I dont like bad mouthing companies and til i recieved a rather slimey email from them I was about to just draw a line under it.

I bought a mat from a company called deep cut designs. They had just gone into production on the mousemat material the likes of Gamemat.eu use and frontline gaming. The design looked wicked. I ordered straight away and they delivered very quickly. Happy days. Well til I opened the box and the mat was a joke. Looked nothing like what I had ordered (ill post pictures up)

I asked for a refund and they said they would refund me cost of the mat, not the postage of it to me or the cost to return it. See thats where it got my back up. As I view it they were expecting me to waste £20 in postage just to get nothing at all. We had some back and forth on the matter and i had to esculate the matter with pay pal. They ruled that they had to give me a full refund once i return the mat. But paypal doesnt cover the cost of the return postage. So Im £10 down. Its nothing money wise, but the principle of the matter is that due to their incompetence Im having to lose money.

Then someone on their page asked what their mats were like etc. So I posted what they advertised and what I got. They blocked me, removed my comment, and then sent me the following email

Hi, Lee,

After escalating your case to PayPal you got the same answer that you got from us. Maybe our offer was fair after all? I suggest spending your energy elsewhere than on our FB boards. Otherwise we will have to respond with full context of this case, including your emails and other information. Which, by the way, PayPal ruled out as incorrect as well.

So if we are wrong, PayPal is wrong, general practice is wrong, but you are right nevertheless...

Thanks,

Gediminas, DCS

basically as i read it. they are threatening to reveal my information etc

Not exactly the buisness practise of trust worthy folks that.

From what I can see, both you and Deep Cut are in the wrong.

They were absolutely wrong for threatening to reveal your personal information. There is no reason for that.

However, regarding the shipping I think you are definitely in the wrong. Who should pay for the return postage if not you? For large national, or even international business, free return shipping is a courtesy, but I don't think you can expect that level of service from a smaller operation. I agree that paying postage on something you are returning is not fun, but Deep Cut isn't making any money on that return shipping, and they need to receive your mat back so they can deal with their own QC issues related to the return.

Deep Cut offered to refund you the money for the item you were unhappy with. That is all of their obligation to you, the unhappy customer.

Regarding your posting on their FB page, I wonder if the tone or content could be seen as hostile by Deep Cut, especially after your "back and forth" on the shipping matter. That might have informed their response to you (which again, they shouldn't have threatened to share your private information) and escalated things.

It sounds like you and Deep Cut should part ways as quickly as possible.

And those mats look nothing alike. If I had bought a mat thinking I was going to get picture #2, when I actually received what is in picture #1, I'd be upset too.

see for me the issue is that they either looked at the mat and went sod him. or they didnt even bother to make sure their product was correctly printed. So why should I have to pay for their mistake at all. I own my own buisness and if i make any mistakes on a job its out of my pocket as it was my mistake.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
However, regarding the shipping I think you are definitely in the wrong. Who should pay for the return postage if not you? For large national, or even international business, free return shipping is a courtesy, but I don't think you can expect that level of service from a smaller operation. I agree that paying postage on something you are returning is not fun, but Deep Cut isn't making any money on that return shipping, and they need to receive your mat back so they can deal with their own QC issues related to the return.

If you are returning a product because it is faulty, then absolutely the seller should cover the return postage. The size of their business is irrelevant. They are still responsible for providing the right product in the right condition.

That's actually the law here in Oz. Obviously, consumer law is going to vary in different countries, though.

 insaniak wrote:
If you are returning a product because it is faulty, then absolutely the seller should cover the return postage. The size of their business is irrelevant. They are still responsible for providing the right product in the right condition.

Is the mat considered faulty? Paypal came to the same resolution as Deep Cut, so whatever protections are in place in the UK* regarding faulty items didn't seem to come into play here.

Perhaps Paypal didn't see this as a faulty item so much as an item not meeting the buyer's expectations.


*I am assuming OP is in the UK based on their flag.

paypal didnt even ask for visual proof and they dont have any control over who pays the return postage after a phonecall to them. Yes I am from the UK

Distance Selling Regulations state that you're liable if you change your mind (don't like the colour, isn't quite what you want etc) but if product is faulty then the onus is on the vendor.

However, I don't think DCS are UK based?

A minor point: their email did not say they would reveal your personal information. They said they would " respond with full context of this case, including your emails and other information." That "other information" does not automatically equal "personal information."

Anyway, maybe it's the picture quality, but is the mat your received really as blue as it looks on my screen?

I don't blame you for returning that mat if it's blue. looks nothing like photo #2

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
is the mat considered faulty? .

If those pictures are accurate, yes, the product looks nothing like what was advertised. Products being unfit for purpose. or being substantially different to what was advertised are generally lumped in the same basket as damaged or faulty goods. In all of those situations, the buyer has not received what they paid for, and so the seller is obligated to fix it or refund them in full.

 insaniak wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
However, regarding the shipping I think you are definitely in the wrong. Who should pay for the return postage if not you? For large national, or even international business, free return shipping is a courtesy, but I don't think you can expect that level of service from a smaller operation. I agree that paying postage on something you are returning is not fun, but Deep Cut isn't making any money on that return shipping, and they need to receive your mat back so they can deal with their own QC issues related to the return.

If you are returning a product because it is faulty, then absolutely the seller should cover the return postage. The size of their business is irrelevant. They are still responsible for providing the right product in the right condition.

That's actually the law here in Oz. Obviously, consumer law is going to vary in different countries, though.

Same here in the EU (99/44/EC IIRC).

Funny side note, black prints from a colour printer (even a good one) usually are at least somewhat bluish, usually (unlike your fancy SOHO colour laser these vinyl printers often don't have a dedicated black cartridge/toner/whatever AFAIK - certainly the cheaper ones a startup might use) so from what I know, it would always look a little blue. A little. Not as much as the photo seems to suggest (although cell phone cameras can be deceptive when it comes to colour representation), and whether the average consumer should even be aware of that at all is questionable - certainly given the product image (just a render from the artwork, perhaps?).

Lots of sellers in the EU get away with not complying with these rules, though - who's going to litigate a €15 postage dispute? Realistically, while you are in the right that's little more than words on paper, currently.

Of course, none of it matters - even if you're in the right you don't threaten to post private communications with a customer like that - ever.
At most, if they'd sincerely disagreed with a position you had publicly taken, they could post their version of the story in reply (although even that rarely ends well for a seller).

Oh and if nothing else, I'll be sure to share a link to this topic around whenever the topic of gaming mats, or deep cut specifically, comes up in conversation. Good grief.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
is the mat considered faulty? .

If those pictures are accurate, yes, the product looks nothing like what was advertised. Products being unfit for purpose. or being substantially different to what was advertised are generally lumped in the same basket as damaged or faulty goods. In all of those situations, the buyer has not received what they paid for, and so the seller is obligated to fix it or refund them in full.

And to back that up with applicable regulations, let's dig out the aforementioned directive:

Consumer goods are presumed to be in conformity with
the contract if they:
(d) show the quality and performance which are normal in
goods of the same type and which the consumer can
reasonably expect, given the nature of the goods and taking
into account any public statements on the specific characteristics
of the goods made about them by the seller, the
producer or his representative, particularly in advertising or
on labelling.

Advertising images certainly qualify as such statements. Reasonable expectations, well, the thing had one job (look like a lava floor) - and it does nothing of the sort. Easy enough.


Really guys, this is not one of those grey areas, this is an open and shut example of a nonconforming product.

unfortunately it is as bluie as the pictures suggest. I was more than a little disappointed in not only their dealing with this matter but also the fact they would send a mat that looks like it does.

If they had offered to replace the mat with one that was as advertised id have been satisfied also. But to palm of subpar products then expect their customers to be out of pocket due to their mistakes just reeks of bad buisness altogether.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The text in quotes is what i sent to them. Thought I would put up what the PM's said for clarity purposes.

hello. recieved my mat today and wondering how i go about returning it as the colour is very different to the pictures in your store. I ordered the lava mat and the ground is very blue and the lava doesnt look as well as in the photos.
Tuesday 13:26
any chance you could reply please
Tuesday 19:34
Hi, sorry for delay. Yes, you can return the gaming mat for a full item refund. return address is:

-redacted-

You might wish to use tracked delivery to ensure that the mat reaches us and we will be able to refund you without any hassle. Cheers!

Gediminas, DCS

does the refund include the cost of the return postage?

