Bought brand new samsung tab on adverts.ie seller wont hand over receipt

the culture of deference

I am posting this now because of this thread
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056858802

HI all. as title says

I Bought a brand new sealed samsung 8.9 tab on adverts.ie, seller wont hand over receipt.

On the original add the seller said it was sealed brand new with receipt.

When I met the seller he said he had mis placed it but had ID on him. I bought the goods and took note of ID. I reminded him again a few times over the next 2 weeks for receipt, then he told me to F off.

I reported it to boards and adverts, the mods contacted him, he then sent the mods a photo of a photocopy of receipt and they were happy enough. I still have no receipt.
What can I do?
Should the mods have done more?
What if he reports the tab as stolen?
What if it has warranty issues?

RangeR

You can do nothing. There are a lot of stolen, high value, goods out there at the moment. You may find, that if you proceed with this that your device isn't yours and you lose yer money.

Some people out there are just pure scum.

galwayjohn89

Wouldn't be surprised if he kept the receipt in order to get the cash-back from Samsung.

fasttalkerchat

Did you pay with paypal or in cash?

uberalles

Phone Samsung and req the device is put in your name and address. Confirm the start date of the warranty.

If they want a receipt email them the copy receipt. They probably won't ask.

People sell stuff all the time but the manufacturer will stand over the warranty provided it not reported stolen by the original owner.

You may be stressing yourself unnecessarily OP.

Phone the manufacturer !

fasttalkerchat

uberalles wrote: »

Phone Samsung and req the device is put in your name and address. Confirm the start date of the warranty.

If they want a receipt email them a receipt.

People sell stuff all the time but the manufacturer will stand over the warranty provided it not reported stolen by the original owner.

You may be stressing yourself unnecessarily OP.

Phone the manufacturer !

Don't do this!

The warranty is not transferable. If you say that you are not the original owner, the warranty is invalid.

dudara

It's basically a private sale and caveat emptor applies. Adverts.ie merely facilitates the sale and enforces some basic guidelines for behaviour (i.e. no gouging).

You have the record of the advert as partial proof that you bought it - hopefully either you got a receipt for handing over cash, or alternatively you paid via PayPal.

j4vier

Vuzuggu wrote: »

Wouldn't be surprised if he kept the receipt in order to get the cash-back from Samsung.

as far as i now, cashback is only applicable on tabs 2 10.1, 7 and note 10.1

there is no cashback on the 8.9

the culture of deference

dudara wrote: »

It's basically a private sale and caveat emptor applies. Adverts.ie merely facilitates the sale and enforces some basic guidelines for behaviour (i.e. no gouging).

You have the record of the advert as partial proof that you bought it - hopefully either you got a receipt for handing over cash, or alternatively you paid via PayPal.

I bought the goods and took note of his ID. I reminded him again a few times over the next 2 weeks for receipt, then he told me to F off.

I reported it to boards and adverts, the mods contacted him, he then sent the mods a photo of a photocopy of receipt and they were happy enough.

The mods did not send me the copy of the receipt, and then they told me to stop ringing the seller as if I was in the wrong.

I still have no receipt.

dudara

If you want to discuss the mods actions, then I'd suggest the Feedback forum. This forum really isn't the place for that.

fasttalkerchat

Did you pay with Paypal OP?

5500

Aside from looking for the receipt, is there anything actually wrong with the tab? If all is fine and no problems I'd stop stressing about it and move on, leave neg feedback on his adverts account if you wish but I wouldn't be getting stressed out over it just because someone else had a totally unrelated problem in relation to tickets bought on gumtree

P. Breathnach

When you buy from a private seller it is a good idea to seek evidence that the seller actually owns the item. A receipt is useful in establishing that. So I think OP has a real point: it is reasonable to expect either the receipt or a copy of it. If it is advertised as being "with receipt", then the receipt should be provided.

Cabaal

Doesn't matter if the item was purchased and never opened, fact remains that it is second hand.

