Felder-schmelder

[RogerS]

When is a reserved item not a reserved item? Answer...on the Felder site.

This is the email that I sent to the MD following my abortive attempt to purchase the KIty 609 advertised for sale.

Dear Mr Woods

In good faith I placed a reserve over the weekend on the Kity 609 combined saw/spindle moulder thst you had advertised on your website. I accepted your terms and conditions that I would be charged 200 euros were I to not honour my side of the contract.

On Monday I was informed that you had, in fact, already sold this unit on the Friday and so technically my understanding is that Felder are in breach of contract.

You will understand that I am rather annoyed about this and so am writing to you to ask how Felder propose to remedy this.

R Sinden

This is the reply I received.

Dear Mr Sinden

I'm sorry to hear this has happened and clearly we will do whatever we can to offer you an alternative solution. However, with an active web site and a busy s/h showroom, where people can come in and buy direct, it is always a possibility that in-between up dating the site the machine on offer has been sold. Once again we are sorry this has happened. We have however a fairly good selection of machines coming in on a regular basis. Would you perhaps like us to notify you of any similar machine becoming available in the future?

Fair enough mistakes happen. However, as of yesterday (Wednesday) the Kity was STILL advertised on the website and you could STILL reserve it so go figure - seriously unimpressed
:evil:

 

[Adam]

I'd reserve it again, and, when they ring and say its not available, you can say they were warned several days ago, and it was obvious that their sale fell through, so you immediately re-reserved it! :twisted: :twisted:

Adam

 

[ike]

Roger,

There are internet shops,and shops (companies) with internet sites. I trust the little padlock on the former,but I never put all my faith in the latter. Yes, in theory everthing might happen as described, but I'm not sure until I have followed up by phone and dealt with a human bean!.

As they have offered to keep you informed of any deals coming up, if that means they are giving you first refusal, it sounds like a fair offer to me.

Ike

 

[BrianD]

I am sympathetic that you have not be able to obtain your good. This is typical of companies that tend to offer the same physical items using two distribution channels (showroom and Internet) while not having the stock management integrated to both sides.

What I mean is: the moment the alleged purchaser bought the ggods the the internal stock count decreased however the web offering does not know about this and therefore you are sitting with the problem as described.

Just shows how marketing runs the business!

Unfortunately, this happens more often than not.

Hopefully they will come back to you on refusal or offer a good alternative - very likely. :roll:

 

[andrewm]

This is typical of companies that tend to offer the same physical items using two distribution channels (showroom and Internet)

Quite agree about the dual channel approach. Even with good stock management I can't really see anyway around the problem that it poses. It is even worse the other way around. Imagine:

customer: What do you have in the way of decent table saws?
salesman: Well there is this rather nice one over here.
customer: can you tell me a little about it?
salesman: certainly sir, it has a 10" blade with a cast iron top ...
... blah, blah, blah ...
... and comes complete with the sliding carriage option.
customer: looks good, I'll take it
salesman: terribly sorry sir but while I was explaining it to you someone was in the process of buying it on line.

Dual channels are just never going to work.

What I do think is unfair though is the one way holding to a contract. You loose your deposit if you pull out but they can pull out at any time. Means that a customer is not sure they are going to get the product but cannot take advantage of bargains elsewhere without risking loosing out. Wonder what their attitude would have been if Roger had phoned to cancel?

Andrew

 

[Adam]

Dual channels are just never going to work.

If thats the case, they should not take the deposit until its been verified as available.

Adam

 

[Anonymous]

It is pretty easy to set up a system that monitors/controls stock from a database that is linked to a dynamic web page as well as the showroom system. I would have expected a companyy as big as Felder to have this in place rather than the static web pages they clearly use

 

[andrewm]

It is pretty easy to set up a system that monitors/controls stock from a database that is linked to a dynamic web page as well as the showroom system. I would have expected a companyy as big as Felder to have this in place rather than the static web pages they clearly use

Agreed, in the sense of keeping the web site up to date as items are sold from the showroom which was admittedly what Roger was complaining about. But the point that I was making was the difficulty of making it work in the opposite direction when an item can be ordered online while someone in the showroom is waiting for it to be put through the till. By the time they get to the till it has been sold to someone else.

Andrew

 

[Neil]

Dual channels are just never going to work.

It doesn't really make any difference even if you only have one means of distribution, as long as there is more than one salesperson. A few months ago I missed out on an ex-display Jet bandsaw from the Axminster clearance list - whilst I was on the 'phone with Axminster exports sorting out delivery cost to Ireland, it suddenly disappeared off the system because another telesales person had just sold it! :evil:

What I do think is unfair though is the one way holding to a contract.

I agree, Andrew - this is the main problem with Felders approach IMO.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Paul Kierstead]

I figure they owe you 200 Euro's. Not that they are going to pay it, but since you were required to possibly forfeit that amount in breach, I think they should pay up since it fell the other way.

More realistically, if they have any sense they should give you a discount on a further sale.

I can see how mistakes are made, but since it continues the explanation they gave falls flat. They just don't have their stuff togather; as some level this is understandable, but once you start demanding money from the customer, you have to be able to deliver.

 

[Losos]

Hi Roger,
The fact that it was still on their web page indicated this really is a 'static' site
Not good policy to hit the customer with a cancellation fee especially if it does not apply the other way.
As Ike pointed out it could work the other way, 'tho I suspect that if there was a 'real' customer at the till that somehow the online customer would loose out - Maybe that's exactly what happened with you
There would have to be some fast talking to tell someone (with cash in his hand) that he can't buy the item physically 2 foot in front of him :wink:

 

[RogerS]

I figure they owe you 200 Euro's.

That's my feeling as well though very much doubt I'll get it.

Mistakes can happen but not fixing the original problem and updating the site for several days is just taking the Mickey. The site has now been updated.

 

[JPEC]

I haven't had an experience like this myself, but I would agree they owe you 200 euros off your next order.

What does Felder Man think?

Julian