I can't comment on the merits of this case, nor the local laws. But in the UK, a company is responsible for the actions of it's contractors. Eg.
I buy something and arrange a carrier to ship it to me - I'm responsible
I buy something and the seller arranges the courier - He's responsible.
I've had lost and damaged shipments in the past. They have all got(ten) resolved, but it takes time and good will by all parties. For me it's usually meant paying again for a fresh order, then getting credited later, when the blame is sorted.
I buy something and arrange a carrier to ship it to me - I'm responsible
I buy something and the seller arranges the courier - He's responsible.
I've had lost and damaged shipments in the past. They have all got(ten) resolved, but it takes time and good will by all parties. For me it's usually meant paying again for a fresh order, then getting credited later, when the blame is sorted.
I will not cross ship to certain parts of the globe any more...and with rare exceptions don't accept credit card payments on Paypal after having been stung...even with a signature you can wind up with a charge-back...and there's nothing you can do -- BOHICA.
The UPS driver is the same guy, winter, spring summer and fall so we have no problems. Same with the US Postal Service. We always get's them a little Christmas present.
In Europe I now have to ship everything to Italy "Registered Mail" -- and some of it still gets lost. Registered is a PIA as you have to physically present the package and have it sealed at the Post Office. It can take 2 months for a customer in Italy to receive a registered parcel.
The UPS driver is the same guy, winter, spring summer and fall so we have no problems. Same with the US Postal Service. We always get's them a little Christmas present.
In Europe I now have to ship everything to Italy "Registered Mail" -- and some of it still gets lost. Registered is a PIA as you have to physically present the package and have it sealed at the Post Office. It can take 2 months for a customer in Italy to receive a registered parcel.
Over here, I had to give written permission to a few suppliers to deliver the goods even when I'm absent. I did and it is now my responsibility if they drop the packets somewhere in my front garden. Therefore, I would presume that without the permission it is their responsibility, which seems correct to me.
/Hugo
/Hugo
it's Customer Service 101
Call them back, ask for someone higher up. If they have never had a problem with a given carrier, the cost of customer good will is small and it's a no-brainer, make the customer happy. If they KNOW a given carrier sux, same story, no-brainer. Maybe you got a customer service person who was a no-brainer.
A happy customer tells an average of 2-3 people about their experience and an unhappy one tells an average of 10, according to training I had at a former employer.
I have had a collective rotten experience with the shipper mentioned on outgoing items, some really bad screwups that show corporate policy flaws. Probably about 7 incidents I can remember.
Murray
Call them back, ask for someone higher up. If they have never had a problem with a given carrier, the cost of customer good will is small and it's a no-brainer, make the customer happy. If they KNOW a given carrier sux, same story, no-brainer. Maybe you got a customer service person who was a no-brainer.
A happy customer tells an average of 2-3 people about their experience and an unhappy one tells an average of 10, according to training I had at a former employer.
I have had a collective rotten experience with the shipper mentioned on outgoing items, some really bad screwups that show corporate policy flaws. Probably about 7 incidents I can remember.
Murray
You guys need to learn to live in the real world here. First of all the parts were packed and left the parts supplier so it should be the end of their responsibility unless you had received the parts and some were broken because of faulty packing then I will agree that a claim in valid.
The shipper either lost or some low life lifted the parts....responsibility partly yours and the shipper but not the parts company.
Now why on this earth would you even dare to think that the parts company would care about your puny unimportant order?
Its not going to effect their bottom line. They aren't going to be interested about threats of loosing possible future orders from diyaudio members either.
I believe this was a Canadian company also...so much for the way they do it across the pond ....responsibility and such
I suggest that you contact your local TV station and maybe they will air a story about your missing parts and maybe this will generate enough interest to get you a refund or replacement.
The shipper either lost or some low life lifted the parts....responsibility partly yours and the shipper but not the parts company.
Now why on this earth would you even dare to think that the parts company would care about your puny unimportant order?
Its not going to effect their bottom line. They aren't going to be interested about threats of loosing possible future orders from diyaudio members either.
I believe this was a Canadian company also...so much for the way they do it across the pond ....responsibility and such
I suggest that you contact your local TV station and maybe they will air a story about your missing parts and maybe this will generate enough interest to get you a refund or replacement.
Hi,
In fact, and for what it is worth "the way we do it across the pond" (i.e. in the UK) is not as was suggested earlier, and that was an unfortunate gross over-simplification of the facts.
In any usual proceedings, judgement would be made based on whatever agreement was reached *in this connection* at the point of sale, between the 2 parties concerned.
I didn't consider that it would help athos56 much to know this, so there didn't seem to be much point in starting any further disagreements over this particular matter.
