I have a new watch but I am not happy...

[muddymonkey]

Sorry in advance, this is a bit of a rant... :?

As some of you will know (sorry if its becoming boring) I had the unfortunate experience of having my first (and only) watch stolen in transit whilst in the loving care of the wonderful Fedex.

The watch in question was a Pietro Germano Nettuno 500m, after the initial shock, emails and phone calls to Fedex and Herr Germano I agreed (after some calm advice from you guys) to pay 50% (1050EUR) to Herr Germano for a replacement watch while Fedex sorted out the insurance claim, with the clear understanding that Herr Germano would do everything he could (he even indicated he would employ the services of a lawyer (I was dubious about this - however) to reclaim the funds and issue me 50%, bear in mind I was quite clear that I paid for full insurance with the original purchase (2100EUR).

I thought there may be an issue with the fact that the package arrived and was signed for at its destination making things a little more complicated and it may take some time for Fedex and Herr Germano to sort this out (with my full co-operation).

Herr Germano assured me he would contact me immediately he received news, no contact, I waited a week to 10 days or so before emailing him with an enquiry as to how things were going and to my amazement he informed me that Fedex had settled at 100USD, the matter was closed and he would send me 50USD when it arrived (50 friggin USD - I nearly went through the roof).

I called Fedex (I had been in contact previously with both Fedex UK and Fedex D) to see what was going on, Fedex informed me that they accepted liability for the missing item and settled to the maximum insurance taken out with/by Herr Germano, there was no problem with the claim and they informed me they would not have settled if they were not happy with the claim (no matter the small amount) they have also stated that they will confirm all this in writing to me if required (I have asked them to do this for me).

I have tried to reason with Herr Germano, he doesn't seem to take any responsibility for sending a package with inadequate insurance (100USD - 2100EUR), his issue is that 'how does he know that the package was empty when it arrived...', maybe fair enough but Fedex didn't have a problem and if adequate insurance was taken out there would be no problem. Now I am down 1050EUR. Even if there was a Tax/Duty issue I would take the hit on a watch worth 2100EUR, but as it is an EU transaction that's not even applicable.

I am absolutely amazed that a guy who is trading (on the internet) cannot even see the problem from my side, I am willing to accept that this is a rare and unfortunate experience for us both, but that is exactly what insurance is for - or am I missing something.

I have paid out 3150EUR, I have received a replacement (hence the title of the post) - oh and he assured me that the second package was adequately insured - the cheek of it. I have lodged a dispute with Paypal and will pursue this through my CC company.

Once I had lodged a dispute with Paypal, Herr Germano emailed me threating legal action (not followed through - as yet), I have continually asked him what level of insurance he had on the initial package - I have not received one acknowledgement of this question never mind an answer. The latest is he is waiting to hear from Fedex (they have settled and closed the matter at 100USD and Paypal (he has not responded to my initial dispute).

I haven't even worn the replacement (sick to death of this situation). Not happy as I see no happy ending for me :evil:

[A.Pottinger]

Appears to be a legitimate complaint.
If you had an agreement for full insurance, and he did not insure adequately, this is a failure on his part, and his not keeping to what is paid for: the contract.

He may be trying to claim that this is 'all the insurance that could be obtained' in resolution. However, if he did not insure the watch adequately accorind to your agreement, there is an outstanding matter.

For one, I always ask for insurance to the full value of the watch, and even go so far as that this is a condition of it being sent before payment. Oe could explicitly specify the amount to be sure of how much it is to be and should be insured for.

I hope that paypal come back positively, and that your cc company do too.

It may be worth outlining that he agreed to insure the watch fully and this was part of the binding agreement between you, therefore he doubtless holds responsibility, and ask what he says to that.

Best Wishes,
AP

[docrwm]

I agree, given the information presented, that it is the sellers responsibility completely as he agreed to insure the package. It was my understanding that the 50% additional was against the hope of its return if FedEx paid out on the insurance claim. This was done in good faith to reassure the seller that the buyer was NOT involved in the watch disappearing and to share the potential loss if FedEx did not honor the insurance claim. The implicit understanding of any reasonable person would be that if insurance was asked for and agreed to that it would cover the FULL replacement cost of the item - otherwise it does not actually "insure" anything in the true sense and useage of that term.

