three sides to every story, the buyers, the sellers, and somewhere in the middle lies the truth.

My advice to anyone selling privately; photo's, list exactly what you are selling to the best of your knowledge, and be prepared for the possibility to be flamed if someone is not 100% satisfied, regardless if you made it clear to them or not.

 

Personally knowing Ray, his english is fine and easy to understand. I agree that his posts are not as clear as other peoples posts, but I have seen post that are a lot tougher to understand, written by people that speak english as their 1st language.

I think that those not involved in this matter, should reserve judgement before quickly jumping on the anti Rottec band wagon, Ray has had many happy dealings in the past, and I don't know of any business that has had 100% customer satisfaction.

 

is this damage similar to urs? ( i got the pic from https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...stitching.html posted by FLAVAH )

if so, it appears the shipping damage is caused by poor OEM package.. Since it is a known issue, a preventive measure should have been taken by ROTTEC before they shipped it out to customers.

IMO, it should not be re-occuring.

If the seats were damaged, it should be replaced with new & undamaged seats.. or full money back. Period.

if the box was damaged by the shipping company, ROTTEC should file a claim with that Co... that's what shipping insurance is for.

also, 20 % restocking fee on a item that came damaged is absolutely ridiculous.

Ray has been helpful to me in the past, tho, so i'll just chalk this one up as a mis-understanding for now.

 

while trying to remain neutral in this matter some members have been reporting these threads since we typically don't permit them...let me say that Bob (mostly) and myself have been in contact with Ray and this member over the last several weeks trying for a fair resolution to this matter...during that period of time Ray would not compromise on his business policies and the member would not compromise because he wanted new seats not repaired ones....since Bob and I thought a member had been needlessly harmed (he originally paid for new seats and should receive new seats) we told the member he could post this thread about his experience...I have since been scolded by IB and told that I should not take sides no matter who I think is right and should leave these matters to IB...so I will......but, I do think that when we believe a member or sponsor has been taken advantage of or wronged in some way we have an obligation to do what we can to support them...if we don't, who will

 

Well stated GT3 Chuck. You summarized the point I was trying to mke.

 

Only if you want to stay in business. The explanation depends on precisely what you meant by 'that'. If you mean the second seats are free, the replacements, then of course not. But the buyer is not obligated to pay the shipping for replacements if he already paid for the original shipping. Nor is the buyer obligated to return the damaged items at his expense. I've had sellers tell me to toss the item or give it to the Salvation Army because shipping back an item they can't sell is just adding more expense. But the disposition of the item is at your expense. Period. If you want it back to be sure it really was damaged, that's a business policy of your own and the consequential cost is yours as well. You pay for return shipping. In general, the modern business model for consumer sales makes it impractical to tell the buyer to "ship it back" without also providing some very low-nuisance way to accomplish that. Most of my suppliers provide a pre-paid UPS shipping number and my nuisance is limited to calling for a pick-up. When the item needs special care and the supplier cares about the condition after return shipping, then they ask me to take it to a "UPS Store" which is a special UPS storefront operation that includes packing as part of the shipping service. Most of them don't care. "Ship it in the original box if it's convenient, or whatever you have on hand. We just need the damaged goods for our insurance company." You may also, but that's between you and your insurance company, and it's not the buyer's responsibility beyond minimum care to protect your already-damaged items.

If your meaning by 'that' was "He still asks us to ship the new seats without charging him for the second shipment." Then the answer is of course. The buyer pays for one shipment only. Any further shipments are at the seller's expense. If you want back the damaged originals, you pay for the return shipping and the packing if it's not trivial. And the second shipment of replacements for those damaged originals is at your expense as well. Shipping damage happens, but places that get my return business normally ship the replacements by the fastest practical means unless I specifically say "no hurry." In any case, you're still on the hook for timely delivery for the amount the buyer already paid. If you can't deliver in time for the original purpose, then the buyer is not obligated to accept a second delivery attempt.

The buyer pays for one shipment and one product. A seller's failure to deliver on the first attempt -- or the second or third -- is neither the buyer's responsibility nor a nuisance he must tolerate. Delay may in fact cancel the sale. A failure of timely delivery is one way to breach the contract of sale. In other words, if I tell you that your product arrived in damaged condition and you offer to get a replacement here next month (or even next week), it is my option whether I accept that delay.

I know nothing about what happened in this case, but taking your own description of the situation as gospel, then if you began suggesting ways I could get the item repaired that was delivered damaged, then I'd probably see that as being unwilling to deliver "new, undamaged" goods and I'd reverse my credit charge also. Some types of behavior are cause for breaking off business relations. At that point, the choice is the seller's whether the item is to sit on the curb to be picked up with the trash or packed and shipped back at seller's expense. Legally, I have a 'bailment' responsibility, but it is slight and the burden of taking care of your damaged first product is primarily yours. In this case, I'd keep the seats out of the weather until your shipper arrived to claim them, but I'm not a storage company and that shipper needs to arrive in a reasonable period of time or they go out with the trash.

Elaborate case law has built up around these issues over centuries but most of the rules are simple common sense. The buyer cannot gratuitously screw the seller, but in general the rules do favor the buyer. They must. The only way the rest of us can stay in business dealing with customers at a distance is to ensure the rules of commercial practice give buyers confidence.

Gary

 

Not that you asked, but I agree wholeheartedly Chuck.

Gary

 

What Rotttec means is that the customer already got his money back through the CC chargeback. In addition, the customer is still in possession of the defective merchandise. So Rottec is asking rhetorically whether if in addition to this, he should also send the customer a new replacement? (so that the customer has a defective seat AND a replacement seat and has paid $0 net).

Here's what I think. If the items were well-packaged and damaged by the shipper (UPS/Fedex/whatever), then the shipper should pay for the damages via their insurance. If the article was not insured with the shipper, then the seller should take responsibility. If the item was damaged by the shipper because it was poorly packaged, then the seller should pay. I think the buyer is entitled to a new product, not a repaired item, of course. I think it would be reasonable for the buyer to accept a large discount if offered, if he has to accept a repaired item (and go through the hassle).

I'm a little confused why Rottec thinks it's worth getting into a 2 month discussion over. It's not like the customer was intentional screwing them. Not all business transactions make money, and some lose money. Perhaps Rottec would consider shipping products with insurance in the future.

 

Internet Brand... owner here.