Complaint: 11440103
I am rejecting this response because:Again, after over THREE MONTHS they have not fixed a defective product or offered a solution other than paying them $375 for a "complete overhaul" of a luxury watch less than a year old--they are able to send a lengthy retort to my complaint within ONE HOUR...truly impressive. If they had this same level of dedication to their customers' issues, there were be no complaints whatsoever. In the words of Shakespeare: "Methinks thou doth protest too much." THESE GUYS ARE CRIMINALS, SWINDLERS, YOU NAME IT--UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE. I will take their points in order:#1: True, I am NOT a certified watchmaker nor repair specialist. That said—I have never owned a watch—or any item—that needed a “complete overhaul” after less than a year of pampered usage. If I have ever had an issue—especially with a item of this price point—the company has taken care of it accordingly. In addition, Authenticwatches.com will neither divulge who these so-called “authorized” repair specialists are, nor will the allow a customer to actually speak to the technician. I was told this was not possible. This leads me to question whether or not these are indeed authorized, or even qualified.#2: Again—glib response, kicking up questions. The reality is this: this watch has been pampered since I received it; has never been so much as dropped, gotten wet, etc…furthermore, it doesn’t matter what the item is—a watch, a car, or a lawn mower—the expectation is that the product work under normal conditions for AT LEAST A YEAR…this didn’t even make it 9 months before I had to return it. True, things happens in the product world…when they do, the seller should take care of it—especially with their warranty…which clearly is bogus.#3: Again, calling me a liar…the fact that someone told me they were the “owner” wasn’t asserted to help my case or make a difference whatsoever…it was incidental…and it was TRUE. Of course, you can say “call us and ask for the owner” and you won’t get him…however, I originally asked to speak to a manager…when I did and the guy was belligerent and unhelpful, I asked to speak to someone at an even higher level. At that point, he said, “It doesn’t get any higher…I’m the owner.” So, whether he was lying or not is not for me to say, but it is emblematic of how this company operates that they would paint a consumer trying to get his watch fixed as “fabricating” a story. Pathetic.#4: It’s simple; an A+ rating for anyone who treats their customers in this fashion is misleading at best. Granted their rating algorithm is based on a multitude of factors—ANY company that behaves in the way AUTHENTICWATCHES.COM does should not receive such a high and vaunted rating. it’s misleading and lowers the value of the good work that Revdex.com does, as well as those companies truly deserving of a strong grade. These criminals (and yes, they are behaving in such a manner) don’t deserve that.#5: Let me be clear—I did not say the “warranty was criminal”—(THERE THEY GO—TWISTING WORDS…)—I asserted (and stand by it), their BUSINESS PRACTICES ARE CRIMINAL. At this point, I’m not even sure that the watch they sent is nothing more than a replica. I have attached the letter from Longines who (of course) cannot control the sales over the internet. They have, however, provided me the name of a local specialist for them who will verify the merchandise and fix it. In the end, they still have my watch; sold me a piece of defective merchandise that stopped working; found loopholes in the warranty; and will not divulge who their so-called “authorized dealers/repairers” are…Really—is that an A+ rated company??? If so, it’s time to change your system.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I am quite disappointed in your offensive reply and nonsense examples. You make me sound like a felony seeking for gain from you. I was just expressing my thoughts as a client because you did not explain in detail on why the repair was not covered by the warranty. How many customers will accept without hesitation that the product breaking is their fault when two different types of malfunctions happen within a few months after their purchase of a new watch? You did not give any detailed information on the previous emails and that is why I am wasting my time here. Regarding the Omega Seamaster, I did not even mention that it was an defective watch nor did I ask you to repair it without any remitting payment as seen in my previous comment. I just mentioned it because I received the reply from you explaining how it is not covered by the warranty without any detailed explanation. It is ridiculous that you used the “crashed car” as an example. I did not throw the watch to break it. Once again, I am very disappointed and exasperated about your company’s attitude towards clients. This was a complete waste of my time. I have many watches and these two are the only ones that broke down. I hope this is just bad luck. Of course, please return my watches with no further intervention.
Regards,
H[redacted]
We thank the client for his service to our nation,. We do, however, wish to emphasize that USMC veterans (nor veterans of any other branch of service), though appreciated, are not entitled to full refunds on worn, used timepieces. Notwithstanding the client's conspiratorial thought process and accusations, we will be happy to provide a time line:Less than three weeks after having received the timepiece, the client called threatening a charge dispute, Revdex.com complaints, and other complaints on other websites, unless we accept back his used watch and send him a new one. That is indeed a threat. The proverbial "You better do what I tell you to, regardless of the terms of sale, or else I'm going to [insert a litany of threats]" is indeed a threatening posture to take.A standard issue service takes 6-8 weeks. We informed the client we would put a rush on the service. The client, after less than three weeks, called and spoke to M[redacted], telling him (paraphrasing) "If you don't ship me a brand new watch I'm calling my credit card to do a charge back, and I'll keep posting negative reviews on your company all over the internet until you send me a new watch or give me a full refund!"Those are indeed threats, as defined in the dictionary:Threatnoun1.a declaration of an intention or determination to�...⇄ would like to emphasize that this incredible litany of threats was made less than three weeks after having received the timepiece, on 9/11/2015. As we did indeed put a rush service on the timepiece, however, a rush service does not mean that we can simply conform to whichever arbitrary time line the client has set forth. On Monday afternoon (9/14/15, three days after the client decided to do all of this) we received an update that the client's timepiece was ready and is shipping back to us for arrival on Thursday, 9/17/15. Therefore, the total completion time from receipt will have been less than 4 weeks; that's a VERY fast turn-around time. To be frank, it's less than half of the turn around time it takes for any standard Bell and Ross repair. Had the client simply been patient and waited, he would have had his timepiece back tomorrow. The client seems to believe that somehow, his calls and threats have had some actual effect on the timeline; they have not. Regardless of any action our company, or the client, or the Revdex.com, or any other party take, the timepiece would have arrived back to us on the exact same day. We had already shipped it with rush service, and there is way to intervene in the middle of said service to "extra rush" the rush service.However, the client did indeed call and make a direct threat to initiate a charge dispute with his credit card. Once that threat is made, we, as an organization, must act to protect ourselves from any loss due to said threat of a fraudulent charge dispute (it is indeed fraudulent.) Upon purchase of the timepiece, the client was made to agree to our terms and conditions, which is standard for all companies. The terms clearly outline that a timepiece cannot be returned for a refund once it has been worn. The terms also outline that our warranty of merchantability takes effect once said timepiece has been worn. These terms are in full compliance with UCC § 2-316, and are standard for all companies (it is rare for any company to issue a full refund on used merchandise). The client agreed to said policies at the time of purchase. A charge dispute is, therefore, in direct violation of UCC § 2-719. We have refunded the client less 20% as a courtesy, and will sell the timepiece as a used watch. We cannot issue the client any further refund. We have offered to ship the client's timepiece back to him, as well as refund the 20% deducted, if he opts to make payment in full via a payment method where he cannot commit further fraudulent charge disputes (check, money order, wire transfer.) The client responded to this offer via email with a litany of conspiratorial theories and insults. The client has been refunded less 20% and this m[redacted]er is now closed. Should the client pursue fraudulent activities with his credit card, we will have no choice but to recuperate any fiduciary losses, plus costs of said recuperative actions.