Assuming that the consignee didn't specify anything of his choice, (which might have been a good idea in this case) the findings would normally be based on the seller's published trading Terms & Conditions (unless maybe they offended against 'The Unfair Contracts Terms Act' or similar).
Where I agree entirely with John, though, is in the approach to be adopted when matters like this go wrong, in order to achieve a satisfactory resolution.
Although never with PCX, I have had a few similar 'hiccups' through the years, but they have all been resolved satisfactorily (mostly in the manner which John suggests), and amicably, but this needs a degree of patience, understanding and co-operation.
PCX cannot succesfully argue with the carriers on athos' part, as they don't know the locality, what time, how, exactly where, etc., etc. this event occurred, and if the initial approach to them was to blame them entirely for what occurred, they possibly don't feel inclined to be very co-operative now. It is clear that the carriers have done something which neither athos, nor PCX, would have wanted and this has given rise to the potential for the loss, so an approach to the carriers to resolve this seems sensible under these circumstances. This is apparently what PCX suggested.
At least then if the carriers insist that the parcel was successfully delivered, athos would have the opportunty to argue the details here, and he might well have achieved something. Admittedly, this would have required some time and effort on athos' part, but I am sure that PCX would have co-operated with providing any additional proof from their end. I presume that athos must have a tracking number (or some means of identifying the parcel) to have known that the package was supposedly delivered 2 days earlier, and that should have been adequate to start the ball rolling with the carriers.
From what has been said, it doesn't appear that athos has done this, or is even willing to, so there is a stalemate situation which has now been compounded by maligning PCX publicly.
It really saddens me to have read about this unfortunate incident, but compounding any ill-feelings by starting a thread like this is certainly not the way I would have chosen in a sincere attempt to resolve this matter.
Regards,
In fact, and for what it is worth "the way we do it across the pond" (i.e. in the UK) is not as was suggested earlier, and that was an unfortunate gross over-simplification of the facts.
In any usual proceedings, judgement would be made based on whatever agreement was reached *in this connection* at the point of sale, between the 2 parties concerned.
I didn't consider that it would help athos56 much to know this, so there didn't seem to be much point in starting any further disagreements over this particular matter.
Assuming that the consignee didn't specify anything of his choice, (which might have been a good idea in this case) the findings would normally be based on the seller's published trading Terms & Conditions (unless maybe they offended against 'The Unfair Contracts Terms Act' or similar).
Where I agree entirely with John, though, is in the approach to be adopted when matters like this go wrong, in order to achieve a satisfactory resolution.
Although never with PCX, I have had a few similar 'hiccups' through the years, but they have all been resolved satisfactorily (mostly in the manner which John suggests), and amicably, but this needs a degree of patience, understanding and co-operation.
PCX cannot succesfully argue with the carriers on athos' part, as they don't know the locality, what time, how, exactly where, etc., etc. this event occurred, and if the initial approach to them was to blame them entirely for what occurred, they possibly don't feel inclined to be very co-operative now. It is clear that the carriers have done something which neither athos, nor PCX, would have wanted and this has given rise to the potential for the loss, so an approach to the carriers to resolve this seems sensible under these circumstances. This is apparently what PCX suggested.
At least then if the carriers insist that the parcel was successfully delivered, athos would have the opportunty to argue the details here, and he might well have achieved something. Admittedly, this would have required some time and effort on athos' part, but I am sure that PCX would have co-operated with providing any additional proof from their end. I presume that athos must have a tracking number (or some means of identifying the parcel) to have known that the package was supposedly delivered 2 days earlier, and that should have been adequate to start the ball rolling with the carriers.
From what has been said, it doesn't appear that athos has done this, or is even willing to, so there is a stalemate situation which has now been compounded by maligning PCX publicly.
It really saddens me to have read about this unfortunate incident, but compounding any ill-feelings by starting a thread like this is certainly not the way I would have chosen in a sincere attempt to resolve this matter.
Regards,
There is no need to take a pot shot at me.
I do believe in looking at a problem using rational thinking. Yes, I do have some customer service experience thus the rational outlook on the problem.
While I feel for Athos56 I also feel that this thread should have never happened. Athos should have contacted the shipping carrier to start the ball rolling.
Secondly, the parts supplier should have been contacted to see what their good will is if any. While some of you feel the parts company is at fault as you can tell I don't share the same feeling and this is based on my experiences.
In the last two or three years the company I work for has had missing shipments of parts from major companies and I can assure you that they do not send out a new shipment of parts to replace the missing ones.
There have been a number of claims against the shipping companies that resulted them them paying the tab.
Companies don't care as long as the product goes out the door in good shape. Good will is something that you will see on a TV sitcom.
Burnedfingers,
I didnt mean to offend, I can understand where your coming from, I just dont agree with you. If it were my bussiness Athos56 would get a new shipment, its not worth the bad press and if you look after people they will be loyal.
