I find myself with a decision to make, and I would appreciate advice from members of the forum.
I bought one of the new Stonfo disc-drag bobbin holders on e-Bay from V Fly at Coldingham Loch, on the strength of promotional material stating that it would take various sizes of bobbin. However, when it arrived I found that it would not accept the Hends Synton thread which I use exclusively for small flies.
I phoned the sellers and spoke to a chap who said they would take it back so long as the packaging was unopened. It didn’t seem to have occurred to him that I had to open the package to discover that the item was entirely unsuitable for my purpose.
Having gently explained that to him, he then offered to ream out the bobbins so they would fit. (Yes, honestly!) I pointed out that this would have to be done with every spool I bought in the future – another detail which had apparently escaped him.
When I further pointed out that these holders were advertised as accepting different sizes of bobbins, his reply was: “Yes, but it never said that they would take every single size of bobbin that was ever made.” (If he is reading this, I wonder if it has yet dawned on him how silly this sounded.)
Anyway, it was finally agreed that they would take back the bobbin holder and give me a refund. Now, strangely, I was able to return it to them for 66p, yet they charged me £1.65 for p&p. But it seems the postal charges are academic as they flatly refuse to refund all but 5p of these.
V Fly are still selling these bobbin holders on e-Bay, and still charging £1.65 for p&p. But at least they have changed the wording of their post to make it clear that they are suitable only for standard bobbins, (which surely amounts to a tacit admission that the initial description was inadequate). They say that this change of wording was at my request, but that is untrue.
The net result is that I am out of pocket to the tune of £2.26, not to mention the cost of the phone call, while the company have lost not so much as a penny piece, despite selling me an item which was described in terms which, even most charitably, fall some way short of the requirement which The Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000 place on businesses to give consumers clear information about the items they offer for sale.
I am now pondering what sort of feedback to leave this firm, and I thought I would throw it open to the forum. I know it is only a couple of quid (which I would cheerfully pop into the nearest charity box), but is there a principle here? Come on, folks: What do you think?

Personally I would just leave some honest feedback about the poor product description, never order from them again, and forget the 2 quid you've lost. It will cost you more than the two quid to recover the money you've lost. The best you can do is try and prevent other people from having the same bad experience you've had. They won't stay in business for long if they have a poor rating.

you are confusing postage with postage and packaging...... he is charging not just for the price of the stamp but the cost of the envelope, the time taken to pack it, the fuel to take it to the post office etc..

have a read of your statutory right you will find postage is non refundable, the guy has not done anything wrong.. he had offered you options which you declined, he has agreed to take back the bobbin holder, which as it is opened he will have more than likely sell at a reduced price... i think the guy has been reasonable

__________________

Agree which is why whenever possible I buy from my local shop where they are prepared to show me anything I want to buy before I buy it. But there again it costs me more than the £2 you are out of pocket to get there.

Thank you for your replies, lads. But Icky, I am intrigued by your contention that the seller was charging me for the time taken to pack the article. This can hardly have been more than a minute, which represents a considerable time saving over a face-to-face retail transaction.
Just think for a moment how long an average tackle-shop customer will spend at the counter, exchanging pleasantries, gossip and chit-chat about who’s catching what, where and what on. All of this is absorbed in the retail price, so to accept your argument would mean that mail (e-mail) order should be cheaper!
The chap’s offer to ream out the bobbins to fit is just plain silly, as all future purchases would also have to be sent to him, then posted back to me, at a cost which would soon exceed the original price of the bobbin holder – let alone the couple of quid in dispute. If you really think that was a reasonable remedy, then we will have to agree to differ.
You are correct to point out that, ordinarily, postage is non-refundable as a statutory right. But why this should take precedence over an apparent breach of the Distance Selling Regulations escapes me.
These regulations require businesses to give consumers clear information about the items they offer for sale, and the fact that this company subsequently altered the wording of their e-Bay post would appear to be a tacit admission that the original was inadequate, at best.
Finally, you say that the cost of fuel to take the package to the post office must be factored in. Indeed so, but I would hope that a well-established retailer would have considerably more than one package to post out each day, thus reducing the cost per item considerably.

__________________
Tight Lines. :)