This client feels his timepiece is not as green as he would like it to be. There is no "misrepresentation" when the client is shown the manufacturer stock photograph and is shipped the manufacturer's item. We are truly sorry to hear this client is displeased, however, there is no scenario possible in which he could receive this timepiece with a brighter green hue, unless he chooses to purchase some form of customized replica.We only sell authentic timepieces, and cannot make the bezel any brighter for the client.The client wished to be provided an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, and offered a discount, to keep the timepiece. As there was no wrongdoing, we are unable to accommodate either of the client's requests. We feel the analogy provided in the foregoing response was indeed an accurate depiction of what is taking place here. There is no "scam" and there is no malicious intent by us when we post the manufacturer's picture and ship the manufacturer's item. This client is well aware of these facts. It is entirely his prerogative to make false, hyperbolic claims (such as "SCAM ALERT" with the hashtag "notauthenticwatches" with the full knowledge that there is no scam, and the full knowledge that the timepiece he received is indeed authentic. No policy shift will take place in order to accommodate requests for monies not owed to an individual. A company engaging in a "scam" does not typically offer full refunds to client's which are dissatisfied. It is not a "scam" for a company to refuse to simply dish out money to a client, under threat of social media posts, when there have been no errors made by said company. If the client doubts authenticity in any way, he is more than welcome to take the timepiece directly to any authorized dealer for authentication.Our policies are posted online, and our system does not allow checkout until such policies have been agreed to. These policies outline that there may be slight variances in a photograph online from the actual item. The reason for this is that photographs of an item on a monitor can vary slightly from an actual item. The intensity of flash, type of lighting, ambient lighting, shading, etc. can result in several different looking photographs of the same item. In addition to this, the same photograph displayed on a set of different monitors, all with potentially different settings, will also result in a slight variance in appearance. Finally, many items we carry have natural stones or jewels (e.g. Mother of Pearl, diamonds, et.al.). Various angles of the a mother of pearl dial will produce significantly different hues and coloration, with a "white mother of pearl" dial appearing light pink, light blue, or white, depending on the angle and lighting. Various light intensity, type of lighting (LED, incandescent, fluorescent) when photographs are taken of diamonds will produce significant variances in diamond brightness and apparent clarity. If the client had purchased a diamond bezel watch, and then informed us that the diamonds aren't as shiny as he thought they would be, we would offer a return for refund (as we have in this case); we would not be able to admit some sort of fault, or provide some sort of compensation (as we cannot in this case).Short of incorrectly admitting fault where there is none, and short of simply giving the client monies not owed to him, we do not see any way of satisfying this client. It is quite evident what is actually taking place.We are happy to hear the timepiece is being returned, and will issue the client a full refund less shipping fees in accordance with our policies posted online. We hope this client is successful in finding a timepiece he feels is suitable to his needs. We always recommend that a client visit a local authorized dealer in order to get a good idea of not just a three dimensional in-person appearance, but also the weight and feel of any timepiece prior to purchasing online.We are sorry that we were unable to satisfy this client and hope he finds the watch he desires.
Complaint: 10583605
I am rejecting this response because:
I did not call 4 hours later. When I called the lady I spoke to said it had been received by then but not fully processed. I was told they were going to go ahead and process so they could charge me a return fee. As I mentioned the items never left their store. If it did they need to provide a tracking number to show this. They can call me a liar but those are the facts. These guys are a bunch of crooks. I am also reporting them to chrono24 the web site I located this merchant on. If this is not resolved I will get them pulled from that site. Their web pages's have a bold statement that their is no re stocking fee. You have to dig into the fine print to see differently. This sis false advertising. I will continue to pursue this until it is resolved. If needed I will file a police report for theft with the police in your area. If they do no want to refund this amount then have them send me the watch.
Regards,
[redacted]
We are unable to accommodate the requests of refund, nor service under warranty, for the reasons outlined in our previous response.The facts are as follows:10/13/2014: This timepiece was sent in fully functional condition.12/30/2014: The client damaged the timepiece (impacted, causing dislodged screw), and we serviced it free of charge as a one time courtesy. Returned to client 1/26/15.4/13/2016: Client returned timepiece indicating it was gaining 5 minutes per day5/8/2016: Client was emailed an estimate for a movement maintenance procedure required. 5/8/16 - 5/9/16 - Client argued about ever having been sent a functional timepiece at any point, despite the fact that no complaints about function had been reported within the approximate 1.25 years since the last time the client received the timepiece which was repaired as a courtesy. Client demanded $500 Million. Client made it clear he had no intention of remitting payment.5/27/2016 - Client's watch was returned with no intervention. This client is attempting to pose an argument that he was never shipped a functioning timepiece. The client was shipped a timepiece which was fully functional until he damaged it in December of 2014. Although we were under no obligation whatsoever to repair it free of charge (damages are not covered under warranty), we did so as a one time courtesy. The client received his timepiece back in January of 2015, and has not communicated about any problems whatsoever until 1 year, 2 months, and 2 weeks later. Upon receiving an estimate, he started claiming it had never worked. The client has further asserted that we never informed him that it could be impacted, and that this is a self serving fabrication. However, in response to his email stating that a service should not be required until after 5 years (which is incorrect), we replied via email on Monday, May 9th, at 7:42 am (PT) stating:"Thank you for your email. A movement maintenance service is advertisedto be required every few years; however, there are a litany of factorsthat can necessitate service at more frequent intervals (impact,vibration, leaving the crown open, moisture infiltration, long periodsof non-use, etc)."The assertion that it was never mentioned that his maintenance service may be due to an impact is simple prevarication.The timepiece does indeed require a movement maintenance service in order to restore function. As clearly outlined in our warranty of merchantability posted on every page of our website, a movement maintenance service is not covered under warranty. Here is a link to our policies:http://www.authenticwatches.com/authenticwatches-warranty.htmlHere is a copy of the applicable exclusions clause, verbatim:"The warranty does not cover damages caused by impact, vibrations, magnetic fields, or batteries; nor does it cover straps, bracelets, bezels, buckles, finishes, cases, dials, hands, crowns, buttons or crystals. It also does not cover damage or defects arising from normal wear; nor does it cover overhauls, maintenance, scratches, accidents, misuse or return shipping."There are no other implied warranties, as clearly outlined in the following clauses in our warranty policies:"All timepieces sold through AuthenticWatches.com will be warranted by the AuthenticWatches.com limited warranty of merchantability unless otherwise noted.""There are no warranties which extend beyond the description on the face hereof.""The foregoing is the entire term of warranty, and no other warranties are included, nor shall be construed to have been implied."All policies are in strict compliance with the laws governing warranties of merchantability (UCC § 2-316). The client agreed to these policies upon checkout, as well as upon returning his timepiece for service. We are sorry, however, we are not able to accommodate the client's request for a refund, nor for warranty service of his damaged timepiece. Thank you.
