Introduction

Is it just me, or is good old-fashioned customer service just a thing of the past?

I seem to remember many years ago (more like decades, actually), when business's seemed anxious and willing to "bend over backwards" to resolve customer-related problems. Back then, it seemed business's understood that going the extra-mile now would probably result in repeat business and good "word-of-mouth" later.

Below, I document two different customer service experiences I've had over the past couple of years.

Feel free to share some of your customer service experiences in the "Comment" box at the bottom of this post.

Discogs Discography Website

Just recently, I purchased a 33 LP vinyl record from an online discography website (discogs.com).

According to Wikipedia, the initial discogs.com website was launched in 2000 (marketplace part of the website launched in 2005), it contains over 15.1 million releases by over 8 million artists across over 1.8 million labels, and has contributions from over 628,000 contributor user accounts. In other words, it isn't some "fly-by-night" operation.

Source:

"Discogs". Wikipedia. Retrieved 2021-05-10

I spent some time browsing through the website before I decided to make a purchase. The website was easy to navigate and there were tons, I mean TONS of vinyl LP's for sale. I'm guessing you could find just about any album you want on this website.

When I found an album that I used to own about 25 years ago (one that I really, really wanted to replace, and that is not available on CD) I thought, OK I'll give it a try and make a purchase. I figured since the price was only $10.00, plus $5.00 for shipping, even if there's some kind of problem, it's not the end of the world, and then I would know what I might expect from any future purchases.

The seller advertised the album as "factory sealed" and in "mint condition", which was another reason I wanted to purchase it.

Unfortunately, after I received the album, I noticed a mark or raised area on the 4th track of the second side which I thought might be audible when played. Sure enough, it made a very annoying sound for about five revolutions of the record. To me, the mark looks like a factory defect, although I can't say for sure.

As I later described to the seller, if this had been in the $1.99 "bargain bin" of a local record store, I would have been fine with the defect, but this album was marketed as "factory sealed" and in "mint condition."

So, thus began my lengthy, very frustrating message exchange with the seller, who ultimately did not refund my money, and who showed little interest at all in a resolution.

When all was said and done, my only recourse was to post a negative review of the seller.

So, I wrote a very long review, explaining in detail what transpired, hoping that anyone reading it might think twice about buying from this seller.

When I went to post the review on discogs.com, I discovered that reviews are limited to only 250 characters. Yes, you read that right - not 250 words, 250 characters! How can anyone write a meaningful review in only 250 characters? Have you ever read online reviews, for example on Amazon? Some of them are quite lengthy, especially the negative reviews, which is exactly the kind of information potential customers are interested in.

Here's the "250-character" review I posted:

Defective 33 LP (visible on surface, audible when played), described as "factory sealed" "mint condition", seller defensive, very non-communicative, wouldn't agree to refund or provide phone number to resolve dispute, not interested in resolution

Here's the long review I wanted to post.

Defective 33 LP, Horrible Customer Service, Extremely Dissatisfied Customer

I'm a newcomer to Discogs. I recently made my first purchase from the seller "nancybuddy."

The 33 LP record I purchased has a visible mark (raised area) on the last track of the second side, which to me appears to be a manufacturing defect (can't say for sure, but that's my guess). The mark makes a very annoying audible sound for 4-5 revolutions of the record during playback. The LP was described by the seller as "factory sealed" and in "mint condition."

I exchanged several messages via Discogs with the seller. I explained the problem to her in detail. I told her that any LP that is "factory sealed" and in "mint condition" condition should play flawlessly. She didn't express any concern about the problem with my order, like a simple "I'm sorry there's a problem with what you purchased, or how can I make it right?" She didn't say she was going to give me a refund either. What she said was:

Just to be clear> I am responsible for factory defects on a 40 year old item?

I didn't see this message until after our lengthy message exchanges due to what I would describe as a technical "glitch" with the Discogs messaging service. So, at the time it seemed as if the seller wasn't sending me any information at all in her messages back to me, basically ignoring my messages. Reading this message now, I assume it means she does not think she is responsible for "factory defects" on old items. If I"m assuming incorrectly, the seller had ample opportunities throughout our message exchanges to clarify this.