As in general practice of refunds - no. We also do not refund the shipping price (9,9 gbp) of the shipment to you. Otherwise we refund full price of every mat that is returned to us.

so im expected to foot the bill to return the mat that isnt as advertised. You have seen the images I sent yes? Its not even close to being the same colour at all.

Sorry to say but Im confused as to why I am expected to pay the return postage when the fault lays with the product
so all in all its going to cost me 20gbp to have no mat at all. dont sound like much of a good deal to me this

Dear, Lee
As I wrote in previous message - if you are not satisfied with the product, we will be glad to refund you for it once you return the item in unused condition. We do not have control of the service or the means you are going to use to deliver the product back to us. When you return a product to a store you a refunded it's price, not the journey you made to the store (which might accidentally go through Hawaii for 3 weeks).
Hope it is understandable now,
Gediminas, DCS

so as i said. because you didnt check the quality (or worse case care that it was sent looking like it is) you expect me to have wasted 20gbp. Through no fault of my own

Ill send a dispute to paypal and recommend our club sticks with getting their mats from GAMEMAT.eu instead from now on.


Sending a faulty product is one thing. Expecting customers to have to be out of pocket due to it isnt on

.

And this is why I avoid companies that are countries away. Particularly ones like this is countries where I have no clue what the laws are for consumer protections, customs, etc.

Plenty of other game mat suppliers out there. Hope this gets sorted for you.

Again, the law is on his side.
Compliance with said law is another matter. Quite frankly, that issue can occur just as easily domestically (this sort of situation quite frankly is endemic around here).

Has anybody else tried and failed to find these guys on Facebook?

In Britain we have that too. It's the old distance selling regulations.
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/distance-selling-regulations

It's a handy guide, but it does say that you get the postage refunded on a faulty good. It's a breach of law if they don't.

I was planning on buying some of their stuff for Malifaux. Now I won't, thanks for the warning OP.

Isn't Lithuania part of the EU now? OP I would raise again with Paypal. State the product is faulty and cite EU law.

Well, this is interesting

I see that as formal representative of Deep-Cut Studio I don't have any more to add that it is already said. But to sum things up:

- Lee (known as Lutharr101 in these forums) bought a product from us (we use the original name, since it is already available on his posts)
- he was unhappy with it
- he was offered full refund for a product price
- couple of emails later he was offered full refund including shipping costs (not the return costs)
- customer demanded returns costs refunded as well
- case was escalated in PayPal (as we are using PayPal as main means to pay for the good on our webstore) and PayPal ruled out that a full refund will be given to the customer as soon as he provides proof that the item is returned to us. PayPal did not refund the return costs to a customer as well

So... Looks like we kept ourselves to the general practice, rules of the trade and law as well. And PayPal confirmed that with their decision following the customer and seller protection programs. As of today customer is demanding full refund, refund for his return costs but is still has the product for himself.

As for parallel thoughts expressed in emails:
- as other members noticed, we did not threaten to disclose any personal information about anyone. We stated, that we will have to provide full context about the case if Lee continues his abuse. But since it is already available in this thread, I feel no need to repeat it
- Lee however did disclose personal information by posting shipping address here on forum without asking if it was a public address or not. It is not. I would kindly ask to remove that part from the posts
- in his letters Lee called us names - slimey rats and you be the judge if these and other action are a professional manner to solve things (but looks like Lee 'accidentally' forgot to expose that email )

To sum up the sum up:
- (hopefully) this is our first and only post in this thread
- I am glad to see opinion about the case from both perspectives - the good and the bad. We are customer oriented business and this case will surely give us a lot to think about. We will review what we went through and will seek ways to improve it. As we did before when we received various feedback
- we will review and re-check the product again. And if we find it necessary to take some action - we will

Gediminas Jonaitis
Deep-Cut Studio

if you had checked the product to begin with this thread wouldnt exist. Funny how on your facebook you removed the pictures I posted so other customers cant see the reality of your product.

thats my response to the email that made me post this thread deep cut.

screenshot the email. thanks for proving much better than i could what a slimey little rat you are.

Below is taken directly from the consumer rights page.

The Distance Selling Regulations no longer apply in UK law. As of 13 June 2014 the new Consumer Contracts Regulations - which implement the Consumer Rights Directive in UK law - apply to all purchases you make at a distance.

This includes shopping online, by mail order, over the phone or through a TV shopping channel.

What should you get back?

The original cost of the outbound postage to you should always be refunded by the seller.

The seller's terms and conditions or returns policy should state who pays the cost of returning the item.

If they don't state this, then the seller has to cover the cost.

In this case, you're entitled to a refund of the total amount you paid, including costs to ship the item to you, and the fee to return the item. No admin or restocking fees should be charged.

Returning faulty goods

If you receive faulty goods and wish to return them, The Distance Selling Regulations are in addition to your other legal rights.

So, if your goods are faulty and don’t do what they're supposed to, or don’t match the description given, you have the same consumer rights under the Sale of Goods Act as you have when buying face to face.

Any terms and conditions that say you must cover the cost of returning an item wouldn’t apply where the goods being returned are faulty.

 DeepCutStudio wrote:
- Lee (known as Lutharr101 in these forums) bought a product from us (we use the original name, since it is already available on his posts)
- he was unhappy with it

Because it's blue, and clearly not as described.

PayPal ruled out that a full refund will be given to the customer as soon as he provides proof that the item is returned to us. PayPal did not refund the return costs to a customer as well ... So... Looks like we kept ourselves to the general practice, rules of the trade and law as well. And PayPal confirmed that with their decision following the customer and seller protection programs. As of today customer is demanding full refund, refund for his return costs but is still has the product for himself.

Paypal is pretty superficial in how they intervene, and they were never going to refund more than he paid. The fact that Paypal aren't especially interested, hardly makes it a moral victory for you.

If your product is faulty then you should return him his money in full, and if you are insisting on having the mat returned to you as well, then you should agree to pay for the return. It's bad enough that you are wasting his time giving him an errand to run. Why do you need the faulty mat back anyway? Are you planning to palm it off on some other poor customer, in the hope that they'll just cut their losses and keep it, rather than get stung for return shipping? Sounds like a scam.

 DeepCutStudio wrote:
. As of today customer is demanding full refund, refund for his return costs but is still has the product for himself.

And he's well within his rights to expect that full refund, including the return cost, once you receive the item back. Given that the mat is clearly not right, a lot of businesses would just tell him to keep it and give him his refund, avoiding the hassle of having it sent back.

I would strongly recommend that you make future business decisions based on EU trade law and principles of good customer service rather than relying on Paypal to tell you how much to refund your customers.

Ultimately, regardless of what the law says (I have no idea what the refund policy is for the EU - Edit: After a brief google, it looks like the EU laws do stipulate that the seller pays for the return of the faulty item) leaving a customer out of pocket because you sent them a faulty item is just not acceptable business practice. Anywhere.

I'm also a little confused by this:

- Lee however did disclose personal information by posting shipping address here on forum without asking if it was a public address or not. It is not. I would kindly ask to remove that part from the posts

I have removed the address.

However, I'm a little puzzled as to why you would be giving out anything other than a business address to a customer, and why you would expect that customers would think that it was anything other than a business address.

If you're running a business from home and using your home address for shipping, then having that address be available to the world at large is pretty much unavoidable.

Yeah, I'm confused by this one.

The blue mat shown is nothing like the sales image so is a defective product.

I have to say that having dealt with DCS myself and having recieved a mat I wasn't happy with (scratched, probably by customs I think) the outcome here is the polar opposite of my exchange. I found Gediminas to be pleasure to deal with even in that circumstance. I was sent a replacement and Gediminas and I agreed that returning the defective product was an unnecassary expense for both of us. I still use the mats and donated the defective one to a club to use for intros.

If as has been suggested here the OP has been abusive then I can see how DCS wouldn't go beyond the minimum basic provisions.

I would suggest that the best course of action here would be for both parties to be a bit magnanimous and sort this one out. So the OP should apologies for any rudeness and delete any accusations and DCS should look ad sending replacement product out, then belatedly handeshakes all round.

Just a suggestion of course.

An EU business that supplies a faulty product MUST provide a full refund on return including there costs of the return postage

it does not matter if the buyer is offensive/annoying/a nightmare, or if they are the most polite the company has ever dealt with

the company MUST pay the return postage

now they don't have to hand over cash if they don't want to, they could arrange their own courier or supply a return label etc

or request proof of destruction (eg photos of the cut up mat)

or simply let the buyer keep the fault product and supply a refund or replacement

so based purely on that Deep Cut are in the wrong

You are not in the wrong at all, the I tem is faulty or clearly not as described. They should offer a full refund. Whether the item is returned to them or not depends on whether they will cover postage. Simply - the customer cannot be expected to pay return postage on faulty or incorrectly sent items (this looks like an entirely different playmat).