Ive had customer service training and basically the customer is allways right. I know several successful entrapaneurs who use this philosophy, and will happily take a hit(within reason) to protect their brand.
Im not sure we could ever agree so Im happy to just disagree
I didnt mean to offend, I can understand where your coming from, I just dont agree with you. If it were my bussiness Athos56 would get a new shipment, its not worth the bad press and if you look after people they will be loyal.
Ive had customer service training and basically the customer is allways right. I know several successful entrapaneurs who use this philosophy, and will happily take a hit(within reason) to protect their brand.
Im not sure we could ever agree so Im happy to just disagree
Luke said:Burnedfingers,
I didnt mean to offend, I can understand where your coming from, I just dont agree with you. If it were my bussiness Athos56 would get a new shipment, its not worth the bad press and if you look after people they will be loyal.
Ive had customer service training and basically the customer is allways right. I know several successful entrapaneurs who use this philosophy, and will happily take a hit(within reason) to protect their brand.
Im not sure we could ever agree so Im happy to just disagree
well i don't know how it is done where your at but in the us most of the time i dont work that way i don't know if you have looked at my other posts on this matter but i worked around a year ago for fed ex and believe me i seen what goes on drivers scribble a name in the scanner drop the box and take off now here is where the disagreement comes in when the parts co. ships something to there customers and it is picked up by fed ex ,ups or what have you and is given the tracking # it is out of there hands unless the box is damaged when picked up and noted in the scanner other than that thay cant control what happens to it after that
I had the same problem too not with part connextion though however, in my case, I was very lucky because my neighbor gave me back the package!!! For some reasons, sometimes UPS and Fedex do need signatures from you, and sometimes they don't. They just left the package in front! Sorry to hear about your case. I think you can talk to part connextion. I think it's their responsibility to deal with the carrier.
One of my local suppliers likes to tell the story of arriving home with his wife after a rainy day's shopping to find $15000 in equipment FedEx left on his front porch early that morning. He stepped around the collapsed packaging and called to congratulate them on being the new owners, extending and invite to pick it up any time. It remained on the porch until they did and the manufacturer shipped a new unit by different courier.
I have also had experiences like the one here. I always ship insured and let the buyer understand he is responsible for anything that happens once it leaves my control. I offer to assist only in any disputes. I give them an option of waiving the insurance to reduce their cost.
Simple. I am not Walmart. I can only control the package while in my possesion. They agree to the terms, as I spell it out clearly for them.
I once shipped a pair of speakers to a gentlemen via UPS. Upon arriving, one corner of the box was totally crushed as was one of the speakers. I reluctantly offered him a refund after sending me back the speakers. He refused to send on his dime, and wanted me to fully reimburse him and keep the speakers. We then decided to file a claim with UPS as it was insured. UPS's inspector looked at the box and claimed the standard "it was not packaged correctly" (same manufacturer's box it was sent in). The buyer quickly agreed with UPS thinking he was now entitled to a full refund from me and keep the speakers.
I told him to cram it up his cramhole.
BTW - I have the best luck with USPS.
Simple. I am not Walmart. I can only control the package while in my possesion. They agree to the terms, as I spell it out clearly for them.
I once shipped a pair of speakers to a gentlemen via UPS. Upon arriving, one corner of the box was totally crushed as was one of the speakers. I reluctantly offered him a refund after sending me back the speakers. He refused to send on his dime, and wanted me to fully reimburse him and keep the speakers. We then decided to file a claim with UPS as it was insured. UPS's inspector looked at the box and claimed the standard "it was not packaged correctly" (same manufacturer's box it was sent in). The buyer quickly agreed with UPS thinking he was now entitled to a full refund from me and keep the speakers.
I told him to cram it up his cramhole.
BTW - I have the best luck with USPS.
I've done business for 15 ears with Parts Connexion in it's various forms and found them more than fair over most issues i've run into.
To blame them for you not requesting a signature delivery or having light fingered neighbors isn't their fault nor should they cover the loss just to keep you off the net. How you can try to blame them and think they should cover the loss defys logic and reason ( and good busines sense - then everyone who claimed a left package wasn't delivered would be looking for replacement- a nice gesture but opens the door to abuse. Espcially if it was teflon caps, WBT posts, Silver wire, 300B tubes, Blackgates .........
To blame them for you not requesting a signature delivery or having light fingered neighbors isn't their fault nor should they cover the loss just to keep you off the net. How you can try to blame them and think they should cover the loss defys logic and reason ( and good busines sense - then everyone who claimed a left package wasn't delivered would be looking for replacement- a nice gesture but opens the door to abuse. Espcially if it was teflon caps, WBT posts, Silver wire, 300B tubes, Blackgates .........
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.