Rich Tone Music

Dave_Mc

chris78 said:

I’ve really got no skin in this but to quote them “ If you are looking for something in extremely good condition it is advised to call for a detailed talk through of the item before ordering. If you have any questions about this item or would like to know more about it, please feel free to contact us with any specific questions and a member of our sales staff will get back to you straight away.”

Put a call in or walk away

What is very different is the second buyers experience where they’ve outright lied. That’s not acceptable

It sounds like they did lie to him too, though. They said someone had bought it in the shop (implying they'd tested it out and been happy with it), whereas the unsuspecting person who bought it next bought it online.

Really sorry to hear that happened to you both @RobG3294 and @RaptorCheeses  

StuartMac290

Shit show from a shit shop.

Voxman

I agree you should be refunded the £20.

Did you pay by credit card? If so you can raise a dispute with them under s75 of the consumer credit act. If not you can use the claim for money online service. 

Before so doing you should however complain in writing (email is fine) to Richtone as you'll need to evidence your complaint and their response and that you have given them all reasonable opportunity to consider and address your complaint.  I'd also refer them to this thread.

I'd be very surprised if for the sake of £20 they'd allow this to progress further. But if they won't reimburse the £20 if it was me, I'd take them all the way as a matter of principle. 

Moloch

Voxman said:

I agree you should be refunded the £20.

Did you pay by credit card? If so you can raise a dispute with them under s75 of the consumer credit act. If not you can use the claim for money online service. 

Before so doing you should however complain in writing (email is fine) to Richtone as you'll need to evidence your complaint and their response and that you have given them all reasonable opportunity to consider and address your complaint.  I'd also refer them to this thread.

I'd be very surprised if for the sake of £20 they'd allow this to progress further. But if they won't reimburse the £20 if it was me, I'd take them all the way as a matter of principle. 

I agree with this. All the 'It's only £20' stuff is bullshit. There are principles involved and every time people let these scummy fucks get away with even a part of this kind of fraud, it emboldens them to continue doing it. The harder and more often their bank accounts get hit, the more likely they are to cut this shit out.

guitarjack66

Jonathangus said:

What I dislike about Richer Sounds is their total lack of guitar gear.


  

I read that in stereo.

scrumhalf

The OP should have his £20 refunded.

The shop is a professional seller of guitars and he is entitled to act upon the expert opinion they gave. 

He relied on that opinion, entirely correctly, and made his purchase. It turned out that the shop's opinion was at best misleading and at worst fraudulent.

To his detriment he made a purchase he would not have made had the opinion offered by the shop been truthful.

Consequently he is entitled to be put in the same position as if he had not made the purchase. That includes both the cost of the item and the cost of acquiring it.

Esoterick

It's interesting how a couple of people are defending a shop selling goods in bad faith. Unless they genuinely cannot appraise second hand guitars, in which case they should maybe put up a notice saying "this guitar may need significant work done it, but we have no idea"

Them telling you someone else bought it the next day is really not appropriate from a customer service perspective as you are effectively telling an unhappy customer they are wrong. Aside from the fact what they said sounds like it was completely untrue anyway...

Andertons seem to go the other way with this if anything, I sold a guitar to them in close to mint condition. It's listed as 3/5 condition.

prowla

I think the way distance selling works is that:

• The buyer pays return shipping if they decide they don't like the item or change their mind.
• The seller pays the return shipping if the item arrives damaged, faulty, or not as described.

In this case it looks like the latter applies.

Dr_Necessiter

barnstorm said:

The effort required to provide a half-decent description (assuming you’re actually checking the used gear you’re taking in) is so minimal that I’m baffled so many shops don’t do it. Seems such an own-goal.

Because if the seller provides a description that is wrong it is a misrepresentation and potentially an offence under the trades descriptions act. If the seller provides none, then it is down to "let the buyer beware" as the OP found out and it puts the onus on the buyer to deal with it by either living with it or returning the item.

barnstorm

Dr_Necessiter said:

barnstorm said:

The effort required to provide a half-decent description (assuming you’re actually checking the used gear you’re taking in) is so minimal that I’m baffled so many shops don’t do it. Seems such an own-goal.