If you're getting hassle from them give trading standards a call and they can set you straight on your rights.

The sensible options are that DCS either give a full refund and tell Lee to keep the faulty mat. Or they post out another.

I agree, at best this is a case of abysmal quiality control that the company somehow missed when sending out and should be sincerely sorry about not having spotted a clearly defective product before it got sent to a client.

At worst this is a case of false advertising or a "bait and switch", the product recieved is nothing like the product advertised, if the company knew that this was the case upon sending out the product to the customer they were clearly aware of sending a poor quality item that was not representative of that which had been ordered.

Either way the negative PR this generates will likely have a wider reaching effect than if the company had simply replaced or refunded the matt to start with, rather than deciding to drag it out and try to convince a paying customer that they werent responsible for whole mess.

Deep Cut mats eh? Judging by the responses here, I'll be advising those I know not to touch with a ten foot barge pole. If you sent me a faulty good, refused to pay return postage, and then deleted my reviews where possible, I'd be more than a little miffed.

thanks for proving much better than i could what a slimey little rat you are.

This message however, won't get you anywhere, and you should cease the insults and fall back on the law.

DeepcutStudio wrote:So... Looks like we kept ourselves to the general practice, rules of the trade and law as well.

There's this little thing called business ethics that goes slightly beyond the law. If you send out a faulty product, the moral onus is generally regarded to be on you to replace it with a functional product or ensure the customer is not out of pocket due to your mistake. Which is why the distance trading laws generally reflect that sort of thing to boot, you can't have companies shipping out broken ovens or suchlike, and then demanding customers pay the £80 return costs.

Well, look's like Deep Cut Studio are loosing future money in their pocket for a small amount of change coming out of it.

Maybe they care, maybe not? - plenty of positive reviews out their for their gear.

The mat, being what appears to be blue and not black as illustrated, is in breach of the Sales of Goods Act 1979 (as amended), UK. EU member states trading to the United Kingdom are bound by this British trading law as it is mirrored by wider EU regulation.

The selling company incur the cost of return shipping (which DC are obliged to pay btw) on the condition that the customer first alerted them within 14 days of receipt of item, under the EU directives on consumer rights online.

However, this is a fait accompli AFTER the item is returned. So if the buyer pays for postage and returns the item, using tracking to evidence the return, the seller is legally obliged under EU trading standards laws, to entirely refund.

It is common practice to simply waive that return process on receipt of photographic evidence and provide a cash refund or negotiate a substantial reduction in price to keep the item. That is between the two parties.

It is also entirely legal to simply refuse to further trade with the individual going forward, as Deep Cut are not the only business providing gaming mats on the market.

Seeing that the mat looks nothing like what they advertised I'd say that company should ABSOLUTLEY pay for shipping.. Or sur them for false marketing.

I just posted on my group's message boards not to order from Deep Cut Mats.

There are too many good businesses out there selling quality mats. (Looking at you, FrontLineGaming).

Thanks for the warning, OP.

Cost of doing business. How much bad-will, negative publicity and reputation damage has been done by the company's attitude and all for the sake of a tenner.

And, regulations aside, he's not wrong. Why should he be out of pocket for the company's balls up?

I run a small business myself and have at times lost money on individual transactions due to a mistake I've made but you put it right and ensure that the customer is not out of pocket .

That's how you build a reputation for quality service, increase demand and ultimately make more money.

These clowns have lost more than one customer through this, as I don't think I want to give my money to a company who clearly has no clue about the fundamentals, doesn't seem to give two gaks about customer satisfaction and, now has a tarnished reputation. You literally can't put a price on reputation, as a small business.

So many small businesses fail because they don't understand the importance of having a positive appearance.

While everything they have said in this thread was technically correct, it came across as rude and entitled, and all over a fault on their end in the first place.

If a small business can't say "Oh man, we were wrong and this was our fault, keep the product and we will send you a new one", then they need to get a serious slice of humble pie.

Awfully handled, this was.

ive several mats ive ordered from Gamemat.eu and all have been flawless but i thought id chance my arm on deep cut as I liked this particular design (had done for a while but they only just done it in the mousemat material).

The tenner is nothing. Its not even a hours work. Its more the principle of them thinking its fine to make mistakes because hey the customers can just pay for them. The gaming community deserves to get what they pay for. And Im glad to see its not just me being anal about this matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
thought i would post a link to an old thread I made a while back about gaming mats in general. Feel free to take a look see
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/605753.page

You should probably update that thread with information and a link to this thread. So no one makes the mistake of buying from them.

Let's ease up on the dogpiling please. This is, after all, one incident.

Thanks for the warning, OP. I was thinking about ordering a mat from these guys, but I'll be looking elsewhere.

 Lorek wrote:
Let's ease up on the dogpiling please. This is, after all, one incident.

Aye the way people are going on about this company is a bit out of hand. They made one mistake. Yes they should have been aware of that particular law, but its not as though they've systemically gone about killing people's grannies. Of course it could come out that there's been other issues. They should have perhaps dealt with this before it came to this, particularly in not sticking to their guns on that law, but besides that they seem to have been fairly amicable.

Did the OP at any point cite the particular law he's in a huff about or did he just go straight to insulting the company? The company should have then looked into the matter more then, but again, people are really make this much bigger than it is at face value.

 Wyrmalla wrote:

 Lorek wrote:
Let's ease up on the dogpiling please. This is, after all, one incident.

Aye the way people are going on about this company is a bit out of hand. They made one mistake. Yes they should have been aware of that particular law, but its not as though they've systemically gone about killing people's grannies. Of course it could come out that there's been other issues. They should have perhaps dealt with this before it came to this, particularly in not sticking to their guns on that law, but besides that they seem to have been fairly amicable.

Did the OP at any point cite the particular law he's in a huff about or did he just go straight to insulting the company? The company should have then looked into the matter more then, but again, people are really make this much bigger than it is at face value.

My problem is that they actually posted in this thread, in an extremely smarmy way.

Well, this is interesting

I see that as formal representative of Deep-Cut Studio I don't have any more to add that it is already said. But to sum things up:

- Lee (known as Lutharr101 in these forums) bought a product from us (we use the original name, since it is already available on his posts)
- he was unhappy with it
- he was offered full refund for a product price
- couple of emails later he was offered full refund including shipping costs (not the return costs)
- customer demanded returns costs refunded as well
- case was escalated in PayPal (as we are using PayPal as main means to pay for the good on our webstore) and PayPal ruled out that a full refund will be given to the customer as soon as he provides proof that the item is returned to us. PayPal did not refund the return costs to a customer as well

They are making out like asking them to pay the return shipping for a completely faulty product is ludicrous and they are in the right because of Paypal, when in reality, they sent the wrong product.. they should have immediately refunded or just sent the correct one.

You do not demand a product be returned to you in order to refund it when you sent an inferior or faulty one in the first place.

It is not down to the customer to go to more hassle to get a product they already paid for, it's down to you to immediately make up for this.

This is my problem with this entire scenario.

Complete lack of humbleness from the store, despite the bad quality mat being their issue.

And my point was that they offered a refund, but weren't aware that they had to pay for the return cost due to taking on Paypal's word rather than looking it up themselves. A poor mistake, but its not a sky shattering thing which people seem to be going on about in this thread...

Good point.

Also; Did the OP ask for a replacement before a refund? Seems like an obviously solution rather than jut asking for the money back.

DCS's response looks like a list of facts (as they see them). I don't see any smarminess there. As I say a more level headed approach from all would see this resolved relatively painlessly.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
A minor point: their email did not say they would reveal your personal information. They said they would " respond with full context of this case, including your emails and other information." That "other information" does not automatically equal "personal information."

Anyway, maybe it's the picture quality, but is the mat your received really as blue as it looks on my screen?

What are you talking about? That dress, err mat is white and gold!

I really don't care about the refund back and forth and the intricacies of different countries consumer protection laws, I just thinks it's absurd they sent out a blue mat.

I mean the complete and utter lack of quality control there is astounding. It's literally just a mat. With two sides. And the one that matters is obviously faulty.
Unless they come off the printer face down and are fed straight into the parcels to be posted out that way how do you miss that the whole things is blue!?

 insaniak wrote:

 DeepCutStudio wrote:
. As of today customer is demanding full refund, refund for his return costs but is still has the product for himself.