The seller is a thief in my opinion - pure and simple (taking as a given that the watch was in fact lost in transit as FedEx has agreed). :evil:

[JCJM]

I feel for you :roll:

I had the impression Germano was a good guy. I will search for my black book now and make a new marking on it. I have some other things on my mind too but its better to leave it unsaid.

Hopefully this gets sorted out eventually.

[mr1973]

If you had an agreement for full insurance, and he did not insure adequately, this is a failure on his part, and his not keeping to what is paid for: the contract.

Couldn´t agree more!

[sweeney]

I'd sue. Basically he's stolen money from you.

[JCJM]

I'd sue. Basically he's stolen money from you.

Agreed. Threatening with a lawyer is old school bulling tactic meant to scare you off. As you are both in EU there shouldnt be any problemo in you winning the case - you have the documentation to prove he broke the deal.

You are a private citizen, Germano is a company and hence the law is strongly on your side should this get ugly.

Even if that were not the case it wouldnt be bad to remind him that word of mouth gets pretty far as what customers think about companies. Internet is a powerful weapon indeed.

[muddymonkey]

Guys, I (obviously) 100% agree with what you are saying and I do realise it is quite easy to build up a one sided picture and start to tarnish someone's reputation, something I was reluctant to do and believe me this is not me lashing out because things didn't go my way.

I believed full insurance was obtained via Fedex and that the only issue was the fact the package arrived and was signed for, unfortunately this, I believe will be my downfall, I believe Paypal and my Credit Card company will ask for a Tracking No. (which is available) and the tracking record shows the package arrived, it then comes down to my word against whoever, in fact Herr Germano has stated it is for me to prove the package arrived empty - how can I do this? Of course I have Fedex settling the claim and maybe I am being a little negative regarding the outcome.

He in fact holds all the cards - so to speak - (and 3150EUR), he truly believes he has offered an adequate compromise in offering me a replacement at 50% retail - never mind the actual cost to make the damned thing!

I will of course persevere but as I say I fear I will be the loser here.

[Griswold]

My view is that you've been conned out of the additional 50% too. :evil:

He clearly agreed to this KNOWING that the only refund you'd get was £50, yet he didn't have the good grace to tell you that. To my mind, that is dispicable. :evil: :evil:

[swanbourne]

If he was covering insurance to the full value of the shipment, FedEx would have charged 7% of the shipment value in insurance so the shipping cost would be an indication as to whether or not insurance was present.

Where no additional insurance is paid for, the maximum compensation paid is the cost of the shipping plus US$100 or the value of the shipment, whichever is less.

Germano has obviously taken the decision which I have, and that is to stand the cost of any losses itself. If I were to cover every shipment at the courier's rate of insurance (they are all almost identical), then it would cost me a minimum of £7000 extra each year. A stand-alone marine insurance policy with many exclusions and a mandatory excess of £200 per claim costs approximately £2000 oer annum. With shipping losses running at less than £1000 per annum, standing the cost of lossesd is the cheapest and logical solution.

I've lost 3 shipments in the last 12 months and replaced each one after the courier declared them "lost".

To summarise, you should have expected to pay a combined shipping and insurance charge of around 250 ? for something valued at 3150 ? and if you didn't, then you should have realised that there was no insurance. This is further confused by most courier companies classing watches as jewellery and refusing to insure them anyway.

Eddie

[ralphy]

My view is that you've been conned out of the additional 50% too. :evil:

He clearly agreed to this KNOWING that the only refund you'd get was £50, yet he didn't have the good grace to tell you that. To my mind, that is dispicable. :evil: :evil:

Ditto that!

Where does this person trade on the Web?

[muddymonkey]

Hi Eddie, totally understand where you are coming from, not sure if the volume of Germano's exports equates to yours, but nevertheless as you state if he chooses not take the insurance cover (I would imagine he should be prepared to take the hit - as the shipper). I paid 150EUR which I would have thought adequate.

Keith

[Grath]

So, am I understanding this correctly? He charged you 150 Euro for shipping with insurance, didn't buy the insurance, and pocketed the difference?