Complaint: 11557996
I am rejecting this response because: I did not receive any check from the company 3 weeks ago as they are saying and they cannot track it as it was sent via regular mail therefore there is no tracking information. I have offered to provide the company with my FedEx and UPS account so they can send another check and it can be tracked however they have denied this for what reason I do not know. I asked them to provide me with a contact of their accounts payable department or bank so I can see how and when the check was sent and they said they cannot provide with this information. They still have no told me when I expect to receive my refund check so I would like to keep this open until I have received it as I am very concern with the reputation of this business from looking at previous reviews online and it has been almost 2 months now that they have been holding my money for an item I never received.
Regards,
A[redacted]
Client purchased a watch which was serviced under warranty. Prior to return, watch was pressure tested and passed the pressure test. Several months later, he contacts us to tell us that water entered the watch, and that the watch was not improperly sealed.The watch was properly sealed when returned...
to him, confirmed via water resistance test.Regrettably, moisture damage is not covered under warranty. The client requested we return the watch with no services rendered, and the timepiece has already been returned to him.We cannot service the timepiece free of charge, nor are we able to have it serviced any more at the price quote he refused, as the longer moisture is left unrepaired, the more extensive the damage will be.We are sorry we are unable to assist the client with his request.
Client claims to have received timepiece in a condition other than what was advertised. At no point in time was the timepiece advertised as "new" nor "brand new". At no point in time was the timepiece advertised to come with factory stickers.The client received the exact item ordered in the exact...
condition advertised. We are sorry, however, we are unable to include items which are not advertised based on the client's recollection of a different purchase of a different timepiece 6 years ago. We are sorry to hear that the client is upset, however, we are unable to waive the additional costs involved. Thank you.
We are sorry the client feels so upset. His first statement begins by stating that the first Rolex timepiece he purchased from us came with stickers. His newest statement warns people to not purchase from us because they will not receive a watch with stickers. Yet, he himself did.We understand that the client is upset and are sorry to hear about that. Each item is advertised precisely in the condition in which it is sold. Some items are listed as brand new, some are listed as store display items, and so forth.A vast majority of Rolex timepieces will come with stickers. Some will not. Anyone can call us at any time to confirm prior to purchase at ###-###-####.Thank you again.
Complaint: 11498981
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards,
Because the manufacturer of the watch informed me otherwise, contradicting your previous statements
[redacted]
Complaint: 11677906
I am rejecting this response because: I purchased a new watch, not a used watch. I was in possession of the watch for 8 months when it began losing time. Why would an 8 month old watch require maintenance? According to Tag Heuer's website, "We recommend a maintenance service after 2 years or a failed water-resistance test." Furthermore, Authenticwatches.com asked for $570.00 for maintenance on my watch. Tag Heuer's website list cost for maintenance service for a mechanical chronograph watch from $190.00 - $200.00. Obviously, Authenticwatches.com is making excuses to not honor their warranty they falsely advertise on their website and charge their customers additional charges for what should be covered under their warranty.
Regards,
J[redacted]
This client did indeed purchase a timepiece from our company. The timepiece was shipped via FedEx and received by the client. The client removed all the tags from the timepiece, and the timepiece was worn. The client did indeed call to report a problem with the GMT hand, and we did indeed...
inform him we would do our best to have the service rushed. A Bell and Ross timepiece typically takes 6-8 weeks to service. This client called us 3 weeks after it arrived in our facility demanding a full refund, and threatening a charge dispute (repeatedly). He also repeatedly threatened negative reviews, as well as this Revdex.com complaint, if we did not comply with his demands and issue him a full refund on his used watch.We are not able to issue a full refund on the client's used timepiece.This client has agreed to our policies posted online, which clearly articulate that once the tags have been removed, or the timepiece is worn, it cannot be returned for a refund. In addition, the client has set an arbitrary time frame for which he demands that we issue a refund. We are unable to comply with arbitrary time-frames set up by clients, as the service procedure is through the manufacturer, and not under our control.The condition of the clients timepiece is as follows: The strap has been bent to the point of permanent notching on the rubber strap. The buckle has been scratched. The case has been scratched.As the timepiece was not returned brand new, we are unable to issue a full refund, notwithstanding threats of negative feedback ratings, or fraudulently based charge disputes.We are sorry, however, we are not able to offer this client a full refund on his used timepiece, and a refund has been issued less the depreciation on a used watch.
Complaint: 11512463
I am rejecting this response because: The company “Authentic Watches” states that I returned my watch over a year and a half later. This is true but I already mentioned many times that the abnormal symptoms had already started soon after the first repair. I thought I could use it while it was mildly defective, but the problems increasingly grew worse and it was totally broken by the time I sent it a second time for repair. They also said I broke the watch because I “changed the time in reverse”. I noticed this on the instruction when I first received the watch (This is simply ridiculous! I cannot fathom why a watch will break if the dial is turned in one direction!) Anyways, I have been very careful to follow the instructions explaining not to reverse the time on the watch, so therefore I don’t believe I myself broke the watch. It is a shame I cannot prove this. The company did not even explain the reasons of my broken watch during the multiple conversations on email. In this situation, the information of the malfunctions was very unilateral, and I felt like I was being ignored. I have completely lost my faith with this company, and I would never recommend it to anyone else.PS: I have another broken watch (Omega Seamster) purchased from this company which was sent for the repair and they also requested $932 for the repair stating not covered the warranty.requested
Regards,
H[redacted]
Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because:
Perhaps some insight to my background will illustrate my
frustration dealing with a company that fails to do what they say they will
I am a retired Marine Corps Officer and a Disabled Veteran. I spent a career serving with men and women
of honor, men and women who could be trusted at their word to do what they said
they would.