And he's well within his rights to expect that full refund, including the return cost, once you receive the item back. Given that the mat is clearly not right, a lot of businesses would just tell him to keep it and give him his refund, avoiding the hassle of having it sent back.

This. Unless they think you doctored the photo, why would they want that back? No one else should be satisfied with that mat. Write it off as a misprint and be done.

Could easily happen if a packer just collected a tube off the shelf and posted it out.

It can just as easily be resolved.

Bossk_Hogg wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 DeepCutStudio wrote:
. As of today customer is demanding full refund, refund for his return costs but is still has the product for himself.

And he's well within his rights to expect that full refund, including the return cost, once you receive the item back. Given that the mat is clearly not right, a lot of businesses would just tell him to keep it and give him his refund, avoiding the hassle of having it sent back.

This. Unless they think you doctored the photo, why would they want that back? No one else should be satisfied with that mat. Write it off as a misprint and be done.

At this point yes that seems like the best solution. As they'll have to return the mat at cost to themselves it'll be less of a loss for the company to just let the customer keep the thing. That's purely because the mat itself isn't resalable, if it were in another state then them asking for it back would be suitable. Now though for the sake of PR its probably best to just do some damage control. However people seem fine to jump on them and froth about how crap they are no matter what the scale of the issue.

However I will admit quality control is something which should be clamped down on. Yes black mats can discolour, however for an SME good PR is everything, and as this case shows even one person complaining causes a mothball (whether that'll effect the margins is questionable, though if its what prospective customers see it could be a problem). At the glance I had at their statement they didn't admit to a faulty product, which may be down to trying to save face, but that isn't good for PR given the sensitive nature of the other side. =P

I think the issues that people have to make them comment so are manifold, primarily.

1. The company allowed inferior quality product to be sent out, implying poor quality control.
2. The company is either ignorant of relevant sales laws, or unwilling to follow them unless deliberately mentioned, both of which are poor business practice.
3. The company did not seek to rectify THEIR mistake in a way that would not leave the customer out of pocket, which is morally ambiguous at best.
4. The company attempted to suppress communication of their screwup on their facebook page, as opposed to dealing with the issue.

All of these things are not good signals for a company to have. Any one of them, individually, can be explained away as a mischance. Two of them as a minor screwup. But when you've hit all four, it begins to indicate something is wrong with the business to the extent that I personally would not wish to deal with them on the offchance I run into the same issue. There's nothing particularly wrong with making a minor screwup with regards to sending out faulty product, or even being ignorant of sales law, but when you compound that with a seeming unwillingness to rectify their issues, as a consumer you have the potential for disaster in any given transaction.

And when there are so many alternatives, why risk it?

 Wyrmalla wrote:
They made one mistake.

There is more than one mistake here. On top of sending out an unacceptable product, and refusing to make amends for their mistake (which was their moral and legal obligation). They also deleted the OP from their facebook for recounting his experience, and then apparently berated him via email, with comments such as: "Maybe our offer was fair after all? I suggest spending your energy elsewhere than on our FB boards". So the OP did exactly what they suggested, and came here to Dakka.

Also DeepCutsStudio has not yet even acknowledged their mistake. I'm all for giving them a chance to put things right. I hope that they will respond here and do just that. But until that happens, and they admit their mistake, and explain to the community exactly how they are going to ensure this won't happen to customers in the future, I don't see why anyone here should be sympathetic.

Yeah, making a mistake is fine. Everyone does it, whether in a personal way or as a business.

What is not fine is (a) refusing to acknowledge that you made a mistake (even on this thread, Deep Cut are basically blaming the customer, saying it's his fault for not being happy with the obviously poor quality mat he got), (b) being unwilling to sort out the mistake rapidly, efficiently, and at your own expense.

Regarding the deleted Facebook post, did anyone see what the OP posted on Facebook? I have a hard time believing DCS' reaction occurred in a vacuum. It is entirely possible that what was posted on FB was not entirely objective, or fair to DCS, causing them to delete the post. Especially given some of the word choices and assumptions made already in the thread title, and OP's comments.

It is also possible that DCS' is out of control trying to suppress any sort of criticism leveled at them, but without seeing the deleted post we have no way of judging the merit of the deletion.

Many in this thread seem to be willing to parse DCS' replies for aggression and smarm while ignoring the OP's own communications with DCS.

This thread's title is hostile to DCS, and thanks to Google, will follow DCS around for a long, long time. While DCS should be aware of their public image and weigh the rather insignificant cost of return shipping to keeping good PR with customers, it would also be helpful to this discussion if people remembered that there are two sides to this story and we do not have all of the information to know if the deleted post was justified by DCS or not.

So, personally, the only info that I really need is the pic of the mat, and the fact that DCS don't acknowledge that mat as a problem. It means I can't risk buying from them, because I want to buy from companies who, even if they occasionally slip up on quality control, will make good. I don't have the time or the mental energy to pursue a long battle to get a refund or replacement in that case -- I expect the company to just sort the problem out immediately.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
It is entirely possible that what was posted on FB was not entirely objective, or fair to DCS, causing them to delete the post. Especially given some of the word choices and assumptions made already in the thread title, and OP's comments.

If we're brutally honest, unless the OP just posted half a dozen curse words (in which case ignore the following), he's perfectly justified in being unpleasant on their FB given his recent commercial experience with them. Yes, they have every right to erase it (it is their facebook page), but again, the fact is that ignoring him/erasing his comments is indicative of the problems this company seems to have, IMO. Instead of engaging/rectifying, they chose to delete and ignore.

 Ketara wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
It is entirely possible that what was posted on FB was not entirely objective, or fair to DCS, causing them to delete the post. Especially given some of the word choices and assumptions made already in the thread title, and OP's comments.

If we're brutally honest, unless the OP just posted half a dozen curse words (in which case ignore the following),

And we will never know what was posted. But that hasn't stopped the mob from forming and declaring DCS an abhorrent company.

Maybe people should step back a bit and cool their jets. That is all I am saying.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
It is entirely possible that what was posted on FB was not entirely objective, or fair to DCS, causing them to delete the post. Especially given some of the word choices and assumptions made already in the thread title, and OP's comments.

If we're brutally honest, unless the OP just posted half a dozen curse words (in which case ignore the following),

And we will never know what was posted. But that hasn't stopped the mob from forming and declaring DCS an abhorrent company.

Maybe people should step back a bit and cool their jets. That is all I am saying.

Mob? Perhaps I'm reading a different thread. I saw a lot of people say that the company was legally obliged to give a refund including return postage, and probably should do so. Some marvelled at the blueness of the mat compared to the photo, and a number of people, having read the companies response, decided that dealing with a company that caused this much hassle over a refund/product return, was not a company they'd want to deal with. A few more lamented how this company has caused themselves a minor PR nightmare, and two or three people speculated that the number of mistakes made was somewhat unbelievable.

Hardly breaking out the pitchforks.

my facebook post was infact 2 posts.

first read advertised mat with a picture they supply on their website

second post (as you can only post one picture per reply on facebook) was what arrived. And being told I must pay for its return. (Thats when I got the smartarse email)

 Ketara wrote:

Mob?

Yep.

 kronk wrote:
I just posted on my group's message boards not to order from Deep Cut Mats.

There are too many good businesses out there selling quality mats. (Looking at you, FrontLineGaming).

Thanks for the warning, OP.

 Reality-Torrent wrote:
You should probably update that thread with information and a link to this thread. So no one makes the mistake of buying from them.

Oh, and look at this. In the N&R section for DCS's announcement thread there is this gem:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Folks interested in getting a Deep Cuts mat may want to take a look at This Thread.

After reading that... I wouldn't do business with them. And their own representative in that thread did not help matters.

The Auld Grump

So, yeah, I'd say a mob is forming.

So....one person telling their friends not to bother buying with the company, and one person telling another to link to this thread to warn people, which he does.

I think you and I have very different definitions of the word 'mob'.

DarkTraveller777 I understand your points and think overall they may be sound(lots of benefit of the doubt having to be applied there mind). But they have been nothing but unacommatating to myself to the point where they expect me to be out of pocket because of their mistakes.

All I have done i put across MY experiance. I dont imply its the same for everyone or put words in anyones mouth. The messages myself and DCS shared are up for all to see. I only ever responded baddly to them when they sent me the email in the original post.

 Ketara wrote:
So....one person telling their friends not to bother buying with the company, and one person telling another to link to this thread to warn people, which he does.

I think you and I have very different definitions of the word 'mob'.

