Langley Miniature Models

[Guest Jack Benson]

Hi,

 

Has anyone encountered a customer service problem with this supplier? 
 

Cheers and Stay Safe
 

 

[Karl]

Hi @Jack Benson, I've used Langley a few times and always found them to be very quick to send items. I built a Clyde puffer but when the kit arrived there were some parts missing, an email to them was responded to within a couple of days and the missing parts were with me within 2 days of that. It sometimes takes a day or two to reply but I've never found them to be anything other than friendly and helpful. I've had a number of items delivered this last week that were ordered last weekend. 

[Guest Jack Benson]

Hi,

 

Thanks for responding. I realise that revealing a less than positive experience on RMweb can be met by hostility but maybe not every customer is treated in the same manner?

My mistake was to inform the seller that the wrong item had been received and hopefully the error could be corrected, the response was a not enjoyable and I have had to resort to a section 57 claim.

 

Cheers and Stay Safe

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bernard Lamb]

A similar experience here. Although it did not get to that stage.

When all is going well they are excellent but when an item got lost in the post in my case they were a pain to deal with.

Bernard

[Guest Jack Benson]

3 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

A similar experience here. Although it did not get to that stage.

When all is going well they are excellent but when an item got lost in the post in my case they were a pain to deal with.

Bernard

There was no response to the two emails to Langley trying to resolve the issue, but the mistake was to call them in order to resolve the issue, only to be met by a stream of profanity followed closely by being cut off. Neither have they responded to PayPal resolution process.

 

Cheers and Stay Safe

[Guest Jack Benson]

The unpleasantness is almost over.

Despite supplying the wrong item, the seller failed to respond to both emails and PayPal’s resolution process, consequently PayPal found in my favour and have issued a refund. It is depressing to note that I was also required to pay for the return of the item to the seller. Hardly an example of fair business practice.
 

By contrast, I contacted Artitec, the manufacturer of the item and I received the model by return from the Nederlands. 
 

Cheers and stay safe

Edited December 17, 2020 by Jack Benson
Removed the name of the seller

[97xx]

I'm sure you probably know this by now, but the consumer does NOT have to cover the cost of returning the item where the problem lies with the item being incorrect or faulty. Paying for return is required only where the fault is that of the buyer.

 

You are also entitled to a refund of your original postage costs for receiving the faulty item, the only wrinkle here is (I think) if you selected an optional enhanced delivery service over the standard one offered in which case you are not refunded for the difference above the standard.

 

Consumer Rights Act 2015, effective 1st October 2015.

Edited December 26, 2020 by 97xx

[hayfield]

Jack

 

Sorry to hear of your issues, I found the opposite reaction/response when I contacted this company. Very polite and extremely helpful. I think there is more than one partner in this business. Perhaps I got lucky or you got unlucky

 

Certainly as posted with mail order a UK buyer is well protected, not certain about international ordres

[Butler Henderson]

40 minutes ago, 97xx said:

I'm sure you probably know this by now, but the consumer does NOT have to cover the cost of returning the item where the problem lies with the item being incorrect or faulty. Paying for return is required only where the fault is that of the buyer.

 

You are also entitled to a refund of your original postage costs for receiving the faulty item, the only wrinkle here is (I think) if you selected an optional enhanced delivery service over the standard one offered in which case you are not refunded for the difference above the standard.

 

Consumer Rights Act 2015, effective 1st October 2015.

Therein lies a problem - those suppliers who in my experience openly  state how to return a faulty item usually require it sending back at the cheapest postage, not that which covers the cost of the item. So if say  a returned item worth beyond the basic £20 compensation the Post Office offer goes missing is the supplier going to cover the matter. I would rather be c.£8 quid out of pocket rather than £££ sending it back with an enhanced delivery option. For one item less then £20 I did return to the supplier rather than them refunding the postage they agreed to send a few small items  to the cost of the postage with the replacement.

[Guest Jack Benson]

OK, just a couple of points.

Langley demanded payment by PayPal, when the mistake was found and a polite call to Langley to sort out the problem, the response was a series of expletives and profanities ended by Langley replacing the receiver. Subsequent emails were ignored and I had to contact PayPal, a case was opened an Langley ignored PayPal until the last day when PayPal would have automatically refunded me. Instead, Langley agreed to a refund but at my expense of the return tracked postage (a PayPal requirement) It took a further two weeks after receipt of the goods for Langley to provide a refund but only for the initial payment. 