If so, that is theivery. Plain and simple stealing.

[sweeney]

Guys, I (obviously) 100% agree with what you are saying and I do realise it is quite easy to build up a one sided picture and start to tarnish someone's reputation, something I was reluctant to do and believe me this is not me lashing out because things didn't go my way.

I believed full insurance was obtained via Fedex and that the only issue was the fact the package arrived and was signed for, unfortunately this, I believe will be my downfall, I believe Paypal and my Credit Card company will ask for a Tracking No. (which is available) and the tracking record shows the package arrived, it then comes down to my word against whoever, in fact Herr Germano has stated it is for me to prove the package arrived empty - how can I do this? Of course I have Fedex settling the claim and maybe I am being a little negative regarding the outcome.

He in fact holds all the cards - so to speak - (and 3150EUR), he truly believes he has offered an adequate compromise in offering me a replacement at 50% retail - never mind the actual cost to make the damned thing!

I will of course persevere but as I say I fear I will be the loser here.

I think the signing for the package issue shouldn't be a problem. It only seems to be a problem for Germano who is basically accusing you of dishonesty.

It's not unreasonable to sign for a package without checking the contents - one expects the contents to be intact and in good condition. How many people rip open their packages in front of FedEx couriers before signing for goods? Not many.

I can understand Germano's reluctance to cough up, but surely it's down to them as it would seem they either knowingly or unwittingly sent the package out without full insurance.

I would imagine Paypal would be more likely to come down on your side as the seller surely hasn't documentary proof that the package was insured to the right amount. If he had FedEx would have coughed up all ?2100 in the first instance.

One thing's for sure - I'll never consider buying product from Germano after hearing how they deal with problems.

[MartinMW]

If you had an agreement for full insurance, and he did not insure adequately, this is a failure on his part, and his not keeping to what is paid for: the contract.

Couldn´t agree more!

My sentiments also, it is also debatable, as suggested earlier, whether Herr G knew of the max amount claimable when he suggested the 50% replacement cost.

Good luck

[Grath]

It's not unreasonable to sign for a package without checking the contents - one expects the contents to be intact and in good condition. How many people rip open their packages in front of FedEx couriers before signing for goods? Not many.

I live in an apartment complex and If I'm not home, they deliver to the office and have someone there sign. The people that work in the office don't open any packages to check the content.

[JCJM]

This aint a complicated thing at all IMO: if the seller agreed to insure the shipped item for its full value and neglected to do it there is no excuse.

Another thing is that there might have been a misunderstanding as to my knowledge the seller in question aint a natvie speaker of English. It would be wise to have a conversation and see whether both parties understood what actually was agreed on the same way in the beginning or not. - Otherwise it might end on a situation where both parties feel mistreated and only add to the misuderstanding and problems. Might be difficult at this moment though.

[docrwm]

This aint a complicated thing at all IMO: if the seller agreed to insure the shipped item for its full value and neglected to do it there is no excuse.

Another thing is that there might have been a misunderstanding as to my knowledge the seller in question aint a natvie speaker of English. It would be wise to have a conversation and see whether both parties understood what actually was agreed on the same way in the beginning or not. - Otherwise it might end on a situation where both parties feel mistreated and only add to the misuderstanding and problems. Might be difficult at this moment though.

Insurance implies replacement value when shipping - that is the assumption in several court cases here in the USA. 150 was paid for insurance and shipping - roughly 7% as Eddie indicated of the sale price (the 3k price was 150% covering the initial price and the 50% thus the 250 figure was miscalculated).

Given that 150 was charged and that equates nicely to 7% of the retail price paid for the item it seems impossible the seller can legitimately claim that there was no understanding or intent to insure the package.

What he did was gamble - he took the cash intended for insurance, pocketed it, and the item went missing. Now he is trying to stick the customer. In the US that would be considered mail fraud if the package were sent via the USPS and carry HEAVY penalties and possible jail time given the amount involved.

[JCJM]

This aint a complicated thing at all IMO: if the seller agreed to insure the shipped item for its full value and neglected to do it there is no excuse.

