TEKNEK TOYS INTERNATIONAL LP

[redacted] first contacted Tek Nek Toys through our web form on [redacted] on 7/16/15 at 11:50pm. Our customer service policy is and was posted at the top of this page on our website in bold text: "Tek Nek Toys will replace products or parts with defects in materials or workmanship for 90...

days from the date of purchase. Repair or replacement is available only to the original purchaser of the product and requires a copy of the sales receipt. Products are disqualified if they have been damaged by accident, unreasonable use, immersion in water, neglect, abuse, battery leakage, or causes unrelated to defects in materials or workmanship." She let us know that she had been gifted a Rockin' Rider Rocking Bull and that its sound effect features were malfunctioning even after replacing the batteries. She offered to mail the malfunctioning toy to us in exchange for a new working one.
On 7/17/15 we exchanged a few emails with her first asking for pictures of the malfunctioning toy. Once we saw the pictures it was clear that it was an old model that we last manufactured in 2011. We let her know this and recommended that she attempt to return or exchange the toy with the retailer it was purchased from. She responded by stating her desire that we stand by our product and replace her toy. We replied to her email with our customer service policy and reiterated that if she can provide a copy of the original sales receipt we would honor the policy and replace her malfunctioning toy with a comparable product.
On 7/19/15 she stated that she did not have the receipt as it was a gift, accused us of unethical business practices, assured us she didn’t steal the bull, demanded that we replace her toy, and threatened to report us to the Revdex.com and post negative remarks on our social media.
On 7/20/15 we told her if she would mail the malfunctioning bull to us as she originally offered to do, we would replace it. We made it clear that, as this was a deviation from our standard policy, this was a one-time only offer.
On 7/21/15 she accepted and asked for our shipping address.
On 7/22/15 we send her our shipping address and requested that she send us the tracking information once she mailed it so we could keep track of the package in transit.
On 8/22/15 [redacted] emailed us requesting that we send her postage to return the malfunctioning toy.
On 8/24/15 we reiterated that since she couldn’t provide the sales receipt for the malfunctioning toy, she would have to ship it to us at her expense before we would send her a replacement.
We received the malfunctioning toy via UPS on 8/28/15. We sent [redacted] an email letting her know we had received it and that per our agreement we would be shipping her replacement toy on 8/31/15 and requested that she verify her shipping address.
On 8/31/15 we still had not received a response from her regarding her address. Not wanting to waste another day we went ahead and shipped the replacement toy to the address she provided in her original email. We sent her an email letting her know it had shipped via FedEx and provided her with the tracking number.
On 9/1/15 [redacted] called our customer service toll-free number and left a message insisting that we reimburse her the cost she incurred shipping the malfunctioning toy back to us.
On 9/2/15 we sent her an email letting her know we had received her message and would be unable to reimburse her for the shipping charges. We again gave her the tracking number for her replacement – which was still in transit at the time – and let her know the estimated delivery date was 9/8/15. She responded by requesting that her request be forwarded to management and that they contact her directly.
On 9/8/15 the replacement toy arrived at its destination.
On 9/9/15 [redacted] called again, leaving a message again stating that she wanted us to reimburse her for the shipping charges. She also was upset that the replacement toy she received was different from the malfunctioning toy even though we had previously let her know that we hadn’t manufactured the original toy since 2011 and that we would send her a comparable product if she paid to ship the malfunctioning toy to us. She said she now wanted the malfunctioning toy back for sentimental reasons. She also stated that she had recently become aware of a 2008 recall our rocking toys had been affected by. However, the toys affected by the recall were manufactured between 7/26/2007 and 12/29/2007. The date code on [redacted]’ malfunctioning toy indicates that it was manufactured on 3/29/2010 and is therefore totally unaffected by the recall.
It is the position of Tek Nek Toys that [redacted] agreed to ship the malfunctioning toy to us at her expense and that she was made aware that this would be in exchange for a comparable, slightly different item since we no longer manufacture the malfunctioning item. In regards to the recall, the affected items were manufactured only during a period in 2007 and, as [redacted]’ malfunctioning toy was manufactured in 2010, her item was never eligible for replacement.