Now, I have encountered an organization who works every
angle to gain the upper hand, whose heavy handed, intimidating tactics border
on extortionary while simultaneously accusing me of making threats. My "threats' consisted of: (1) Stating I
would contact the Revdex.com; (2) Stating I would speak with my
credit card company regarding this m[redacted]er and, (3) I would write a negative review if I did not
obtain an equitable solution. These are
not threats, these are Consumer Protections available to all American
Citizens. Yet, at the mere mention of
involving these additional agencies, the representatives of Authentic Watches
immediately became argumentative and hostile while pointedly discouraging me
from speaking with these agencies. Why
would this be? Why would an honorable
company who is operating above the board wish to discourage a consumer from
invoking standard avenues of protection?
And yet, within two days of contacting my credit card
company Authentic Watches issued an immediate refund of 80% of the original
purchase price. Why did they suddenly
refund this money so willingly?
Three days after I contacted the Revdex.com I began to receive several
emails from Authentic Watches. In an
email dated September 2015, Peter Grant, the General Manager for Authentic
Watches, informed me my watch was now ready to be shipped. An incredibly coincidental turn of events,
no? Just three days prior I had been
informed by M[redacted] that my watch would need a MINIMUM of three weeks before it
would the watch would be repaired
So, based on the above observations, it would seem the
avenues available for Consumer Protection really do work. Despite Authentic Watches threats to the
contrary immediately following my contacting the Revdex.com and the
Bank of America, my watch was suddenly ready to be shipped.
I have countless emails that document my correspondence with
Authentic Watches where my tone is polite and accommodating. Similarly, I have several emails from
Authentic Watches where their tone is aggressive, intimidating and hostile. In short, the company misrepresents their
products: they advertise and sell as new
watches that damaged and in need of repair.
By way of apologizing for receiving a watch that was so
obviously malfunctioning, Amber promised on August that my watch would
receive RUSH service and it would be back in my hands within 3-weeks of its
return to Authentic Watches. THIS IS THE
POLICY AUTHENTIC WATCHES VIOLATED. For
reference, I never tacitly entered into any other agreement with Authentic
Watches
Any competent lawyer could request discovery which I would be willing to bet
would reveal a systemic p[redacted]ern of instances where Authentic Watches knowingly
shipped malfunctioning watches as new
Despite all of the above including Authentic Watches
unwillingness to honor their agreements, since Authentic Watches claimed my
watch had been repaired and was ready for shipment, in an email dated
September I suggested an elegantly simple and equitable solution to this
dispute: Authentic Watches re-charge my
credit card for the 80% refund they issued then simply ship my watch back to
me. And their response, they insisted I
wire – yes, use a direct wire transfer – the FULL AMOUNT to their bank account,
then they would refund 20%.
When I asked via email why I should now trust they would do
the right thing and use a wire transfer, a method of payment that offers ZERO
CONSUMER PROTECTIONS, all communication with Authentic Watches ceased
Authentic Watches business model and those in its employ are unscrupulous,
exploitive, dishonest and nefarious
Some final points to consider that will highlight the unscrupulous
nature of this companyIn their response to you they state I removed all tags
from the watch. This is a lie. Both plastic protective covers were in place
and had never been removed from the crown and case when I shipped the watch
back to Authentic Watches. The watch was
on my wrist for exactly one minute. How
then did a flexible band with an extremely high shape memory permanently
crease? How was the buckle
scratched? How was the case
scratched? I took detailed photos before
I returned the watch. None of the
claimed damage is visible in any of the photos.
Thus, there are only three explanations for the damage now claimed by
Authentic Watches: (1) they shipped a
watch to me that had been previously used and returned; (2) the watch was not
in fact damaged and their response is part of a systemic p[redacted]ern of
intimidation or, (3) they are lying.
Regards,
[redacted]
This client purchased a TAG Heuer Bracelet on 6/17/2015. 3 weeks after purchase, the client called, indicating we did not send him the end pieces. Being that we work with high value merchandise, we have high resolution surveillance in our shipping department, as well as a zoomed in, high...
resolution camera focusing on an area used for staging and packaging new orders.We informed the client we would check the recording of his shipment to determine what had taken place. Upon checking the footage, it is clear that this client was sent a complete bracelet, including the end pieces.Perhaps, in the 3 weeks between the client's receipt of the item and call to our office, the end pieces were misplaced. End pieces aren't sold separately; they are part of the bracelet. We do not have any bracelets without end pieces, and we don't have any end pieces without bracelets. We suggest the client double check the envelope in which it was shipped, or double check the packaging, or any other areas that the bracelet has been in within the past three weeks (car, home office, etc.)We are not able to fabricate end pieces, nor order them individually. The bracelet was sent to the client fully complete.
This client has repeatedly requested that the timepiece be returned. We apologize for any inconvenience. The timepiece will be returned to the client once it arrives back at our location. There are no phone calls to be made to any international location in order to facilitate direct return. Thank you.
This client returned his watch, citing it just stopped working. Upon receipt, the timepiece is full of impact points and scratches, and loose parts from impact can be clearly observed through the clear case-back of his timepiece.We informed the client that damage due to impact is not covered under...
warranty, as outlined in our policies and procedures. The client's response was that he has never impacted it.We have enclosed several photographs. This timepiece has had in excess of 20 impacts, all of which were strong enough to indent solid stainless steel. We have also enclosed a photo from the back of the timepiece showing that the impacts have, at the least, damaged and dislodged one of the screws in the movement.This client wants the timepiece to be repaired free of charge. However, because the client has clearly damaged the timepiece (clearly evident externally and internally). Damages due to impact are not covered under warranty, and the timepiece cannot be repaired free of charge.Thank you.
This client purchased a Breitling Bentley Flying B in September of 2014. Within 2 months, the client had an issue with the timepiece and he returned it for service. The issue was that he somehow got the movement magnetized, and we had it serviced free of charge and returned. Over a year and a...
half later, the client returned the timepiece again for servicing. Upon assessment, it was determined that the timepiece requires a maintenance service to rectify the issue. The reason for this is that the client changed the time in reverse, which you cannot do on a Flying B with a time aperture, as indicated in the instructions. This is not covered under warranty, and the client refused to remit payment for service.In short, this was damaged by the client. Our policies clearly articulate that this is not covered under warranty. The client has indicated he will not remit payment, and the timepiece has been recalled from the manufacturer. Once the timepiece arrives, it will be returned to him with no intervention. Thank you.
This client sent in his timepiece and it was serviced in accordance with guidelines. The "huge crack" he is referring to on his back case is a tiny indentation, less than a quarter of a millimeter, which is present in the pre-manufactured grooves Omega places on the back case of the watch in order...
to utilize the tool to open the case back. The grooves are placed there for precisely this reason. There are no cracks (whatsoever) on the back case of the client's timepiece.Furthermore, there are no cracks on the crystal of the client's timepiece.We are unable to arbitrarily refund the client for these grievances. We apologize for any inconvenience.