As it's a second hand item you will have no warranty on the item as you are NOT the purchaser, unless of course you lie to the manufacturer and claim you are the original purchaser

fasttalkerchat

Personally I would reverse the transaction until he sends you everything you paid for.
A receipt adds value, especially if it was bought for resale. I have in the past paid an extra few quid for an item with a receipt.

RangeR

Cabaal wrote: »

Doesn't matter if the item was purchased and never opened, fact remains that it is second hand.

Or stolen.

Cabaal

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Personally I would reverse the transaction until he sends you everything you paid for.
A receipt adds value, especially if it was bought for resale. I have in the past paid an extra few quid for an item with a receipt.

Doesn't add any value really,

Second hand is second hand, warranty's don't transfer over unless the manufacturer allows them to...most don't.

fasttalkerchat

Cabaal wrote: »

Second hand is second hand, warranty's don't transfer over unless the manufacturer allows them to...most don't.

That's what I said in post 6. A lot of buyers want to see a receipt and since it was listed in the advert, the seller knew including this would help sell the item.

uck51js9zml2yt

If the receipt was so important to the OP why did he/she hand over money for a tab without one?

You have your tab, the seller has his money. All you can do is learn from the experience.

the culture of deference

Brennan Bald Hairpiece wrote: »

If the receipt was so important to the OP why did he/she hand over money for a tab without one?

You have your tab, the seller has his money. All you can do is learn from the experience.

You are missing the point.

He sent the mods a copy of receipt, they will not send it to me or request him to send it to me.

I didn't realise that a warranty didn't transfer on a new sealed item. Does that mean xmas presents aren't covered?

RangeR

the culture of deference wrote: »

He sent the mods a copy of receipt, they will not send it to me or request him to send it to me.

Worse than that, he sent a PHOTO of a PHOTOCOPY of SOME receipt. Did that receipt have the actual serial number of the tablet printed on it? If not, then a photo of a photocopy could be for a pile of ****e, as far as I'm concerned.

fasttalkerchat

the culture of deference wrote: »

You are missing the point.

He sent the mods a copy of receipt, they will not send it to me or request him to send it to me.

Have you tried PM'ing the mod for that image. Since it is your property I don't see why they wouldn't give it to you. A photocopy of a complete receipt holds the same value.

Nonoperational

There basically nothing you can do. Next time don't hand over the cash without the receipt.

the culture of deference

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Have you tried PM'ing the mod for that image. Since it is your property I don't see why they wouldn't give it to you. A photocopy of a complete receipt holds the same value.

The mods think I am over reacting.

The adverts.ie ad clearly said 1 week old brand new sealed tab with receipt.

The seller sent the Mods a copy of receipt and they felt that was enough.

Surely the adverts Mods have to do more?

fasttalkerchat

the culture of deference wrote: »

The mods think I am over reacting.

The adverts.ie ad clearly said 1 week old brand new sealed tab with receipt.

The seller sent the Mods a copy of receipt and they felt that was enough.

Surely the adverts Mods have to do more?

Have you tried talking to the mod? After that report it.

Procrastastudy

The seller has not supplied what he said he would, however one would simply argue you knew that at the time of purchase. A couple of points spring to mind.

The warranty is only with the original purchaser and retailer so you don't need to worry about that, you have no warranty. The manufacturer has no contract with you, or indeed the original purchase. Common practice however is for the manufacturer to assist you in the case of a fault if you request it. You're pulling a fast one if you try and do this with second-hand goods (generally some allow transfer). If you're going to pull a fast one merely tell them you lost the receipt they will likely go off manufacture date.

If it's stolen you may be okay as you might fall into the category of bone fides purchaser. Can't give legal advice so GIYF and I'm normally wrong when I do anyway.

Adverts.ie have done pretty much all they can. Frankly you shouldn't have handed over the money until the guy produced a receipt if it was that important to you. I'd just move on and enjoy your gadget!

Well donr for not joining the Apple cult!