So, I decided to go with "Plan B", which involved sending the LP sent back to the seller via the USPS per the information sheet that was sent with my purchase, which says (among other things):

IF THERE IS ANY NEED TO RETURN THE ITEM > JUST REWRAP IN ORIGINAL PACKAGE WRITE REFUSED ACROSS FRONT AND GIVE TO YOUR POSTMAN OR POST OFFICE THEN THEY WILL COLLECT ON MY END PLEASE FOLLOW THIS SUGGESTION IN ALL CASES NO MATTER WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD OR BEEN TOLD IT WORKS

I was skeptical that this would work but I thought, OK, maybe the seller has some kind of return shipping arrangement with the USPS. So, I did as instructed, resealed the package, wrote the word "REFUSED" in bold on the package, and took it to my local U.S. Post Office in Scottsdale, Arizona, along with the information sheet so I could show it to the postal clerk.

Both the clerk and the Post Office supervisor told me that they know nothing about any prior arrangements with "The Doo Wop Shop" or "Nancy Griffith's Collectables" (the the seller business names shown on the instruction sheet). They also said they will not ship the package back unless I pay for the postage. Finally, they expressed some concern as to whether the business I was dealing with was reputable to suggest that I could return a package as instructed. I did not send the package back.

Feeling that I had been misled, I sent another message to the seller explaining this. Her response was:

OK pay for return postage and I will send you the cash to cover it Should be $4

At this point, I was feeling even more skeptical about the seller I was dealing with. Sending cash through the mail, regardless of the amount, is never a good idea, and I wasn't confident that I would be reimbursed.

I sent another message to the seller saying:

It's not fair or reasonable for you to ask me to pay for return shipping on a defective product. All other business's I've dealt with in the past always send me a prepaid return shipping label if a return is required.

In that same message I asked the seller for a contact phone number so we could resolve the problem immediately with one phone call rather than continuing with back-and-forth messages which were going nowhere towards a resolution. No contact phone number was provided.

In that same message I told the seller that in order to resolve the issue I needed two things:

1. An email/message from you telling me exactly how much of the $15.81 I've paid you're going to refund back to my PayPal account and when it will be credited.

2. An additional $6.64 credited back to my PayPal account to cover my cost of sending the package back to you (media rate with signature required so I'll know for sure you received it).

The response from the seller was:

I can mail you the $4 cash NOW or after I get it back What do you want

Again, nothing was said about any refund.

Nothing was said about my request for her to credit $6.64 to my PayPal account. That's an additional $2.64 over the $4.00 she was stating. If I were a business owner I would jump at the chance to "make things right" for a customer for an additional $2.64.

The concept of dealing with cash made me feel very uncomfortable. I thought that if the seller wants to send me cash for return postage, is the seller going to want to send me cash for my purchase as well (assuming she would even agree to a refund)? What if a cash/letter gets lost in the mail, then what? With no audit trail of the refund I would have no recourse. This is not a proper and acceptable way to do business.

At this point I had lost all faith and trust in the seller.

I'm a reasonable person. All I ask is that people deal with me in good faith, communicate, and be fair. I did everything I could to try and resolve the problem. As I stated before, the seller wouldn't send me a phone number so we could talk about this "face-to-face" and resolve it immediately. It appears that the seller had no intent on refunding my purchase right from the "get go" because she feels if it's an old item, then it's not her problem.

I'm not blaming the seller because the LP is defective. I'm upset and extremely dissatisfied with her because of how she handled this issue. I communicated with her, profusely. I was never rude or discourteous to her, but the seller preferred not to engage in any meaningful conversation with me.

If any business advertises anything as "factory sealed" and in "mint" condition, regardless of what it is or how old it is, then that business should do the right thing and stand by the products it sells and offer a refund if the product is not as described.

To add insult to injury, here's what the seller posted in response to my review:

SELLERS BEWARE He has No feedback but is allowed to purchase

HOW did this buyer be allowed to purchase with NO FEEDBACKS my discogs agreement is set at 79 pos feedbacks Serious Discogs malfunction

To which I replied:

First-time Discogs buyer. I have no idea what the seller is talking about.

Reviews on the Discogs website are referred to as "feedback" (and they limited to only 80 characters).

Her response to my review REALLY showed me what kind of person I was dealing with. Her response is an attempt to discredit me and make other sellers skeptical about me as a buyer. Wow, can you believe that? Talk about vindictive!

One final note about her response, I think she actually might have put her foot in her mouth by what she posted. How can a first-time buyer have any "feedback" (seller reviews of buyers) if it's the first time the buyer is buying? There are no prior purchases upon which to provide feedback! Wow, again! This seller is not playing with a full deck!

May 29, 2022 Update:

As I said at the beginning of this section, I REALLY want a good copy of this album. So, I thought I'd check to see what other vendors on the Discogs website has this album for sale.