Complaint: 11440103
I am rejecting this response because:Again, after over THREE MONTHS they have not fixed a defective product or offered a solution other than paying them $375 for a "complete overhaul" of a luxury watch less than a year old--they are able to send a lengthy retort to my complaint within ONE HOUR...truly impressive. If they had this same level of dedication to their customers' issues, there were be no complaints whatsoever. In the words of Shakespeare: "Methinks thou doth protest too much." THESE GUYS ARE CRIMINALS, SWINDLERS, YOU NAME IT--UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE. I will take their points in order:#1: True, I am NOT a certified watchmaker nor repair specialist. That said—I have never owned a watch—or any item—that needed a “complete overhaul” after less than a year of pampered usage. If I have ever had an issue—especially with a item of this price point—the company has taken care of it accordingly. In addition, Authenticwatches.com will neither divulge who these so-called “authorized” repair specialists are, nor will the allow a customer to actually speak to the technician. I was told this was not possible. This leads me to question whether or not these are indeed authorized, or even qualified.#2: Again—glib response, kicking up questions. The reality is this: this watch has been pampered since I received it; has never been so much as dropped, gotten wet, etc…furthermore, it doesn’t matter what the item is—a watch, a car, or a lawn mower—the expectation is that the product work under normal conditions for AT LEAST A YEAR…this didn’t even make it 9 months before I had to return it. True, things happens in the product world…when they do, the seller should take care of it—especially with their warranty…which clearly is bogus.#3: Again, calling me a liar…the fact that someone told me they were the “owner” wasn’t asserted to help my case or make a difference whatsoever…it was incidental…and it was TRUE. Of course, you can say “call us and ask for the owner” and you won’t get him…however, I originally asked to speak to a manager…when I did and the guy was belligerent and unhelpful, I asked to speak to someone at an even higher level. At that point, he said, “It doesn’t get any higher…I’m the owner.” So, whether he was lying or not is not for me to say, but it is emblematic of how this company operates that they would paint a consumer trying to get his watch fixed as “fabricating” a story. Pathetic.#4: It’s simple; an A+ rating for anyone who treats their customers in this fashion is misleading at best. Granted their rating algorithm is based on a multitude of factors—ANY company that behaves in the way AUTHENTICWATCHES.COM does should not receive such a high and vaunted rating. it’s misleading and lowers the value of the good work that Revdex.com does, as well as those companies truly deserving of a strong grade. These criminals (and yes, they are behaving in such a manner) don’t deserve that.#5: Let me be clear—I did not say the “warranty was criminal”—(THERE THEY GO—TWISTING WORDS…)—I asserted (and stand by it), their BUSINESS PRACTICES ARE CRIMINAL. At this point, I’m not even sure that the watch they sent is nothing more than a replica. I have attached the letter from Longines who (of course) cannot control the sales over the internet. They have, however, provided me the name of a local specialist for them who will verify the merchandise and fix it. In the end, they still have my watch; sold me a piece of defective merchandise that stopped working; found loopholes in the warranty; and will not divulge who their so-called “authorized dealers/repairers” are…Really—is that an A+ rated company??? If so, it’s time to change your system.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I am quite disappointed in your offensive reply and nonsense examples. You make me sound like a felony seeking for gain from you. I was just expressing my thoughts as a client because you did not explain in detail on why the repair was not covered by the warranty. How many customers will accept without hesitation that the product breaking is their fault when two different types of malfunctions happen within a few months after their purchase of a new watch? You did not give any detailed information on the previous emails and that is why I am wasting my time here. Regarding the Omega Seamaster, I did not even mention that it was an defective watch nor did I ask you to repair it without any remitting payment as seen in my previous comment. I just mentioned it because I received the reply from you explaining how it is not covered by the warranty without any detailed explanation. It is ridiculous that you used the “crashed car” as an example. I did not throw the watch to break it. Once again, I am very disappointed and exasperated about your company’s attitude towards clients. This was a complete waste of my time. I have many watches and these two are the only ones that broke down. I hope this is just bad luck. Of course, please return my watches with no further intervention.
Regards,
H[redacted]
We thank the client for his service to our nation,. We do, however, wish to emphasize that USMC veterans (nor veterans of any other branch of service), though appreciated, are not entitled to full refunds on worn, used timepieces. Notwithstanding the client's conspiratorial thought process and accusations, we will be happy to provide a time line:Less than three weeks after having received the timepiece, the client called threatening a charge dispute, Revdex.com complaints, and other complaints on other websites, unless we accept back his used watch and send him a new one. That is indeed a threat. The proverbial "You better do what I tell you to, regardless of the terms of sale, or else I'm going to [insert a litany of threats]" is indeed a threatening posture to take.A standard issue service takes 6-8 weeks. We informed the client we would put a rush on the service. The client, after less than three weeks, called and spoke to M[redacted], telling him (paraphrasing) "If you don't ship me a brand new watch I'm calling my credit card to do a charge back, and I'll keep posting negative reviews on your company all over the internet until you send me a new watch or give me a full refund!"Those are indeed threats, as defined in the dictionary:Threatnoun1.a declaration of an intention or determination to�...⇄ would like to emphasize that this incredible litany of threats was made less than three weeks after having received the timepiece, on 9/11/2015. As we did indeed put a rush service on the timepiece, however, a rush service does not mean that we can simply conform to whichever arbitrary time line the client has set forth. On Monday afternoon (9/14/15, three days after the client decided to do all of this) we received an update that the client's timepiece was ready and is shipping back to us for arrival on Thursday, 9/17/15. Therefore, the total completion time from receipt will have been less than 4 weeks; that's a VERY fast turn-around time. To be frank, it's less than half of the turn around time it takes for any standard Bell and Ross repair. Had the client simply been patient and waited, he would have had his timepiece back tomorrow. The client seems to believe that somehow, his calls and threats have had some actual effect on the timeline; they have not. Regardless of any action our company, or the client, or the Revdex.com, or any other party take, the timepiece would have arrived back to us on the exact same day. We had already shipped it with rush service, and there is way to intervene in the middle of said service to "extra rush" the rush service.However, the client did indeed call and make a direct threat to initiate a charge dispute with his credit card. Once that threat is made, we, as an organization, must act to protect ourselves from any loss due to said threat of a fraudulent charge dispute (it is indeed fraudulent.) Upon purchase of the timepiece, the client was made to agree to our terms and conditions, which is standard for all companies. The terms clearly outline that a timepiece cannot be returned for a refund once it has been worn. The terms also outline that our warranty of merchantability takes effect once said timepiece has been worn. These terms are in full compliance with UCC § 2-316, and are standard for all companies (it is rare for any company to issue a full refund on used merchandise). The client agreed to said policies at the time of purchase. A charge dispute is, therefore, in direct violation of UCC § 2-719. We have refunded the client less 20% as a courtesy, and will sell the timepiece as a used watch. We cannot issue the client any further refund. We have offered to ship the client's timepiece back to him, as well as refund the 20% deducted, if he opts to make payment in full via a payment method where he cannot commit further fraudulent charge disputes (check, money order, wire transfer.) The client responded to this offer via email with a litany of conspiratorial theories and insults. The client has been refunded less 20% and this m[redacted]er is now closed. Should the client pursue fraudulent activities with his credit card, we will have no choice but to recuperate any fiduciary losses, plus costs of said recuperative actions.