RangeR

Procrastastudy wrote: »

If it's stolen you may be okay as you might fall into the category of bone fides purchaser. Can't give legal advice so GIYF and I'm normally wrong when I do anyway.

On a technicality, if it's stolen, it still belongs to the original owner that is was stolen from. NOT the person who paid the "thief", good faith or not.

Procrastastudy

RangeR wrote: »

On a technicality, if it's stolen, it still belongs to the original owner that is was stolen from. NOT the person who paid the "thief", good faith or not.

Are you sure? I thought equity's darling and all that.

P. Breathnach

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Are you sure? I thought equity's darling and all that.

In almost all circumstances, a person can not give better title to property than he himself has. That means that if you buy something that has been stolen, you do not acquire good title. The principle is set down in lawerly Latin as "nemo dat quod non habet" - nobody can give that which he does not own.

the culture of deference

Does that mean xmas presents aren't covered?

Procrastastudy

the culture of deference wrote: »

Does that mean xmas presents aren't covered?

Oddly yes from a legal point of view. Convention is that a retailer will look after you though. That said as I've put forward on a number of occasions there is a lot of rubbish bandied about re receipts and contracts.

Scotty #

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

The warranty is not transferable.

Cabaal wrote: »

As it's a second hand item you will have no warranty on the item as you are NOT the purchaser

Cabaal wrote: »

Second hand is second hand, warranty's don't transfer over unless the manufacturer allows them to...most don't.

Procrastastudy wrote: »

The warranty is only with the original purchaser and retailer so you don't need to worry about that, you have no warranty.

While extended warranty or manufacturers specific warranty may be only with the original purchaser, under Irish law, the guarantee is transferable.

From citizensinformation.ie...
A guarantee or warranty on a product gives additional protection and this protection is extended to anyone who has possession of the goods during the lifetime of the guarantee.

A guarantee or warranty is a written statement given by the manufacturer or other company. The guarantee or warranty indicates that the manufacturer or other company will repair or replace an item within a set amount of time after it has been purchased. Guarantees are legally binding.

the culture of deference

P. Breathnach wrote: »

In almost all circumstances, a person can not give better title to property than he himself has. That means that if you buy something that has been stolen, you do not acquire good title. The principle is set down in lawerly Latin as "nemo dat quod non habet" - nobody can give that which he does not own.

If I buy a brand new product on adverts.ie, that has a receipt, and the mods have seen said receipt, and the mods know I have purchased it and the seller has confirmed that fact.

Am I the legal owner of the tab?

ceegee

the culture of deference wrote: »

If I buy a brand new product on adverts.ie, that has a receipt, and the mods have seen said receipt, and the mods know I have purchased it and the seller has confirmed that fact.

Am I the legal owner of the tab?

Not if the person who sold it to you had stolen it

P. Breathnach

Scotty # wrote: »

While extended warranty or manufacturers specific warranty may be only with the original purchaser, under Irish law, the guarantee is transferable.

From citizensinformation.ie...
A guarantee or warranty on a product gives additional protection and this protection is extended to anyone who has possession of the goods during the lifetime of the guarantee.

A guarantee or warranty is a written statement given by the manufacturer or other company. The guarantee or warranty indicates that the manufacturer or other company will repair or replace an item within a set amount of time after it has been purchased. Guarantees are legally binding.

That piece is remarkably unclear, and I would be slow to rely on it.

P. Breathnach

the culture of deference wrote: »

If I buy a brand new product on adverts.ie, that has a receipt, and the mods have seen said receipt, and the mods know I have purchased it and the seller has confirmed that fact.

Am I the legal owner of the tab?

As ceegee has said, you are not the owner if the person who sold it to you had stolen it.

It is quite imaginable that a person could steal an item and the receipt together: think how often people put the receipt into the same carrier bag as a newly-purchased item. Somebody who lifts the bag in a bus or in a coffee-shop or wherever ends up with the receipt.