A group of people are forming opinions based on hearsay.

If you think that sort of response is appropriate based on the information we have, then fine. I disagree. I think people are jumping to conclusions based on one person's account of what happened with a sale gone wrong.

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
Yeah, making a mistake is fine. Everyone does it, whether in a personal way or as a business.

What is not fine is (a) refusing to acknowledge that you made a mistake (even on this thread, Deep Cut are basically blaming the customer, saying it's his fault for not being happy with the obviously poor quality mat he got), (b) being unwilling to sort out the mistake rapidly, efficiently, and at your own expense.

This is a great summary, and is really important for potential future customers to be aware of.

DarkTraveller, I understand your call for restraint, but the company's own responses are a huge red flag. It isn't dogpiling, it isn't mob justice. It's placing responsibility to rectify an error with the responsible party. The company seems to have focused on the customer's behavior more than the apparent product problem. It is completely unprofessional for a company to whine about hurt feelings because a customer expressed frustration at having to pay anything out of pocket for a defective product. Really, complaining about a business correspondence address being posted by a customer? That information should be on the company website. This was just turnabout to reframe the issue so that they are the victims.

Bottom line, all the evidence presented supports that the customer paid for a product that is defective. The customer is being asked to pay out of pocket to ship it back in order to get a refund. The company is focused on reframing the issue to be about criticizing the customer's behavior instead of fixing the problem.Customers don't have to be unblemished saints in all dealings in order to not have to pay out of pocket to ship back a defective product, should they?

Finally, what has the company done to investigate the complaint? Did someone bother to pull another mat off the shelf and actually look at it to see if the complaint is valid? That's complaint investigation 101. Instead, it appears they are doing everything they can to dodge responsibility. At this point, every item they produce must be assumed to carry the risk of being completely different from advertised because there is no evidence that they have addressed the cause of the problem.

 Lutharr101 wrote:
DarkTraveller777 I understand your points and think overall they may be sound(lots of benefit of the doubt having to be applied there mind). But they have been nothing but unacommatating to myself to the point where they expect me to be out of pocket because of their mistakes.

All I have done i put across MY experiance. I dont imply its the same for everyone or put words in anyones mouth. The messages myself and DCS shared are up for all to see. I only ever responded baddly to them when they sent me the email in the original post.

No worries, man. I am completely sympathetic to your situation and I don't want my position in this thread to be misconstrued otherwise. You bought something that you did not receive. I personally have issues with the (very) common customer expectation that shipping should be covered by small business operations, but if that is EU law, then by all means you should have been treated according to the rule of law. I don't think DCS has a leg to stand on there. You should get your money back including shipping (and any return shipping you paid).

My issue is that forums, and the internet in general, can create a mob mentality where people get carried away with emotion over trivial things. Like people finding a moral issue with DCS deleting your Facebook posts. I don't mean to imply that you acted a fool on DCS' page, and they may very well have overreacted by deleting your posts, but without seeing what was said, it is simply your word versus their word regarding the content and merit of those posts. However, others are willing to run with that and assume DCS are morally bankrupt. That seems a stretch to me without more information.

Anyway, I hope you get sorted out, Lutharr101.

It's a clear-cut case.

a) The company willingly (!) sent out a faulty product in order to scam a customer. Red flag.

b) The company is not aware of EU law and that they're breaking it by not fully paying for the return and all cost involved.

Instead of admitting to their mistake, they went full-out defensive and openly refuse to adhere EU law. Complete no-go. Stay away from that company as far as possible.

Just sent an e-mail to all club members (roughly 100 people + their friends) warning them from Deep Cut and never buy anything from said company, along with warning others to buy from them.

i can guarantee you sir that what I posted was merely what they advertised and what arrived They very much did overreact to the posts. But since you dont know me personally I wont take it baddly that you dont automatically take my word for it. I know whats the truth and thats good enough for me.

I understand your kinda playing devils advocate.

My main issue in all this is while they may be a small buisness it still shouldnt equal me being out of pocket as non of this is my fault at all. I bought something in good faith and frankly that good faith has been soiled in this case.

I wont be going back into the old mat threadto necro it as I put that up as a guide and dont really want it tarnished with back and forth there and the other mat companies being overlooked due to and arguements that could break out. I did make an edit that their customer service is not very good but left it at that.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
So....one person telling their friends not to bother buying with the company, and one person telling another to link to this thread to warn people, which he does.

I think you and I have very different definitions of the word 'mob'.

A group of people are forming opinions based on hearsay.

If you think that sort of response is appropriate based on the information we have, then fine. I disagree. I think people are jumping to conclusions based on one person's account of what happened with a sale gone wrong.

DCS have basically written that they will not refund the OP's return postage for the faulty product - which goes against EU law regarding such returns.

DCS have engaged in some seemingly condescending communication with the OP - This may be due to language differences.

DCS are using PayPals resolution of the escalated claim to justify their position regarding refunding return postage (going against the above)

DCS have not admitted liability stating that the customer wasn't happy with the product (this could be their position via the PayPal resolution if OP didn't state the item is faulty).

The best response for DCS would have been to refund the return postage or send prepaid returns documentation. They could also offer to send a replacement mat at the same time.

Gavel down, case closed.

 Sigvatr wrote:
It's a clear-cut case.

a) The company willingly (!) sent out a faulty product in order to scam a customer. Red flag.

b) The company is not aware of EU law and that they're breaking it by not fully paying for the return and all cost involved.

Instead of admitting to their mistake, they went full-out defensive and openly refuse to adhere EU law. Complete no-go. Stay away from that company as far as possible.

Just sent an e-mail to all club members (roughly 100 people + their friends) warning them from Deep Cut and never buy anything from said company, along with warning others to buy from them.

a) id not say they did it on purpose to be fair. Even though Im not best happy with them atm I wouldnt assume that.

b) to be fair on that point it wasnt til i made this thread I found out that was incase the law. I'm more bothered that law aside its immoral in my eyes to expect a customer to pay for ones own mistakes.

Edited as my opinions on Deep cut have changed for the better since this post was made.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
A group of people are forming opinions based on hearsay.

It's not hearsay, there is photographic evidence of the mat, and both parties have posted in the topic. There is no question that DCS is in the wrong here. Even in the unlikely event that the photo is a complete fabrication, DCS still should have offered to take it back for inspection, and offered to reimburse the OP on the condition that it is faulty.

Deleting the facebook post is not the issue. No one who has posted in this topic has made a big deal about the facebook post, beyond noting that it is suspicious. The focus in every post is on why the OP's map is blue, and why he wasn't offered a full refund. Those issues are not a matter of speculation.

 Lutharr101 wrote:


a) id not say they did it on purpose to be fair. Even though Im not best happy with them atm I wouldnt assume that.

b) to be fair on that point it wasnt til i made this thread I found out that was incase the law. I'm more bothered that law aside its immoral in my eyes to expect a customer to pay for ones own mistakes.

Sending out a product with small errors like transport damages can definitely happen and are no problem. Sending out such a disastrous product that clearly is a huge production mistake cannot happen by accident. Someone saw this one and thought "meh, that's okay". The company's job is to find that person and punish him / her, e.g. by deducting the entire cost from his / her wage. Secondly, you need to make full amendments to the customers who received the faulty product which includes covering up all cost. Without any second of hesitation. Law or not.

Ive had this thing happen before, bigger companies will just issue a refund without getting the item back but Ive had smaller companies as well as private sellers on eBay request that the buyer pay the shipping back for returned items. Ive done the same thing through eBay, someone didnt like something or didnt read a description and Ive refunded them but had them pay shipping and wasnt really a big deal.

Im in the U.S. so I understand it may be different legally but I still dont get people getting up in arms about this.

Hope it gets resolved though.

 Rotgut wrote:
Ive had this thing happen before, bigger companies will just issue a refund without getting the item back but Ive had smaller companies as well as private sellers on eBay request that the buyer pay the shipping back for returned items. Ive done the same thing through eBay, someone didnt like something or didnt read a description and Ive refunded them but had them pay shipping and wasnt really a big deal.

Im in the U.S. so I understand it may be different legally but I still dont get people getting up in arms about this.

Hope it gets resolved though.

because this isnt me reading a description wrong. It turning up and me thinking afterall I dont like the product. If it had turned up and been exactly as they advertised it I would have given them a glowing review. The items faulty, and to get my original purchase money back I now have to waste £10-15.

 Smacks wrote:
Deleting the facebook post is not the issue. No one who has posted in this topic has made a big deal about the facebook post, beyond noting that it is suspicious.