This client feels his timepiece is not as green as he would like it to be. There is no "misrepresentation" when the client is shown the manufacturer stock photograph and is shipped the manufacturer's item. We are truly sorry to hear this client is displeased, however, there is no scenario possible in which he could receive this timepiece with a brighter green hue, unless he chooses to purchase some form of customized replica.We only sell authentic timepieces, and cannot make the bezel any brighter for the client.The client wished to be provided an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, and offered a discount, to keep the timepiece. As there was no wrongdoing, we are unable to accommodate either of the client's requests. We feel the analogy provided in the foregoing response was indeed an accurate depiction of what is taking place here. There is no "scam" and there is no malicious intent by us when we post the manufacturer's picture and ship the manufacturer's item. This client is well aware of these facts. It is entirely his prerogative to make false, hyperbolic claims (such as "SCAM ALERT" with the hashtag "notauthenticwatches" with the full knowledge that there is no scam, and the full knowledge that the timepiece he received is indeed authentic. No policy shift will take place in order to accommodate requests for monies not owed to an individual. A company engaging in a "scam" does not typically offer full refunds to client's which are dissatisfied. It is not a "scam" for a company to refuse to simply dish out money to a client, under threat of social media posts, when there have been no errors made by said company. If the client doubts authenticity in any way, he is more than welcome to take the timepiece directly to any authorized dealer for authentication.Our policies are posted online, and our system does not allow checkout until such policies have been agreed to. These policies outline that there may be slight variances in a photograph online from the actual item. The reason for this is that photographs of an item on a monitor can vary slightly from an actual item. The intensity of flash, type of lighting, ambient lighting, shading, etc. can result in several different looking photographs of the same item. In addition to this, the same photograph displayed on a set of different monitors, all with potentially different settings, will also result in a slight variance in appearance. Finally, many items we carry have natural stones or jewels (e.g. Mother of Pearl, diamonds, et.al.). Various angles of the a mother of pearl dial will produce significantly different hues and coloration, with a "white mother of pearl" dial appearing light pink, light blue, or white, depending on the angle and lighting. Various light intensity, type of lighting (LED, incandescent, fluorescent) when photographs are taken of diamonds will produce significant variances in diamond brightness and apparent clarity. If the client had purchased a diamond bezel watch, and then informed us that the diamonds aren't as shiny as he thought they would be, we would offer a return for refund (as we have in this case); we would not be able to admit some sort of fault, or provide some sort of compensation (as we cannot in this case).Short of incorrectly admitting fault where there is none, and short of simply giving the client monies not owed to him, we do not see any way of satisfying this client. It is quite evident what is actually taking place.We are happy to hear the timepiece is being returned, and will issue the client a full refund less shipping fees in accordance with our policies posted online. We hope this client is successful in finding a timepiece he feels is suitable to his needs. We always recommend that a client visit a local authorized dealer in order to get a good idea of not just a three dimensional in-person appearance, but also the weight and feel of any timepiece prior to purchasing online.We are sorry that we were unable to satisfy this client and hope he finds the watch he desires.
Complaint: 10583605
I am rejecting this response because:
I did not call 4 hours later. When I called the lady I spoke to said it had been received by then but not fully processed. I was told they were going to go ahead and process so they could charge me a return fee. As I mentioned the items never left their store. If it did they need to provide a tracking number to show this. They can call me a liar but those are the facts. These guys are a bunch of crooks. I am also reporting them to chrono24 the web site I located this merchant on. If this is not resolved I will get them pulled from that site. Their web pages's have a bold statement that their is no re stocking fee. You have to dig into the fine print to see differently. This sis false advertising. I will continue to pursue this until it is resolved. If needed I will file a police report for theft with the police in your area. If they do no want to refund this amount then have them send me the watch.
Regards,
[redacted]
We are unable to accommodate the requests of refund, nor service under warranty, for the reasons outlined in our previous response.The facts are as follows:10/13/2014: This timepiece was sent in fully functional condition.12/30/2014: The client damaged the timepiece (impacted, causing dislodged screw), and we serviced it free of charge as a one time courtesy. Returned to client 1/26/15.4/13/2016: Client returned timepiece indicating it was gaining 5 minutes per day5/8/2016: Client was emailed an estimate for a movement maintenance procedure required. 5/8/16 - 5/9/16 - Client argued about ever having been sent a functional timepiece at any point, despite the fact that no complaints about function had been reported within the approximate 1.25 years since the last time the client received the timepiece which was repaired as a courtesy. Client demanded $500 Million. Client made it clear he had no intention of remitting payment.5/27/2016 - Client's watch was returned with no intervention. This client is attempting to pose an argument that he was never shipped a functioning timepiece. The client was shipped a timepiece which was fully functional until he damaged it in December of 2014. Although we were under no obligation whatsoever to repair it free of charge (damages are not covered under warranty), we did so as a one time courtesy. The client received his timepiece back in January of 2015, and has not communicated about any problems whatsoever until 1 year, 2 months, and 2 weeks later. Upon receiving an estimate, he started claiming it had never worked. The client has further asserted that we never informed him that it could be impacted, and that this is a self serving fabrication. However, in response to his email stating that a service should not be required until after 5 years (which is incorrect), we replied via email on Monday, May 9th, at 7:42 am (PT) stating:"Thank you for your email. A movement maintenance service is advertisedto be required every few years; however, there are a litany of factorsthat can necessitate service at more frequent intervals (impact,vibration, leaving the crown open, moisture infiltration, long periodsof non-use, etc)."The assertion that it was never mentioned that his maintenance service may be due to an impact is simple prevarication.The timepiece does indeed require a movement maintenance service in order to restore function. As clearly outlined in our warranty of merchantability posted on every page of our website, a movement maintenance service is not covered under warranty. Here is a link to our policies:http://www.authenticwatches.com/authenticwatches-warranty.htmlHere is a copy of the applicable exclusions clause, verbatim:"The warranty does not cover damages caused by impact, vibrations, magnetic fields, or batteries; nor does it cover straps, bracelets, bezels, buckles, finishes, cases, dials, hands, crowns, buttons or crystals. It also does not cover damage or defects arising from normal wear; nor does it cover overhauls, maintenance, scratches, accidents, misuse or return shipping."There are no other implied warranties, as clearly outlined in the following clauses in our warranty policies:"All timepieces sold through AuthenticWatches.com will be warranted by the AuthenticWatches.com limited warranty of merchantability unless otherwise noted.""There are no warranties which extend beyond the description on the face hereof.""The foregoing is the entire term of warranty, and no other warranties are included, nor shall be construed to have been implied."All policies are in strict compliance with the laws governing warranties of merchantability (UCC § 2-316). The client agreed to these policies upon checkout, as well as upon returning his timepiece for service. We are sorry, however, we are not able to accommodate the client's request for a refund, nor for warranty service of his damaged timepiece. Thank you.