I found one, which was touted as being in "Near Mint" condition.

I contacted the seller, briefly explained what I had been through with my first purchase, and asked the seller the following:

If I purchase this album from you, will you guarantee you'll refund my purchase price if there is a defect? Are you willing to pay for return shipping, and would you process the refund and return shipping through PayPal?

The seller responded with:

Unfortunately, it's very difficult for most sellers to offer refunds. Our margins are pretty tight as we pay percentages to both Discogs and PayPal on every purchase as well as covering the initial cost of the record, packaging supplies and materials and sometimes even shipping. Not to mention time spent storing, cleaning, packaging and going to the post office. For people like me, this is mostly a hobby. I love finding records, preserving them and getting them to people who want them. That said, if I start offering refunds, I'll lose money and be a target to all the scammers (not you) who like to target the little guys like me and claim records were never received or broken. Happy to play test before I send if you'd still like to purchase.

To which I responded with:

Sure, please go ahead and listen to the album, both sides, and let me know if you hear any annoying "pops", "clicks", or noises, check to see if the record is warped, or if the record skips. As long as it plays "perfectly" I'm willing to purchase it.

I sent that message on 18 days ago on May 11. I have not received a response from the seller.

And, just when I thought my first purchase "debacle" was over and done with, on May 19 I received a message from "nancybuddy" which said the following:

Ignorance of Discogs rules is not a defense

On May 25 she sent me another message as follows:

take off your neg feedback and I will refund the 15.81

The last message "nancybuddy" posted prior to these two was on May 10 - two days after I posted my negative review.

The seller claiming I'm breaking the "rules" and therefore I have no "defense." What is going on here? Am I on trial in a court of law?

But what really "takes the cake" is that then she has the audacity to FINALLY say she will refund my purchase price in full if I remove the negative review!

I gave this seller every opportunity to make this "right" and she chose not to. Only NOW, after I've posted a negative review, only NOW she agrees to do what she should have agreed to at the outset.

Her belated offer isn't about making things "right" for me. It's not that she had a sudden "change of heart" and decided to do what's right. She's only making this offer because she doesn't want a negative review about her business on the website. IT'S ALL ABOUT HER.

Could I decide to "bury the hatchet", so to speak, and accept her belated offer? At least then I'd get my money back, right? Or would I? This seller indicated previously that she wanted to deal in cash. Sorry, but cash is not acceptable, especially considering the type of person I'm dealing with.

The "bigger picture" here is that reviews exist for a reason: to help potential buyers make wise purchasing decisions. If I were to remove the review, then what's the point of having reviews? Other potential buyers need to know about the extremely frustrating, unfair, and unreasonable experience I went through with this seller.

And one last thing about the sellers on this website. If what I was told by the second seller I approached is true - that their margins are "pretty tight" - then increase your costs just enough to cover refund situations. People looking for vintage records are not going to balk at paying just a little bit more to know that just in case there's a problem and a return is necessary, they won't get "the runaround" like I did.

Cox Communications

In January of 2020 I contacted Cox Communications (my internet service provider) in order to downgrade the speed of my service and save some money. I had been on a discounted, "promotional" rate of $54.49/month for the 30 mbps service, but I felt that I really didn't need the extra speed, and my "promotional" period was about to expire.

The representative I spoke with told me that if I downgrade from my 30 mbps "promotional" rate to the lowest Cox speed of 10 mbps, then my cost would be $59.99/month. In other words, I would be paying $5.50 more/month for a slower speed! That didn't sound right to me at all. You're telling me that's the best you can do for a loyal, long-time Cox customer of 14 years?

The representative was adamant and would not offer me any lower rate. So I said OK, I'll take it.

As soon as I hung up the phone I got online and did some research. I saw advertisements for Cox 10 mbps rates of $44.99/month (not first-time introductory rates).

So, I called Cox a second time, this time asking to speak directly to the Loyalty/Retention department. For the record, the first rep I spoke with told me he worked in the Loyalty/Retention department.

I spoke with a very cordial woman who at once told me she could give me the $44.99/month rate, effectively immediately, that there would be no charge to switch, that if I wanted to upgrade later there would be no charge to upgrade, and that my next bill would be pro-rated to show the new, lower rate. Now that's customer service!

But where was this service on my first call? Why did I have to make a second call? If that first rep worked in the Loyalty/Retention department as he said, why did he not offer me the lower rate? Most likely, that first rep had been "schooled" by Cox to try and get as much money out of a customer as possible. And that's what you get for 14 years of loyalty?