Because if the seller provides a description that is wrong it is a misrepresentation and potentially an offence under the trades descriptions act. If the seller provides none, then it is down to "let the buyer beware" as the OP found out and it puts the onus on the buyer to deal with it by either living with it or returning the item.

Sure - and then you have the hassle and expense of dealing with a return; a customer who won’t come back; and very probably a thread like this one that puts off a load more people. Could all so easily be avoided.

chrisj1602

I think even if with vague listings, it would be reasonable for them to highlight anything that could be significant to a buyer, eg. A headstock repair, non-original case, or a guitar having virtually no frets.

If I buy a used guitar, I am open to some playing wear, but I expect it to be fully functional - unless stated otherwise.

aconitethrill

As an irreverent and facetious comment, one minor benefit of this incident is that it's one fewer website for me to browse and drool over...

Feels like the roster of reliable shops is dwindling rapidly... of course, it's impossible to make a list because for every terrible experience like this someone else will have a 'can't recommend them highly enough' story, but still! 

Offset

aconitethrill said:

As an irreverent and facetious comment, one minor benefit of this incident is that it's one fewer website for me to browse and drool over...

Not remotely facetious - I thought exactly the same.

Dr_Necessiter

barnstorm said:

Dr_Necessiter said:

barnstorm said:

The effort required to provide a half-decent description (assuming you’re actually checking the used gear you’re taking in) is so minimal that I’m baffled so many shops don’t do it. Seems such an own-goal.

Because if the seller provides a description that is wrong it is a misrepresentation and potentially an offence under the trades descriptions act. If the seller provides none, then it is down to "let the buyer beware" as the OP found out and it puts the onus on the buyer to deal with it by either living with it or returning the item.

Sure - and then you have the hassle and expense of dealing with a return; a customer who won’t come back; and very probably a thread like this one that puts off a load more people. Could all so easily be avoided.

Indeed, but it’s their business model and they must feel that it works for them - at least until the word gets around and they need to change it. 

Halls66

Sure - and then you have the hassle and expense of dealing with a return; a customer who won’t come back; and very probably a thread like this one that puts off a load more people. Could all so easily be avoided.

Exactly. And if the OP changes the discussion title to 'Rich Tone Music', 3 words, it will match the company name and will appear high enough in google search results to start to really hurt.

prowla

Offset said:

aconitethrill said:

As an irreverent and facetious comment, one minor benefit of this incident is that it's one fewer website for me to browse and drool over...

Not remotely facetious - I thought exactly the same.

I am a customer, though I've only bought parts.

I've recommended them before, but now I think I'll be reluctant to do so.

The seeds of doubt are sown...

Lodious

Having seen the guitar has been returned once, I'd be wanting my 20 quid back on principal as it's obviously not an honest oversight.

RobG3294

Halls66 said:

Sure - and then you have the hassle and expense of dealing with a return; a customer who won’t come back; and very probably a thread like this one that puts off a load more people. Could all so easily be avoided.

Exactly. And if the OP changes the discussion title to 'Rich Tone Music', 3 words, it will match the company name and will appear high enough in google search results to start to really hurt.

Whoops...

RobG3294

About to put a email flavoured rocket up the backsides at Rich Tone HQ. 

Really unsure how to send an email without confrontation (and hence appearing like an A-hole) over a small amount of money when I've had to use such parlance to objectively describe their apathetic and misleading behaviour consistently throughout it, but sadly its accurate.

It's a matter of time before someone is misled by their lack of description on an expensive Guitar, wants to return it, and issues/damage occur in transit back to Rich Tone, to which objectively they have no leg to stand on.

Will update once I have a response.

p90fool

Whilst the twenty quid obviously matters at least on principle, I think the practice of reselling a dud until it ends up being bought by a beginner, by someone who's buying it as a gift or by anyone who doesn't know enough to challenge them is about as shitty as it gets. 

Cynical is an understatement.