Complaint: 11557996
I am rejecting this response because: I did not receive any check from the company 3 weeks ago as they are saying and they cannot track it as it was sent via regular mail therefore there is no tracking information. I have offered to provide the company with my FedEx and UPS account so they can send another check and it can be tracked however they have denied this for what reason I do not know. I asked them to provide me with a contact of their accounts payable department or bank so I can see how and when the check was sent and they said they cannot provide with this information. They still have no told me when I expect to receive my refund check so I would like to keep this open until I have received it as I am very concern with the reputation of this business from looking at previous reviews online and it has been almost 2 months now that they have been holding my money for an item I never received.
Regards,
A[redacted]
Client purchased a watch which was serviced under warranty. Prior to return, watch was pressure tested and passed the pressure test. Several months later, he contacts us to tell us that water entered the watch, and that the watch was not improperly sealed.The watch was properly sealed when returned...
to him, confirmed via water resistance test.Regrettably, moisture damage is not covered under warranty. The client requested we return the watch with no services rendered, and the timepiece has already been returned to him.We cannot service the timepiece free of charge, nor are we able to have it serviced any more at the price quote he refused, as the longer moisture is left unrepaired, the more extensive the damage will be.We are sorry we are unable to assist the client with his request.
Client claims to have received timepiece in a condition other than what was advertised. At no point in time was the timepiece advertised as "new" nor "brand new". At no point in time was the timepiece advertised to come with factory stickers.The client received the exact item ordered in the exact...
condition advertised. We are sorry, however, we are unable to include items which are not advertised based on the client's recollection of a different purchase of a different timepiece 6 years ago. We are sorry to hear that the client is upset, however, we are unable to waive the additional costs involved. Thank you.
We are sorry the client feels so upset. His first statement begins by stating that the first Rolex timepiece he purchased from us came with stickers. His newest statement warns people to not purchase from us because they will not receive a watch with stickers. Yet, he himself did.We understand that the client is upset and are sorry to hear about that. Each item is advertised precisely in the condition in which it is sold. Some items are listed as brand new, some are listed as store display items, and so forth.A vast majority of Rolex timepieces will come with stickers. Some will not. Anyone can call us at any time to confirm prior to purchase at ###-###-####.Thank you again.
Complaint: 11498981
I am rejecting this response because:
Regards,
Because the manufacturer of the watch informed me otherwise, contradicting your previous statements
[redacted]
Complaint: 11677906
I am rejecting this response because: I purchased a new watch, not a used watch. I was in possession of the watch for 8 months when it began losing time. Why would an 8 month old watch require maintenance? According to Tag Heuer's website, "We recommend a maintenance service after 2 years or a failed water-resistance test." Furthermore, Authenticwatches.com asked for $570.00 for maintenance on my watch. Tag Heuer's website list cost for maintenance service for a mechanical chronograph watch from $190.00 - $200.00. Obviously, Authenticwatches.com is making excuses to not honor their warranty they falsely advertise on their website and charge their customers additional charges for what should be covered under their warranty.
Regards,
J[redacted]
This client did indeed purchase a timepiece from our company. The timepiece was shipped via FedEx and received by the client. The client removed all the tags from the timepiece, and the timepiece was worn. The client did indeed call to report a problem with the GMT hand, and we did indeed...
inform him we would do our best to have the service rushed. A Bell and Ross timepiece typically takes 6-8 weeks to service. This client called us 3 weeks after it arrived in our facility demanding a full refund, and threatening a charge dispute (repeatedly). He also repeatedly threatened negative reviews, as well as this Revdex.com complaint, if we did not comply with his demands and issue him a full refund on his used watch.We are not able to issue a full refund on the client's used timepiece.This client has agreed to our policies posted online, which clearly articulate that once the tags have been removed, or the timepiece is worn, it cannot be returned for a refund. In addition, the client has set an arbitrary time frame for which he demands that we issue a refund. We are unable to comply with arbitrary time-frames set up by clients, as the service procedure is through the manufacturer, and not under our control.The condition of the clients timepiece is as follows: The strap has been bent to the point of permanent notching on the rubber strap. The buckle has been scratched. The case has been scratched.As the timepiece was not returned brand new, we are unable to issue a full refund, notwithstanding threats of negative feedback ratings, or fraudulently based charge disputes.We are sorry, however, we are not able to offer this client a full refund on his used timepiece, and a refund has been issued less the depreciation on a used watch.
Complaint: 11512463
I am rejecting this response because: The company “Authentic Watches” states that I returned my watch over a year and a half later. This is true but I already mentioned many times that the abnormal symptoms had already started soon after the first repair. I thought I could use it while it was mildly defective, but the problems increasingly grew worse and it was totally broken by the time I sent it a second time for repair. They also said I broke the watch because I “changed the time in reverse”. I noticed this on the instruction when I first received the watch (This is simply ridiculous! I cannot fathom why a watch will break if the dial is turned in one direction!) Anyways, I have been very careful to follow the instructions explaining not to reverse the time on the watch, so therefore I don’t believe I myself broke the watch. It is a shame I cannot prove this. The company did not even explain the reasons of my broken watch during the multiple conversations on email. In this situation, the information of the malfunctions was very unilateral, and I felt like I was being ignored. I have completely lost my faith with this company, and I would never recommend it to anyone else.PS: I have another broken watch (Omega Seamster) purchased from this company which was sent for the repair and they also requested $932 for the repair stating not covered the warranty.requested
Regards,
H[redacted]
Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because:
Perhaps some insight to my background will illustrate my
frustration dealing with a company that fails to do what they say they will
I am a retired Marine Corps Officer and a Disabled Veteran. I spent a career serving with men and women
of honor, men and women who could be trusted at their word to do what they said
they would.