Let's look at Ketara's response which I bolded.

 Ketara wrote:
Yes, they have every right to erase it (it is their facebook page), but again, the fact is that ignoring him/erasing his comments is indicative of the problems this company seems to have, IMO. Instead of engaging/rectifying, they chose to delete and ignore.

That is a huge leap considering we do not know what was posted on Facebook. I don't think he is alone in arriving at that conclusion.

 Smacks wrote:
The focus in every post is on why the OP's map is blue, and why he wasn't offered a full refund. Those issues are not a matter of speculation.

Nor am I disputing that. In my first post in this thread I stated that the mats are not the same. What I am disputing is the assumptions being made. Assumptions about motivations on the part of DCS, and assumptions on what was or was not posted on the Facebook page.

People jumped on this problem like flies on gak, and for what?

"DCS didn't follow EU law!"

Okay. Perhaps they were unaware of the law. Does that make them a bit incompetent? Sure. But if I am not mistaken, the OP admitted he was a small business operator and he was unaware of the same law until coming into this thread. So does that mean the OP is unfit to have customers as well? No, of course not. But DCS needs to be boycotted, apparently.


And if this doesn't sum up my point perfectly:

 Lutharr101 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
It's a clear-cut case.

a) The company willingly (!) sent out a faulty product in order to scam a customer. Red flag.

b) The company is not aware of EU law and that they're breaking it by not fully paying for the return and all cost involved.

Instead of admitting to their mistake, they went full-out defensive and openly refuse to adhere EU law. Complete no-go. Stay away from that company as far as possible.

Just sent an e-mail to all club members (roughly 100 people + their friends) warning them from Deep Cut and never buy anything from said company, along with warning others to buy from them.

a) id not say they did it on purpose to be fair. Even though Im not best happy with them atm I wouldnt assume that.

b) to be fair on that point it wasnt til i made this thread I found out that was incase the law. I'm more bothered that law aside its immoral in my eyes to expect a customer to pay for ones own mistakes.

The injured party is even giving the DCS the benefit of the doubt. The injured party here is being reasonable and not jumping to conclusions.

People are assigning motivation and assuming a lot, and I don't think that is particularly helpful.

Okay. Perhaps they were unaware of the law. Does that make them a bit incompetent? Sure. But if I am not mistaken, the OP admitted he was a small business operator and he was unaware of the same law until coming into this thread. So does that mean the OP is unfit to have customers as well? No, of course not. But DCS needs to be boycotted, apparently.

well in my defense my buisness is painting and decorating. I dont provide actual goods, more a service. I just know Ive on occassion fethed up on a job which Ive had to pay out of my pocket to rectify as its just how things should be done. Though I must admit the £500 quid carpet I once had to replace cos one of the lads ruined it with gloss stung lol

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:


Let's look at Ketara's response which I bolded.

 Ketara wrote:
Yes, they have every right to erase it (it is their facebook page), but again, the fact is that ignoring him/erasing his comments is indicative of the problems this company seems to have, IMO. Instead of engaging/rectifying, they chose to delete and ignore.

That is a huge leap considering we do not know what was posted on Facebook. I don't think he is alone in arriving at that conclusion.....

People are assigning motivation and assuming a lot, and I don't think that is particularly helpful.

If you are going to quote me, please at least do me the courtesy of pulling the full statement, especially the bit where I said:

If we're brutally honest, unless the OP just posted half a dozen curse words (in which case ignore the following), he's perfectly justified in being unpleasant on their FB given his recent commercial experience with them.

I accounted for the possibility of the OP posting unreasonable obscenities. I then said that if the company is erasing anything beyond that (which as it is turns out, they seem to have been), I 'regard that as indicative of the problems this company seems to have', namely the way in which the consumer appears to be being treated as nothing more than a pain in the arse. And I base that general opinion on the photographic evidence, and the company's lacklustre efforts thus far.

Please indicate where the assumption is being made, because quite frankly, I'm pulling the companies 'motivations' from their own comments and actions. You are free to disagree with my interpretation of those comments and actions, but calling opposing viewpoints 'assumptions' at this stage is just derogatory.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
So....one person telling their friends not to bother buying with the company, and one person telling another to link to this thread to warn people, which he does.

I think you and I have very different definitions of the word 'mob'.

A group of people are forming opinions based on hearsay.

If you think that sort of response is appropriate based on the information we have, then fine. I disagree. I think people are jumping to conclusions based on one person's account of what happened with a sale gone wrong.

Hearsay you mean up until DeepCut posted (becoase the did very first page) and comfirmed want happened, ending with IF we did something worng will fix it. So yeah I think it fine to help people avoid them until such time as the prove they fixed the problem. DakkaDakka is great for threads of what happens when you keep giving companies the benefit of the doubt without proof they changed or fixing the problem. Best thing for them to do fix it and make the whole thing disappear and never get to this point in the first place. Now they need damage control, quickest way would be to refund his money or get him his product and ask that he have this thread closed. Sure being called slimey is not nice, but if your a business your feeling have no place it sells or customer service, or your business will not last long, more so in the age of the internet and only reviews.

well to be fair I was nither unpleasant nor abusive on their facebook page. Merely providing photographic evidence of what their mats actually looked like

Only time i was ever unpleasant was in a private email after they were arsey with me.

People can read the thread and make up their own minds based on the limited evidence available from both sides of the argument.

The legal situation regarding long distance selling regulations has been made clear.

OP and the company can correspond outside DakkaDakka to come to hopefully a mutually satisfactory solution.

I think we're done here.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
So....one person telling their friends not to bother buying with the company, and one person telling another to link to this thread to warn people, which he does.

I think you and I have very different definitions of the word 'mob'.

A group of people are forming opinions based on hearsay.

If you think that sort of response is appropriate based on the information we have, then fine. I disagree. I think people are jumping to conclusions based on one person's account of what happened with a sale gone wrong.

The pictures he posted are not hearsay, nor is the rep's post in this thread. To quote SNL, "Learn a book, Seth."

 Wyrmalla wrote:
And my point was that they offered a refund, but weren't aware that they had to pay for the return cost due to taking on Paypal's word rather than looking it up themselves. A poor mistake, but its not a sky shattering thing which people seem to be going on about in this thread...

This is not okay, the proper respons would be: " Oh gak! Was that the seriously inferior product we supplied you with? Keep it sir, we will send you a new one, free of charge."

Yep, best way is to have them keep the crappy product and send a replacement.

Because let's be frank here, it's their fault for not being more careful about quality control, not the consumer. And moreover, considering the quality difference is as plain as day, they knew they were sending out product that did not match the advertised quality. I've literally seen this first hand in many businesses. If they really wanted to clear out stock, they should take new photos of the off color mats and clearance them out, it's better than throwing it away, and much better than shiftily trying to sell them to consumers.

I don't have much sympathy if a company goes to some cut rate shop for production, fails to make sure that shop gets somewhere near their advertised quality, and then get hit from it. The only reason why this isn't a legal issue is because the cost and this hobby is so small that no one really cares, and that's what they're banking on.

There's always more companies out there willing to step in and fill the market's needs. Part of the reason why our industry has stagnated is because people put up with all sorts of bad practices.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Let's look at Ketara's response which I bolded.

 Ketara wrote:
Yes, they have every right to erase it (it is their facebook page), but again, the fact is that ignoring him/erasing his comments is indicative of the problems this company seems to have, IMO. Instead of engaging/rectifying, they chose to delete and ignore.

That is a huge leap considering we do not know what was posted on Facebook. I don't think he is alone in arriving at that conclusion.

I don't think we need to know what was written in the facebook post to draw that conclusion. Someone could just look at what DCS themselves have posted (or not posted) in this topic. Engaging and rectifying is not what they seem to be doing thus far. So I don't think it is a leap.

People jumped on this problem like flies on gak, and for what?

Probably to show some solidarity, and convince Deep Cuts Studios to do the right thing. I don't think people are posting here saying that they are going to warn their various communities, all because of reactionary anger. I think people are actually saying "hey look, an awful lot of your potential customers are networked through this board, and none of us want to be treated this way."

 Smacks wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Let's look at Ketara's response which I bolded.

 Ketara wrote:
Yes, they have every right to erase it (it is their facebook page), but again, the fact is that ignoring him/erasing his comments is indicative of the problems this company seems to have, IMO. Instead of engaging/rectifying, they chose to delete and ignore.

That is a huge leap considering we do not know what was posted on Facebook. I don't think he is alone in arriving at that conclusion.