Another thing is that there might have been a misunderstanding as to my knowledge the seller in question aint a natvie speaker of English. It would be wise to have a conversation and see whether both parties understood what actually was agreed on the same way in the beginning or not. - Otherwise it might end on a situation where both parties feel mistreated and only add to the misuderstanding and problems. Might be difficult at this moment though.

Insurance implies replacement value when shipping - that is the assumption in several court cases here in the USA. 150 was paid for insurance and shipping - roughly 7% as Eddie indicated of the sale price (the 3k price was 150% covering the initial price and the 50% thus the 250 figure was miscalculated).

Given that 150 was charged and that equates nicely to 7% of the retail price paid for the item it seems impossible the seller can legitimately claim that there was no understanding or intent to insure the package.

What he did was gamble - he took the cash intended for insurance, pocketed it, and the item went missing. Now he is trying to stick the customer. In the US that would be considered mail fraud if the package were sent via the USPS and carry HEAVY penalties and possible jail time given the amount involved.

Well... as I said on my first line... there is no excuse. Another thing is to try to solve the matter using diplomacy first and unleashing the dogs of hell not after all other venues have been tried. Clausewitz had it right IMO.

[rapidboy]

his issue is that 'how does he know that the package was empty when it arrived...',

Was the package damaged or show signs of having been opened ?

How do you know that the package wasn't empty when it was posted ?

Could be a scam by the seller or an employee of the seller.

[Dave E]

Nasty business. If he charged for insurance, it should have been insured, that seems both plain and fair. Anything else is simply dishonest.

Eddie, I can completely see where your policy comes from, the difference is you replaced the missing consignments, the mark of an honest man and good trader.

[swanbourne]

If we just stick to the facts, they appear to be:

1. FedEx accepts that the goods went missing and have paid out.
2. Germano has accepted the FedEx payout, proving that they agree that the goods went missing and submitted a claim as the shipper.
3. Keith has paid for goods which FedEx and Germano agree have not been received.

Taking all the emotion out of the equation, the situation is now that Keith is still waiting to receive the goods for which he has paid.

Eddie

[Chris_in_the_UK]

If we just stick to the facts, they appear to be:

1. FedEx accepts that the goods went missing and have paid out.
2. Germano has accepted the FedEx payout, proving that they agree that the goods went missing and submitted a claim as the shipper.
3. Keith has paid for goods which FedEx and Germano agree have not been received.

Taking all the emotion out of the equation, the situation is now that Keith is still waiting to receive the goods for which he has paid.

Eddie

Bang on Eddie

1. If Germano accept the risk by gambling on the insurance then they replace the watch.

2. If the customer is told and agrees to a low-ball insurance figure in full knowledge that this is risky then the responsibility passes to the customer if they agree.

Jeez - the more I read the more I avoid Fedex, UPS and DHL......

[docrwm]

If we just stick to the facts, they appear to be:

1. FedEx accepts that the goods went missing and have paid out.
2. Germano has accepted the FedEx payout, proving that they agree that the goods went missing and submitted a claim as the shipper.
3. Keith has paid for goods which FedEx and Germano agree have not been received.

Taking all the emotion out of the equation, the situation is now that Keith is still waiting to receive the goods for which he has paid.

Eddie

Eddie,

I would only add that it appears that money was paid in the full expectation that the package was to be insured for its replacement value. Thus, on yet another level, placing the burden square on the shipper/merchant yet again.

[Victor]

If we just stick to the facts, they appear to be:

1. FedEx accepts that the goods went missing and have paid out.
2. Germano has accepted the FedEx payout, proving that they agree that the goods went missing and submitted a claim as the shipper.
3. Keith has paid for goods which FedEx and Germano agree have not been received.

Taking all the emotion out of the equation, the situation is now that Keith is still waiting to receive the goods for which he has paid.

Eddie

Spot on Eddie,

I feel that Germano should have replaced the watch . Unfortunately the only way to prove that the package that arrived was empty,would be to have opened it in front of the FEDEX delivery person ......or to check the weight when initially shipped as opposed to on arrival .....again in front of a member of FEDEX.