Nevertheless, the receipt would be helpful if the ownership is ever disputed. It would, at least, clarify matters.

I think it is more useful if you have some good ID of the person who sold the item to you. If it emerges that it has been stolen, you know who to go after for compensation and, more important, the Gardaí know who to go after for prosecution.

Scotty #

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That piece is remarkably unclear, and I would be slow to rely on it.

Fair enough.

I'll quote directly from the SALE OF GOODS AND SUPPLY OF SERVICES ACT, 1980 under the GUARANTEES section...

19.—(1) The buyer of goods may maintain an action against a manufacturer or other supplier who fails to observe any of the terms of the guarantee as if that manufacturer or supplier had sold the goods to the buyer and had committed a breach of warranty, and the court may order the manufacturer or supplier to take such action as may be necessary to observe the terms of the guarantee, or to pay damages to the buyer. In this subsection, “buyer” includes all persons who acquire title to the goods within the duration of the guarantee and, where goods are imported, “manufacturer” includes the importer.

It's crystal clear. Guarantees and warranties do transfer to new owners for the duration of the guarentee/warranty.

You can read the whole act here... http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1980/en/act/pub/0016/

Scotty #

the culture of deference wrote: »

Am I the legal owner of the tab?

You bought the product in good faith. Unless you believe the product to be stolen or until someone challenges you regarding ownership, yes, until someone proves otherwise you are the legal owner.

slimjimmc

Samsung's own statement on warranties.

Your SAMSUNG warranty

Samsung products carry a full warranty for the period specified. Some Samsung products carry different warranty periods due to the nature of the product's design, manufacture or expected use.

The warranty applies from the date of purchase by the first customer and is transferable only between end-users.

This warranty does not affect your statutory rights as a consumer in any way.

So, it seems under Samsung's terms the warranty is transferrable to the OP and he can initiate a warranty claim directly. However if he returned it to a third party, e.g. shop or repair centre to be fixed then the shop/repair centre can't initiate a warranty claim to cover repairs because they are not end users.

P. Breathnach

Scotty # wrote: »

You bought the product in good faith. Unless you believe the product to be stolen or until someone challenges you regarding ownership, yes, until someone proves otherwise you are the legal owner.

Unless what you acquire is (a) a negotiable instrument, or (b) purchased in a "market ouvert", then you can not acquire better title than the seller had. Outside those very limited exceptions, if you buy a stolen item you do not become the legal owner.

Good faith does not come into it. Waiting to be challenged does not come into it as a matter of law (although as a practical matter, if your possession is unchallenged you can act as if you are the legal owner).

dudara

culture of deference and other posters - If you want to discuss the Adverts mods' actions, then take it to the Feedback or Adverts forum. This is not the place for that discussion.

dudara

Scotty #

P. Breathnach wrote: »

... if you buy a stolen item you do not become the legal owner.

..if your possession is unchallenged you can act as if you are the legal owner

What constitutes 'legal ownership' of the tablet? There is no registrar, no certificate of ownership, no changing of deeds, passing of printed title. I don't know the answer but I presume possession has an awful lot to do with it. Lets just say we know the tablet not to be stolen. Does legal ownership pass then? Yes? Why?

So let's say we presume the tablet not to be stolen. Unless the OP believes or knows otherwise, they should also presume legal ownership. Right?

P. Breathnach

Scotty # wrote: »

What constitutes 'legal ownership' of the tablet? There is no registrar, no certificate of ownership, no changing of deeds, passing of printed title. I don't know the answer but I presume possession has an awful lot to do with it.

That's too big and complex a question for my limited expertise. But possession does not amount to much in proving ownership.

Lets just say we know the tablet not to be stolen. Does legal ownership pass then? Yes? Why?

Because the person purporting to pass on the ownership actually has the right to pass it on.

So let's say we presume the tablet not to be stolen. Unless the OP believes or knows otherwise, they should also presume legal ownership. Right?