At no time did Langley apologise or engage in any contact other than the initial abusive response to a polite enquiry. They had every opportunity to offer restitution as it took four weeks to resolve.

 

By contrast, the Dutch manufacturer of the goods, when contacted, supplied the correct item with 48hrs from email to delivery, I regret placing my order with their UK distributer.

 

Apologists for Langley might dismiss this incident but if required I am prepared to defend this statement in court.

 

Cheers and Stay Safe

 

 

 

 

 

[97xx]

31 minutes ago, Butler Henderson said:

Therein lies a problem - those suppliers who in my experience openly  state how to return a faulty item usually require it sending back at the cheapest postage, not that which covers the cost of the item. So if say  a returned item worth beyond the basic £20 compensation the Post Office offer goes missing is the supplier going to cover the matter. I would rather be c.£8 quid out of pocket rather than £££ sending it back with an enhanced delivery option. For one item less then £20 I did return to the supplier rather than them refunding the postage they agreed to send a few small items  to the cost of the postage with the replacement.

Might be at cross-purposes here - I was referring to the seller's obligation to refund on the original delivery charge - where they are not required to refund you for any 'enhanced' delivery option you chose over their standard one.

 

In detail, they can also pro-rate that refund according to the proportion of delivery charge applicable to only the faulty item. So, to take an extreme example if you had a sheet of transfers faulty in a 30kg delivery of white metal, you'd only get small letter postage refunded, pretty obviously.

 

In terms of returning the item, you are within your rights (and in fact advised) to choose a trackable and compensated service, and be refunded by the seller accordingly.

 

Appreciating that this can indeed be expensive, it is often suggested that you offer the seller the option to issue a return service label, or collect the item. However, I can see that this conversation might not have been too fruitful here...

[Guest Jack Benson]

Richard,

 

The gap between what should be done and what is achieved is vast.

 

I have taken away the simple lesson that I will never deal with this retailer again and this might possibly prevent even more costly mistakes in the future.

 

How ironic indeed that Artitec stepped up, as a result I will continue to use their products.

 

Thanks

Edited December 26, 2020 by Jack Benson
Appalling grammar

[Bernard Lamb]

21 hours ago, 97xx said:

Might be at cross-purposes here - I was referring to the seller's obligation to refund on the original delivery charge - where they are not required to refund you for any 'enhanced' delivery option you chose over their standard one.

 

In detail, they can also pro-rate that refund according to the proportion of delivery charge applicable to only the faulty item. So, to take an extreme example if you had a sheet of transfers faulty in a 30kg delivery of white metal, you'd only get small letter postage refunded, pretty obviously.

 

In terms of returning the item, you are within your rights (and in fact advised) to choose a trackable and compensated service, and be refunded by the seller accordingly.

 

Appreciating that this can indeed be expensive, it is often suggested that you offer the seller the option to issue a return service label, or collect the item. However, I can see that this conversation might not have been too fruitful here...

A lot of companies operate on a fixed rate for P&P system so that line of argument has complications. It is all well and good to go on about what should happen and the exact legal position but if when things go wrong the supplier is totally unwilling to offer any help then you are stuck. Particularly so if it is a small amount and any legal action is too time consuming to bother about.

In this case as both Jack and myself have pointed out we have a very good supplier who does not seem willing to get involved when there is a problem. Caveat emptor.

Bernard

[97xx]

Agree re caveat emptor.

 

Ultimately, one bad voice garners on average around two dozen sets of listening ears, so the penalty for unacceptable behaviour is large.

 

We can all imagine that dealing with the general public has its challenges, but I would suggest that in a more specialist area it is likely that we're not quite as 'general' and so hopefully more understanding of supplier challenges.

 

For me, performance issues are far more forgivable than unnecessarily unacceptable behaviour.

[Denbridge]

On 25/11/2020 at 14:05, Jack Benson said:

There was no response to the two emails to Langley trying to resolve the issue, but the mistake was to call them in order to resolve the issue, only to be met by a stream of profanity followed closely by being cut off. Neither have they responded to PayPal resolution process.

 

Cheers and Stay Safe

Nothing new then. They have quite a reputation, not least on the exhibition circuit. A rather disfunctional family.