Amazon made a mistake (was: Screwed by amazon!)
- Thread starter tsobo
- Start date
- Status
a point masterfully ignored by all those more knowledgable on your finances than you are or so they think
See, if you had come in here with that story in the OP, you would have undoubtedly had the support of prettymuch every reader on here.
But in your OP you provided only part of the information, it was not remotely surprising to me that people would (and did) come to the assumed conclusion I demonstrated.
This whole thing has blown up into a 4+ page thread simply because you came in half-cocked, going off at amazon and provided only just enough information for an incorrect (but logical) assumption to be made.
The sound financial advice of stop buying things you can't really afford, it's a pretty simple rule which is peddled by one of the most visited money budgeting website in the UK - MSE (Martin Lewis was once voted the most trusted man in Britain, too)
You seem to struggle to comprehend that it's impossible to know absolutely nothing about the OPs finances, seeing as you know, he actually shared insights that essentially can be summarised as: Not having £600 in my bank has made me unable to pay my bills. Again, if he has better finances overall, then he would be able to shift funds around and it wouldn't even be an issue. Saying he can't afford the bills means he has no other easy accessible cash.
it's typical. knowitalls who make a judgement on someone without all the facts.
Nobody is claiming to have knowledge of his finances, so sit down and be quiet with your pathetic little strawman arguments, we're not interested in that kind of ****-waving, grow up.
The information he provided made it look plainly obvious that he ordered something he could not afford and as such, people rightly pointed this out, as it was a logical conclusion from the limited (as now shown - incomplete) information.
it's only sound financial advice if you know all the details. you don't.
no, the only person struggling here is you. you have had a snapshot of the op's finances. that is not enough to make any of the claims you are making. there are plenty of reasons why moving his savings/cash around isn't possible while they are still financially responsible.
No you shouldn't have to. However - if you have the ability to temporarily cover the shortfall from your savings, surely it's easier to do this, rather than risk the potential for further human error, by trying to accelerate the refund of the incorrectly taken money?
Whilst they've made a mistake, they've already done what they can to resolve it - hopefully you'll see the refund in 3 days (or at worst the 4-7 they've suggested)
His OP provided all the information necessary for people to help with the question he actually asked though. "what do I do? Would the bank be able to stop the payment as it still shows as pending?"
It's not his fault people were keener to try and find a way to blame him for the situation and paint him as the financially irresponsible idiot rather than simply say 'You need to phone your bank and talk to them, they can tell you your options', that's the only reason this thread has blown up, no fault of the OP.
It wasn't necessary for anyone here to come to any conclusion about whether the OP could afford the phone or not, it doesn't change the answers to his question.
Fixed for you...
Funny how when a person only supplies half the story, people come to logical (but incorrect) conclusions.
You're very naive.
The only reason why he wouldn't want to use savings is if they're in a long term savings account that charges a penalty for removal. Even if that is true, putting all your money in such an account and not leaving any for quick access is a bad idea.
You would absolutely use quick access savings on a temporary basis to get your account out of the red because a) there's no charge and b) the interest lost on such a small amount, across such a small time frame of 4-7 days, in a market where interest rates on quick access accounts is ~1%, wouldn't even add up to pennies.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
That's that cleared up then *nods*
Devliman said:
Aaah it's the OPs fault you jumped to conclusions. Couldnt possibly be yours could it?
You didnt do basic math though, did you? basic math would have told you that you didn't have enough information to answer that particular question. You make assumption, you risk getting it wrong. Funnily enough, that's what I've been teaching my 9 year old this week when working through some of his maths schoolwork. He seems to understand that better than some people in this thread.
Last edited:
huh?
you're grasping now simply to defend your position. you don't need to. you've made your position clear, rightly or wrongly. you don't need to defend it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
They've done the bare minimum, which is to say they've followed their own guidelines. if it was an ordinary refund that would be absolutely fine, but it's not. Amazon certainly can do more and should do more in this case.
I'm not grasping at all, it's just common sense. The OP has since mentioned that Amazon's mistake has cost him and has also stated "Why should I use my savings"?
Well if you had easy access savings, or another account with no penalty for accessing, such as another current account, why wouldn't you use that money to avoid paying costs for going into the red? Again, losing out on interest for 4 to 7 days would equate to pennies.
I question why you wouldn't use your savings as it would cost you less than the interest rate on an unarranged overdraft.
Do you think cutting your nose off to spite your face (i.e. not using your savings out of some misguided principle, even when it would save you a higher interest payment) is a good idea?
Or perhaps, these savings don't actually exist? Which is why the OP was so triggered in the first place.
Hi many thanks. As a matter of fact, I have just had a call from amazon senior management. They have had a look and the decision is, they had no reason to have taken that money, at all. They're going to send me an email (I will copy it on here), we've agreed they're going to return my money but it could take 5 to 7 days as it depends with my bank.
On a more positive note, I have been offered £50 for my troubles, a small gesture but quiet deserved considering some of the posts I have read on here. I would like to thank the many who have seen reason, and have understood exactly what I was saying. But to those who tried to lecture me, on financial management and blame me for this, its been a shocking experience.
My initial post was very clear as to what had happened and the advise I needed but the clever chaps came in and it became a moral lecture about why I spent money I don't have, seriously. And some of the people attacking are actually mods!. Well I suppose its freedom of speech but please look at your moral compasses before you start lecturing about finances, to someone who has not requested financial advise. If this was an exam, most of you would have failed as you responded without reading the scenario!
From amazon :
Hello......
This is A.. from Amazon Management Team.
We’re sorry for any inconvenience caused by this.
As the charge of £599.00 has already been processed, it’s not possible to cancel it at this time. To resolve this issue for you, I've requested a full refund of the charge. I've also requested a additional £50.00 to cover the interest. This refund can be completed by us with in this day but please allow your bank between 5-7 business days to process it.
When the refund is completed in our system, we'll send you an e-mail letting you know the date, amount and payment details. You can see information about completed refunds in ‘Your Account’ once you've received a confirmation e-mail from us. You can view completed refunds in Your Orders, https://www.amazon.co.uk/your-orders, by selecting "Order Details".
I hope this helps. We look forward to seeing you again soon.
Warmest regards,
A..
Amazon.co.uk
Show quoted text
Last edited:
that's another big ole grasp right there.....it may well be true but without proof you're grasping to defend your position....i've already mentioned you don't need to defend it, you're entitled to it. i could 'grasp' myself and suggest the reason you're continuing to defend it is because you realise you're wrong. but that would be me grasping and making assumptions without all the necessary info
- Status