Now, I have encountered an organization who works every
angle to gain the upper hand, whose heavy handed, intimidating tactics border
on extortionary while simultaneously accusing me of making threats. My "threats' consisted of: (1) Stating I
would contact the Revdex.com; (2) Stating I would speak with my
credit card company regarding this m[redacted]er and, (3) I would write a negative review if I did not
obtain an equitable solution. These are
not threats, these are Consumer Protections available to all American
Citizens. Yet, at the mere mention of
involving these additional agencies, the representatives of Authentic Watches
immediately became argumentative and hostile while pointedly discouraging me
from speaking with these agencies. Why
would this be? Why would an honorable
company who is operating above the board wish to discourage a consumer from
invoking standard avenues of protection?
And yet, within two days of contacting my credit card
company Authentic Watches issued an immediate refund of 80% of the original
purchase price. Why did they suddenly
refund this money so willingly?
Three days after I contacted the Revdex.com I began to receive several
emails from Authentic Watches. In an
email dated September 2015, Peter Grant, the General Manager for Authentic
Watches, informed me my watch was now ready to be shipped. An incredibly coincidental turn of events,
no? Just three days prior I had been
informed by M[redacted] that my watch would need a MINIMUM of three weeks before it
would the watch would be repaired
So, based on the above observations, it would seem the
avenues available for Consumer Protection really do work. Despite Authentic Watches threats to the
contrary immediately following my contacting the Revdex.com and the
Bank of America, my watch was suddenly ready to be shipped.
I have countless emails that document my correspondence with
Authentic Watches where my tone is polite and accommodating. Similarly, I have several emails from
Authentic Watches where their tone is aggressive, intimidating and hostile. In short, the company misrepresents their
products: they advertise and sell as new
watches that damaged and in need of repair.
By way of apologizing for receiving a watch that was so
obviously malfunctioning, Amber promised on August that my watch would
receive RUSH service and it would be back in my hands within 3-weeks of its
return to Authentic Watches. THIS IS THE
POLICY AUTHENTIC WATCHES VIOLATED. For
reference, I never tacitly entered into any other agreement with Authentic
Watches
Any competent lawyer could request discovery which I would be willing to bet
would reveal a systemic p[redacted]ern of instances where Authentic Watches knowingly
shipped malfunctioning watches as new
Despite all of the above including Authentic Watches
unwillingness to honor their agreements, since Authentic Watches claimed my
watch had been repaired and was ready for shipment, in an email dated
September I suggested an elegantly simple and equitable solution to this
dispute: Authentic Watches re-charge my
credit card for the 80% refund they issued then simply ship my watch back to
me. And their response, they insisted I
wire – yes, use a direct wire transfer – the FULL AMOUNT to their bank account,
then they would refund 20%.
When I asked via email why I should now trust they would do
the right thing and use a wire transfer, a method of payment that offers ZERO
CONSUMER PROTECTIONS, all communication with Authentic Watches ceased
Authentic Watches business model and those in its employ are unscrupulous,
exploitive, dishonest and nefarious
Some final points to consider that will highlight the unscrupulous
nature of this companyIn their response to you they state I removed all tags
from the watch. This is a lie. Both plastic protective covers were in place
and had never been removed from the crown and case when I shipped the watch
back to Authentic Watches. The watch was
on my wrist for exactly one minute. How
then did a flexible band with an extremely high shape memory permanently
crease? How was the buckle
scratched? How was the case
scratched? I took detailed photos before
I returned the watch. None of the
claimed damage is visible in any of the photos.
Thus, there are only three explanations for the damage now claimed by
Authentic Watches: (1) they shipped a
watch to me that had been previously used and returned; (2) the watch was not
in fact damaged and their response is part of a systemic p[redacted]ern of
intimidation or, (3) they are lying.
Regards,
[redacted]
This client purchased a TAG Heuer Bracelet on 6/17/2015. 3 weeks after purchase, the client called, indicating we did not send him the end pieces. Being that we work with high value merchandise, we have high resolution surveillance in our shipping department, as well as a zoomed in, high...
resolution camera focusing on an area used for staging and packaging new orders.We informed the client we would check the recording of his shipment to determine what had taken place. Upon checking the footage, it is clear that this client was sent a complete bracelet, including the end pieces.Perhaps, in the 3 weeks between the client's receipt of the item and call to our office, the end pieces were misplaced. End pieces aren't sold separately; they are part of the bracelet. We do not have any bracelets without end pieces, and we don't have any end pieces without bracelets. We suggest the client double check the envelope in which it was shipped, or double check the packaging, or any other areas that the bracelet has been in within the past three weeks (car, home office, etc.)We are not able to fabricate end pieces, nor order them individually. The bracelet was sent to the client fully complete.
This client has repeatedly requested that the timepiece be returned. We apologize for any inconvenience. The timepiece will be returned to the client once it arrives back at our location. There are no phone calls to be made to any international location in order to facilitate direct return. Thank you.
This client returned his watch, citing it just stopped working. Upon receipt, the timepiece is full of impact points and scratches, and loose parts from impact can be clearly observed through the clear case-back of his timepiece.We informed the client that damage due to impact is not covered under...
warranty, as outlined in our policies and procedures. The client's response was that he has never impacted it.We have enclosed several photographs. This timepiece has had in excess of 20 impacts, all of which were strong enough to indent solid stainless steel. We have also enclosed a photo from the back of the timepiece showing that the impacts have, at the least, damaged and dislodged one of the screws in the movement.This client wants the timepiece to be repaired free of charge. However, because the client has clearly damaged the timepiece (clearly evident externally and internally). Damages due to impact are not covered under warranty, and the timepiece cannot be repaired free of charge.Thank you.
This client purchased a Breitling Bentley Flying B in September of 2014. Within 2 months, the client had an issue with the timepiece and he returned it for service. The issue was that he somehow got the movement magnetized, and we had it serviced free of charge and returned. Over a year and a...
half later, the client returned the timepiece again for servicing. Upon assessment, it was determined that the timepiece requires a maintenance service to rectify the issue. The reason for this is that the client changed the time in reverse, which you cannot do on a Flying B with a time aperture, as indicated in the instructions. This is not covered under warranty, and the client refused to remit payment for service.In short, this was damaged by the client. Our policies clearly articulate that this is not covered under warranty. The client has indicated he will not remit payment, and the timepiece has been recalled from the manufacturer. Once the timepiece arrives, it will be returned to him with no intervention. Thank you.
This client sent in his timepiece and it was serviced in accordance with guidelines. The "huge crack" he is referring to on his back case is a tiny indentation, less than a quarter of a millimeter, which is present in the pre-manufactured grooves Omega places on the back case of the watch in order...
to utilize the tool to open the case back. The grooves are placed there for precisely this reason. There are no cracks (whatsoever) on the back case of the client's timepiece.Furthermore, there are no cracks on the crystal of the client's timepiece.We are unable to arbitrarily refund the client for these grievances. We apologize for any inconvenience.