Pretty well, subject to reasonableness: if you bought an item at a knock-down price in cash from a stranger in a pub, then it you are unlikely to be believed if you argued that it never crossed your mind that it might be stolen goods. But in less dodgy circumstances, you are sensible to presume that the seller had good title. That's what I meant when I said "as a practical matter, if your possession is unchallenged you can act as if you are the legal owner". But if the presumption turns out to be ill-founded, that's a game-changer. If you buy something in good faith and it is then discovered to have been stolen, you are obliged to return it to its rightful owner.

Scotty #

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's too big and complex a question for my limited expertise. But possession does not amount to much in proving ownership.

Of course it does. How many items in your home do you have proof of ownership for? What makes you the owner of these items and not me? POSSESSION! I've seen the limit of your expertise with the issue of transfer of warranty.

OP, as long as you believe the person you bought the tablet from to be the owner or until someone else claims ownership, you are the new owner. Legal or otherwise!

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Pretty well, subject to reasonableness:

That would be a YES then. :rolleyes:

Procrastastudy

Scotty # wrote: »

Of course it does. How many items in your home do you have proof of ownership for? What makes you the owner of these items and not me? POSSESSION! I've seen the limit of your expertise with the issue of transfer of warranty.

OP, as long as you believe the person you bought the tablet from to be the owner or until someone else claims ownership, you are the new owner. Legal or otherwise!

That would be a YES then. :rolleyes:

WOW a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. You've managed correct some of us on a point and now you're Gods gift? Magnanimous - perhaps add that word to you vocabulary.

The legal owner would be the person who bought it in the first place. The only time this doesn't apply is equity's darling that doesn't apply to stolen goods like this (TY RangeR & P. Breathnach for putting me right). Furthermore the OP by their actions could be found to be on notice even if it did apply.

KwackerJack

He will most likely claim off the insurance for a new one and still have spare cash!!

Scotty #

Procrastastudy wrote: »

The only time this doesn't apply is equity's darling that doesn't apply to stolen goods like this (TY RangeR & P. Breathnach for putting me right).

Like this? You know this tablet to be stolen? I don't, so in my opinion, from what's been said in the thread, the buyer is a BFP.

Procrastastudy wrote: »

You've managed correct some of us on a point and now you're Gods gift?

Don't know what you are trying to get at here. Yourself and others have given inaccurate and misleading information to the OP. This is worse than not giving any information at all. I'll bow out of this thread before I ruffle anyone else's feathers.

Procrastastudy

Scotty # wrote: »

Like this? You know this tablet to be stolen? I don't, so in my opinion, from what's been said in the thread, the buyer is a BFP.

BFP doesn't, as far as I know apply here. This was discussed further up. I'm happy to be corrected, however a civil manner wouldn't go amiss. Especially as you yourself have given incorrect information.

Scotty # wrote: »

Don't know what you are trying to get at here. Yourself and others have given inaccurate and misleading information to the OP. This is worse than not giving any information at all. I'll bow out of this thread before I ruffle anyone else's feathers.

Well I did assume it was just a lack of interpersonal skills rather than you actively trying to be rude.

Scotty #

WOW!! Now I'm being uncivil and rude?? At no time have I been either, you will be under no doubt when I have. As a matter of fact it was you who accused me of thinking I'm "God's gift" after I corrected you.

I have not given misinformation. The OP has made an honest purchase without notice from whom they believe to be the owner of the device (which Adverts has verified) thus obtaining good title. This makes them BFP. FACT! (Why do you find this so hard to accept?? (Rhetorical - I don't actually care))

I have no idea what you do for a living but I sincerely hope it has nothing to do with giving legal advice or law in general! (That's maybe rude... but not uncivil )

Good day!

dudara

Posters - take a break from attacking each other. Continue and I will issue infractions.

dudara

P. Breathnach

Scotty # wrote: »

... The OP has made an honest purchase without notice from whom they believe to be the owner of the device (which Adverts has verified) thus obtaining good title...

You do not acquire good title simply on the basis of a purchase in good faith.