In the U.S. FEDEX will only pay out $500 on missing goods , even if Insured for more .....is this the same in Europe?

The only way to fully insure expensive items here is with USPS Registered Mail which covers up to $20,000.

As Eddie states most small business will cover individual loss,as it works out less expensive than full Insurance on every transaction,over the course of the year.

I hope that things get resolved in the end.

All the best,
Vic

[muddymonkey]

A couple more facts on this one...

The package arrived at my office (I always have watches delivered to my office - as I am there most of the time :cry: ), my receptionist signed for the package. The package had been opened and re-taped (my first thought was Customs - maybe naive on my part), and of course hindsight is a great thing, but I would have insisted opening it in front of the Fedex employee if I had any thought this situation would arise.

Almost immediately (certainly within 15 minutes) I had called an emailed both Germano and Fedex to explain the situation.

Germano's argument is that I should not have accepted a package that 'appeared' to have been tampered with, he's pretty consistent on this, and I can see where he is coming from - to a point.

I imagine, as I stated I had never had anything lost in transit, he had never lost anything in transit either, therefore in his eyes it may be worth the risk of low insurance, it may have been an error (he hasn't told me it was), even so he's taking a pretty hard line.

I don't know about you guys but whether a business or a private individual if I were sending an item to the value of 2100EUR I would make absolutely 100% sure I was covered as the shipper. As I stated in an earlier post there maybe have been one or situations where I have thought about the impact of duties/tax on large value shipments coming from outside UK, but didn't think this was worth the risk of losing the item, ie. Grand Seiko sent from Seiya in Japan declared at full value, took a hit but was expecting it and I did receive the watch. In this case it wasn't an issue (a no brainer) as we are within the EU so I had no doubts got to be 100% coverage on this.

In terms of the problem with insuring Jewellery/Watches after my initial call Germano asked if I would refer to the 'item' as a Germano Diving Instrument, which I agreed to and have done consistently. May make no difference at all I see no reason Fedex would not tell me if there was a problem with the coverage on the particular item - therefore paying out minimum compensation - they haven't told me about any problem regarding coverage.

The acceptance of the package is one side of the story (and if Fedex hadn't settled I would and did see this being a potential problem in terms of time, hence paying the additional 1050EUR) the main one is the lack of any inkling of 'Customer Service'.

I realised that Germano ain't exactly the Swatch Group so i had some sympathy for his situation, but he has been hard line all along (I actually wonder what would have happened if I had not paid the 1050EUR for a replacement - 2100EUR down and no watch at all - 50 USD maybe), in fact Germano sent me an email stating that he had the replacement package all ready to go and i should pay him 'what I think', sounds good, this was AFTER I had paid him the 1050EUR - interesting.

My main point is, he hasn't even offered me my original shipping costs (remember this was not his outlay) as a gesture say, wouldn't have been acceptable but it would have been a sign of goodwill.

Oh, he did state that from my 50USD from Fedex he could deduct this from the price of one of his straps - s@*t, how generous.

I do not wish to bring others into this situation, but I have dealt with Eddie on a couple of occasions without a problem, but those who have had a problem have been shown a superior level of understanding and customer service and at the very least I expected some sympathy on Germano's part, actuall he stated via email ' he did believe I received an empty package...' as soon as I apply a little 'heat' he changes this to 'how does he know the package was empty...'

Anyway the fact is before I took the plunge on the Germano I thought long and hard about looking for a new watch, I had a little cash tucked away and was looking for something big and rugged, a Dreadnought was highest on the list and had a few offers but I thought although the Germano was expensive I thought I'd give it a go. Oh I wish I had picked up a DN.

I have paid a total of 3150EUR for certainly a unique watch, and the quality and attention is pretty good, but the reality is the resale value on this will plunge dramatically and I could have bought two DN's maybe a Seadweller or maybe an Ennebi Fondale, never mind how this affects my incoming Italian.

F*@K it just gets worse, i am off for a lie down :evil:

Keith

Keith

[sweeney]

Don't get too downhearted - just think of it as getting a rugged and unique watch for half the list price and vigorously pursue the ?2100 odd that you're owed down to Germano's "negligence". I think you've got a very strong legal case for the return of your ?2100 (however, I'm no law expert).

