Problematic warehouse contracts delay delivery

By Suzanne Palmer
Published December 20, 2007

Q: On July 27, I ordered a product called Zorbeez after seeing it advertised on television. My payment of $28.71 was processed by my bank the same day.

I hadn't received the product by Aug. 29, so I called customer service. The representative said the order had shipped July 28, but since I hadn't received it yet, they would process the order again. They claimed my phone number had given them an address in St. Petersburg, even though I had given them the address, which is in Gulfport.

In mid September, I called again to check the order's status. I was told it had shipped, but if I didn't receive it by Sept. 26, I should call again.

I called Oct. 1 and this time, I was told the order had, in fact, not shipped due to a warehouse problem.

At this point, I told the supervisor I no longer wanted the product, just a credit. She agreed and went on to tell me that if it arrived, I should keep it with their compliments for my trouble.

By Oct. 15, I'd received neither the credit nor the Zorbeez. I called customer service and the man I spoke to said he would look into it and call back the next day.

I have heard nothing further. I'd appreciate your help getting my refund.

Barbara Hardoerfer

A: According to an e-mail you sent, part of your shipment arrived Nov. 8, but still no credit.

Zorbeez did not respond to Action's first inquiry so we sent another by FedEx.

You forwarded an e-mail you received shortly thereafter, from Paul McKenna, director of customer service for Zorbeez.

He apologized for the poor service you'd received and detailed a severe problem the company had with its warehouse contracts that resulted in the necessity of immediate shutdown of operations while it moved its inventory to a new facility. Shipments were delayed.

"As a result of your efforts," you wrote, "I received a check today for the full amount of my order. I don't think I would have ever seen this check without your help."

Caught in fine print

Q: My husband and I purchased a leather sofa in February 1999 in Michigan. At the time, we also purchased a fabric protection package with seven-year coverage.

A few years later I noticed some oil stains on the sofa, which I can attribute to my husband since he has oily hair. I tried to clean the stains but had no success. Then I remembered the protection package and called the number listed for claims.

The representative I spoke with quickly denied my claim, despite its being within the coverage period and within the warranty, which states it will cover all human bodily fluids.

Are these plans a ripoff or what?

Ellen Kleinedler

A: The challenge with any warranty is in following its terms and conditions to the letter. If not, the warranty becomes void and your claim will be denied.

I read your warranty carefully. Although it does mention coverage of "human bodily fluids," it states that the fabric is warranted if it becomes stained "as a result of spills from" things like beverages, ink or bodily fluids.

Further along it says that the warranty does not apply to normal soiling from everyday use.

Clearly, the stain on your leather sofa didn't come from a spill, but rather the prolonged use by your husband, who happens to have oily hair.

You also mentioned having attempted to clean the stain before you phoned the warranty administrator. The terms say you must call first, then clean the stain according to the directions given by the company representative.

I expect either of these issues may have contributed to your claim being denied.

Action solves problems and gets answers for you. Write Times Action, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731, or call, (727) 893-8171, or, outside of Pinellas, toll-free 1-800-333-7505, ext. 8171, to leave a recorded request. Complaints can only be accepted by mail. Send only photocopies of personal documents. Names of letter writers will not be omitted except in unusual circumstances. Letters may be edited for length and clarity.

[Last modified December 19, 2007, 15:30:47]