I don't think we need to know what was written in the facebook post to draw that conclusion. Someone could just look at what DCS themselves have posted (or not posted) in this topic. Engaging and rectifying is not what they seem to be doing thus far. So I don't think it is a leap.

People jumped on this problem like flies on gak, and for what?

Probably to show some solidarity, and convince Deep Cuts Studios to do the right thing. I don't think people are posting here saying that they are going to warn their various communities, all because of reactionary anger. I think people are actually saying "hey look, an awful lot of your potential customers are networked through this board, and none of us want to be treated this way."

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Pretty serious difference between design and print. Thats why I like http://www.gamemat.eu/6x4-g-mats.html having lot of real pictures of mats up there...

matous1983 wrote:
Pretty serious difference between design and print. Thats why I like http://www.gamemat.eu/6x4-g-mats.html having lot of real pictures of mats up there...

all my other mats are from there and I couldnt ask for better products or customer service from them. Infact after several purchases my gaming club and several friends ordered mats also. As it stands I wanted a lava style mat and the one they do isnt to my tastes compared to the deep cut one (hence the order), but saddly the one I got would only look cool if I started playing Powerpuff Girls vs My Little Pony.

Did you ask for a replacement to be sent to you prior to a refund?

 notprop wrote:
Did you ask for a replacement to be sent to you prior to a refund?

no i simply asked how I return it. I was happy to send it them so they could see what the issue was in person just that I expected them to foot the bill for such a thing due to it being their mistake. But as you can see in the messages they initially just said send it back and wasnt even goign to refund me the original postage to me either. That only happened once paypal got a dispute claim.

PS: boss necromunda thread you got going on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
PPS

I have tried to message them via facebook but they have blocked me. So I guess that goes to show exactly how far their customer service goes.

Nor is this an entirely isolated incident - from the other thread:

 plastictrees wrote:
I received a mat damaged in shipping from them.
They offered a partial refund or to have me return the mat (my shipping cost) for a replacement.
I took the refund and was happy with the resolution.
The mat was 95% fixable.

Would and have ordered from them again.

PlasticTrees was happy with the partial refund - but they were required to send the full refund.

That fact that PlasticTrees was happy does not make what DCS was doing legal or ethical. (Not saying that it is the same ballpark as making stuffed puppies out of actual puppies, but it is slightly wonky.)

The Auld Grump

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
This thread's title is hostile to DCS, and thanks to Google, will follow DCS around for a long, long time.

Yep, which is why they should have been even more careful in their response. They could have turned bad publicity in to good publicity with a response that was aimed at helping the customer instead of just doing the minimum paypal required of them (which is still less than the law requires).

At this point they have no one to blame but themselves. Sending out a bad mat? Annoying for the customer, but forgiveable. Asking the customer to pay return shipping? A bad mistake that should have been corrected ASAP to avoid making a bad name for yourself. Posting in a public forum in any way that doesn't show empathy for the customer and doesn't show you are doing your best to rectify it? A horrible PR move that is going to cost you sales.

Let's say that OP was indeed in the wrong in terms of how he/she addressed the situation. Let's say he/she did curse on their FB page. So what? They're the customer. There's a reason why the customer is always right: because bad word from the customer can make you lose other customers.

Bait and switch laws don't exist over there, I see.

 notprop wrote:
Yeah, I'm confused by this one.

The blue mat shown is nothing like the sales image so is a defective product.

I have to say that having dealt with DCS myself and having recieved a mat I wasn't happy with (scratched, probably by customs I think) the outcome here is the polar opposite of my exchange. I found Gediminas to be pleasure to deal with even in that circumstance. I was sent a replacement and Gediminas and I agreed that returning the defective product was an unnecassary expense for both of us. I still use the mats and donated the defective one to a club to use for intros.

If as has been suggested here the OP has been abusive then I can see how DCS wouldn't go beyond the minimum basic provisions.

I would suggest that the best course of action here would be for both parties to be a bit magnanimous and sort this one out. So the OP should apologies for any rudeness and delete any accusations and DCS should look ad sending replacement product out, then belatedly handeshakes all round.

Just a suggestion of course.

It's nice to see some input from someone other than the two affected parties. I think this bears reading again, from the tone this topic is starting to take.

Well...

I sure won't ever order from them.

I've got a 'faulty' mat from them replaced before. For even more trivial reasons than OPs.


The back of the non-cloth mat was quite creased and they sent me a replacement mat. I have no idea why they wouldn't send OP a new one if the color difference is so obvious but I wouldn't mind doing business with them again.

Them being the only ones who will ship a mat over to where I am for less than 50USD shipping fee also helps

After seeing this thread, and DCS response to this thread, I have decided not to purchase from Deep Cut studios. Which is a pity, as one of their mats and some of their product would have been nice to purchase.

at the end of the day, it is the customer who essentially has the last word, and if you treat a customer badly, even if the situation has not been caused by you directly, it reflects on your business practices, your reputation, and of course your sales.

pretending something never happened, or that a situation will blow over is a very naive, and childish business view, especially in a closed market dealing with luxury items, like gaming. Deep cut studios need to make an effort to turn this positive, and it is obvious from what the OP is saying ,that they are trying to "blow over" this incident.

With that I think there is nothing more to say on the topic, so I shall lock the thread.

When the situation is resolved satisfactorily I hope the OP and the supplier will come back to inform DakkaDakka.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I have re-opened the thread for some news to be posted.

heya guys. Thank you for all your feedback. Id like to state that after further discussions with DCS they have agreed to pay for the return postage once the mat has arrived to them. Which I think is fair.

Below is their reply to my further email suggesting we resolve this matter properly.

Hi, Lee,

Sure, why not

Please use Royal Mail tracked delivery and let me know how much did it cost you. We will refund you for your purchase via PayPal case, and make an additional separate PayPal transfer to cover your costs.

The outcome of this whole mess should also be known in your public posts as well. Because a stick always has two ends

Cheers,

Gediminas, dcs

I'm glad they resolved it, as from this thread they have almost all previous requests. I wonder if the issue is the mousepad mats are much more expensive to ship, so harder to absorb that. Regardless, in the future I think you will reach this point faster if you are a little more polite in your requests, Lutharr. But again glad it is finally sorted!

Shame it took so long but they did not have to go back on this and its good of them to do so eventually.

I think they just got a bit miffed with the way you asked for some reason

 Rayvon wrote:
Shame it took so long but they did not have to go back on this and its good of them to do so eventually.

I think they just got a bit miffed with the way you asked for some reason

Quite likely - but their current response is still the one that they should have started with.

And the response required by law.

The attitude of the customer has no bearing on what is required - only how far beyond minimal compliance a retailer is willing to go.

Still, if the lesson has been learned, then all is good.

A calm answer turneth away wrath.

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:
Shame it took so long but they did not have to go back on this and its good of them to do so eventually.

I think they just got a bit miffed with the way you asked for some reason

Quite likely - but their current response is still the one that they should have started with.

And the response required by law.

The attitude of the customer has no bearing on what is required - only how far beyond minimal compliance a retailer is willing to go.

Still, if the lesson has been learned, then all is good.

A calm answer turneth away wrath.

The Auld Grump

Agree with it all mate, if it were my business I would have refunded him no questions irrelevant of his perceived attitude.

At least they actually came around, that makes them better people than I originally gave them credit for and I have edited my initial post as well to reflect this.

Its easier to be stubborn and just ignore it, than it is to realise you made a mistake and fix it eh, for some people anyway.

 RiTides wrote:
I'm glad they resolved it, as from this thread they have almost all previous requests. I wonder if the issue is the mousepad mats are much more expensive to ship, so harder to absorb that.

It would be nice if they could respond in the topic. I'm glad that the issue with Lutharr has been settled, but there are still a lot of questionmarks over what other customers can expect.

I've been looking at mats the last few days for x-wing and Infinity. DCS appear to have some great products, but if I were to order from them, how do I know that my mat won't turn up blue as well? And I end up with the same trouble Lutharr had. Was this issue a one-off, or are there problems with the mouse mats? It would be nice if they could respond and clear this up for everybody.

Well I'll post a picture of mine when it comes in, although likely in the N&R thread so we don't duplicate discussion. I am curious if this particular mat just came out miscolored for some reason, rather than that being the actual design (which seems to not be possible given the art).

Relapse wrote:
Bait and switch laws don't exist over there, I see.

Yes they do. Problem is nobody makes the effort to go after unethical people like Deep Cut Studios for treating a consumer as poorly as that; after all, it's only 10 quid, right? And that's why folks keep getting away with such business practices.