And remember - as Michael Corleone would say - it's business, not personal.

[redmonaco]

surely you are only owed the extra EU1050 you paid?

You have the watch and it would have initially cost EU2050?

You paid by credit card for the transaction, I would put the amount in dispute citing the provision of insurance premium that you paid and was not implementted.

YOU are then in the driving seat, as Germano is out 2 watches and only has EU1050.

You then tell him that as you have 1 watch you owe him EU1050 which you will pay on receipt of a letter of confrimation that he will accept this as full and final payment for the transaction.

Case Closed

[JCJM]

Keith - the seller is a firm and you are a private citizen. You have documentation that proves, that the deal was based on the fact that the seller insures the shipped item for its full replacement value. That didnt happen. The rest regardig whether you should have opened the package in the observing eye of the FedEx is a good argument but isnt actually as stong a defence one might first think it is. The rest of what has been talked is rhetoric that has nothing to do with the actual basis from which this case will be judged upon shall it proceed to jurifidical proceedings.

Lets cut to the chase now:

The EU laws concerning consumer protection are pretty tough for the sellers and hence give pretty good coverage for the consumer. In my adequately informed understanding you should have a 90% propability to win this case.

Please see: http://www.kuluttajavirasto.fi/ecc/defa ... ntsiteid=2

ps. it might not be a bad idea to remind Germano of the fact that the money he might save in not acting as he should on your case might be peanuts to the financial consecuensies he might face after tarnishing his image. As we all know, deals on the WIS world are based on trust and the WIS pond is pretty small.

Just my 002

[MichaelBe]

"ps. it might not be a bad idea to remind Germano of the fact that the money he might save in not acting as he should on your case might be peanuts to the financial consecuensies he might face after tarnishing his image. As we all know, deals on the WIS world are based on trust and the WIS pond is pretty small"


Amen, well said. From not knowing anything about these watches and reading this thread, I would never EVER! consider buying watches from this Germano character. The reason why I come to this site is because I respect all the "WIS" opinions. I would not consider buying any watch, or any product for that matter, if the SERVICE was not praised by others.

[ralphy]

Keith

Did you open the packet in front of your receptionist?

If so, do you think written confirmation of same from her should help the situation with this Germano chappie?

Just a thought......

R

[Dave Essel]

"ps. it might not be a bad idea to remind Germano of the fact that the money he might save in not acting as he should on your case might be peanuts to the financial consecuensies he might face after tarnishing his image. As we all know, deals on the WIS world are based on trust and the WIS pond is pretty small"


Amen, well said. From not knowing anything about these watches and reading this thread, I would never EVER! consider buying watches from this Germano character. The reason why I come to this site is because I respect all the "WIS" opinions. I would not consider buying any watch, or any product for that matter, if the SERVICE was not praised by others.

Seconded whole-heartedly.

A suggestion: it might help this get clear in this vendor's mind quite how much he is damaging his reputation if he were to receive emails from people telling him that until muddymonkey advises this forum that the matter has been happily resolved, the writer will not only abstain from buying from him but will actively advise friends and acquaintances not to do so either.

I'd be happy to write such a letter although I would like first to see a pic of the watch in question, just to satisfy my curiosity.

I googled Germano watches and found a Germano.de selling watchstraps. There is a mention of watches on the site but the link is strangely dead and seems to have been removed from some of the pages.

Is this the Germano in question?

[DeusIrae]

Can some kind soul please post a example picture of the missing watch? I'd just like to know what went missing.

[Gunscrossed]

Homage to the Rolex,
http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/r...g=2&imagepos=8

[Pete]

If I was in this position, I'm pretty certain I'd be seeking legal advice instead of wondering about what you can/can't do.

Go and see a lawyer, they may be able to tell you in 5 seconds if you're best off just wearing the loss, or if you do have some recourse.

I know here (Victoria, Aust) my local law society offers free 30 minute referrals to solicitors (ie, you get the first 30 minutes no obligation). Perhaps something similar operates where you are. It would be worth checking out.

Mind you, it may still end in tears but at least you'll know what you can/can't do.