I am curious if this particular mat just came out miscolored for some reason, rather than that being the actual design (which seems to not be possible given the art).

RiTides, most printing like this is done using four color process, meaning four layers of transparent colors in a dot pattern overlapping each other. The overlapping and the colors showing through the negative space of the dot pattern create the image. The four colors used in this process are cyan, magenta, yellow, and black. It looks like something happened during the printing process (jam up, machine start up, etc.) and all the print sections were not on, and all that printed was the cyan. This should have never left the door at the manufacturing company and if it was prepackaged I can see how it shipped form DCS. Although I agree with everyone else that when presented with the photos they should have replace or refunded at absolutely no cost to the buyer.

I'm seeing a lot of words like 'unethical' and other inflammatory language, so having more than a bit of trading standards and customer service law experience from back in the UK, I'd like to point out some things.

1. It's highly likely DCS were simply unaware they were obligated to pay return postage, hence my pointing out the laws on the issue on page 1 of this thread. They had offered to partially rectify the situation and have now, likely on being made aware of their legal responsibility, decided (wisely...) to settle in full accordance with EU and UK trading laws. This thread did seem very ready to get the pitchforks when there really wasn't the back and forth history prior to posting to warrant that, unlike, say, the Blue Table fiasco.

2. The OP sounds like he kicked off with DCS on their page publicly and gave them hell instead of patiently escalating matters (after which you can raise hell, see the Blue Table fiasco for how that reached a certain level before a 'pile in' was acceptable). So their backs were up and they offered below what was required of them in this matter, that's why it's often better to start complaining politely in a reasonable and professional manner. I also read here 'no matter how rude, the customer had the right'... which isn't the case, if the customer can be shown to be harassing, vulgar, threatening etc, this can go in a whole different way... be warned...

3. DCS are, in no way, obliged to further trade with this or any other customer in the future. I would suggest on resolution of this matter, they both go on their merry way and wipe the slate clean. The OP has already found another company to his liking (the presence of other companies selling same/similar products allows the supplier to refuse further trade).

4. Defamation, Slander and Libel recourse all also exist in the EU's trading laws, so be careful how you tread in using hyperbole or words like 'slimy rats'... Professional, curteous exchange and maintaining the moral high ground are excellent when/if you have to present your case to an outside arbitrator. It avoids you looking like the aggressor, which invariably sets that ombudsman against you.


finally

5. I was looking at DCS product myself, especially their 6x4 space mats for my BFG/STAW games and would greatly appreciate some feedback from them on whether this really was a 'one off' or whether they really cannot produce actual 'true black' on their mouse mat materials.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:


(...)
finally

5. I was looking at DCS product myself, especially their 6x4 space mats for my BFG/STAW games and would greatly appreciate some feedback from them on whether this really was a 'one off' or whether they really cannot produce actual 'true black' on their mouse mat materials.

I'm in the same case, I was about to order a game mat when I saw this thread.
I just want to know if it's a recurent issue with DCS products or just an isolated case.

this matter is now resolved. I think they have taken a look at their stock and realised that particular mat is indeed faulty as they dont want me to waste my time posting it back and have put that style on hold for now.

I have been offered a full refund for both the mat and the postage. And I am more than happy to repurchase said mate again in the future if the mats are fixed.

People can read the original messages. I was in no way abusive in them til the very end when my back was very much up, and nither were I on their facebook page. Unless posting a picture of an item is considered abusive somehow these days

I think tbh the thread has gone a long way to prove to them that good customer service is paramount when items are faulty. And given the content of the email I just got Id say its lesson learnt. Several others have used them in the past with no hassles at all and maybe it was just a personality clash in this case. All it all drek happens and now its resolved.

Im going to request an admin lock the thread now as I think it has servered its purpose

Glad to hear that it got resolved. Late, but in the end, everyone is satisfied. Already blew my mod whistle :*

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I'm seeing a lot of words like 'unethical' and other inflammatory language, so having more than a bit of trading standards and customer service law experience from back in the UK, I'd like to point out some things.

1. It's highly likely DCS were simply unaware they were obligated to pay return postage, hence my pointing out the laws on the issue on page 1 of this thread. They had offered to partially rectify the situation and have now, likely on being made aware of their legal responsibility, decided (wisely...) to settle in full accordance with EU and UK trading laws. This thread did seem very ready to get the pitchforks when there really wasn't the back and forth history prior to posting to warrant that, unlike, say, the Blue Table fiasco.

2. The OP sounds like he kicked off with DCS on their page publicly and gave them hell instead of patiently escalating matters (after which you can raise hell, see the Blue Table fiasco for how that reached a certain level before a 'pile in' was acceptable). So their backs were up and they offered below what was required of them in this matter, that's why it's often better to start complaining politely in a reasonable and professional manner. I also read here 'no matter how rude, the customer had the right'... which isn't the case, if the customer can be shown to be harassing, vulgar, threatening etc, this can go in a whole different way... be warned...

3. DCS are, in no way, obliged to further trade with this or any other customer in the future. I would suggest on resolution of this matter, they both go on their merry way and wipe the slate clean. The OP has already found another company to his liking (the presence of other companies selling same/similar products allows the supplier to refuse further trade).

4. Defamation, Slander and Libel recourse all also exist in the EU's trading laws, so be careful how you tread in using hyperbole or words like 'slimy rats'... Professional, curteous exchange and maintaining the moral high ground are excellent when/if you have to present your case to an outside arbitrator. It avoids you looking like the aggressor, which invariably sets that ombudsman against you.


finally

5. I was looking at DCS product myself, especially their 6x4 space mats for my BFG/STAW games and would greatly appreciate some feedback from them on whether this really was a 'one off' or whether they really cannot produce actual 'true black' on their mouse mat materials.

Well, that's a huge bunch of nonsense for just one post. Defamation, slander and libel in trade law? Well that would be one peculiar legal system. I like the capitalization there, someone got his degree off of sovereign-citizen's-web, obviously.
Next, something like "slimy rats" is inherently so clearly stated a matter of opinion that it's permissible pretty much anywhere. I would suggest you stop talking out of your hindquarters on matters on which, even by internet standards, your understanding is so fundamentally hilariously flawed.
Besides that: it's immensely important to create as much social (and financial!) consequence/burden for companies who act in as slimy a manner as Deep Cut Studios. There is no reasonable way whatsoever to argue that a business which deals primarily in sales to consumers can even be remotely justified in not knowing such elementary cornerstones of basic contract law as pertains to consumer sales. ("elementary cornerstones of basic..."? Yeah. It's that fething idiotic to believe for one second this is not something any business in such a field should and would absolutely know).

In fact, let it be known clearly that the only reason I shall not repeatedly call Deep Cut Studios a bunch of slimy rats here on dakkadakka is rule number one. They're welcome at any time to DM me here on dakka for my full personal details and try and do something about me making sure to spread my opinion of their despicable business practices as far and wide through the gaming community as I can (and can be bothered to, but I'm perfectly happy to keep occasionally posting some tidbits for a couple of years ).
You know what, though? They won't. Even they just *won't*. Because even with your senses inserted so far up your hindquarters as I can only surmise to be required for the repugnant behaviour towards customers that Deep Cut Studios has clearly displayed here, they will still have sufficient sense to realise that everything you are so hilariously incorrectly claiming if absolute bantha gak.

So please, stop apologizing for businesses treating consumers as abhorrently as Deep Cut Studios apparently prefers to do, until they are called on it in such a public manner - that sort of senseless behaviour from the likes of you only enables companies like Deep Cut Studios to abuse customers as much as they clearly prefer to, had they not been called on it.

Play nice kids, it's time for my nap.

The OP's problem has been resolved - and hopefully DCS remembers this for later.

And I am fairly certain that their response has cost them some business.

DCS was in the wrong, and has had their arses impacted by steel capped toes.

No need to keep kicking it, for now at least.

Doesn't make them less in the wrong when it happened, but hopefully they can learn from it, and move on.


The Auld Grump

Copying here from the N&R thread for completeness:

 DeepCutStudio wrote:
In the end:
- solutions were found outside standard and formal procedures
- customer received a full refund without having to return the item back
- questionable mats were removed from sales for thorough investigation
- apologies were expressed

My personal thanks for all the feedback. It is the main force that kept us growing and I hope it will in the future as well.

Gediminas Jonaitis
Deep-Cut Studio

If either of the affected parties (Lutharr101 or DeepCutStudio) have more to add, please just PM me or another moderator to have the thread unlocked - thanks.