View Single Post
Old 18th July 2020, 10:55 PM   #21
manishkulkarni
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kronckew
Yes, that casting seam clinches the argument. I hope that's your photo, not one of the vendor's - he might try saying you should have known from his photo...

The law in the UK gives you 30 days to return an item for refund,

From sale of goods act 2015:

"Under the Consumer Rights Act 0f 2015 you have a legal right to reject goods that are of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described, and get a full refund - as long as you do this quickly. This right is limited to 30 days from the date you take ownership of your product."

If it was an online purchase, you may have further rights.

Always buy by credit card where possible, they give you 60 days to claim and get your money back, then the fight the vendor to reimburse the CC company.

The vendor cannot remove these rights by clauses in their 'Terms and Conditions'. Weasel words like 'sold as seen' or attempts to delay or avoid responsibility for falsely describing an item do not remove your rights. The description may have untruths in it, but that's for your vendor to take up with them that sold it to them. Of course, if you are from outside the UK, getting redress may be difficult if the vendor chooses to ignore you. Hiring a lawyer remotely would be expensive, and hiring a Baliff to actually collect on any court judgement might also be a headache (tho the vendor have to pay the fees). All in all, if the item was not very expensive, you might have to bite the bullet & chalk it up to experience as a learning episode. As noted, ALL of us have an OOPS corner or closet for memory stimulants, or for resale (just be sure to call it a replica or fantasy item and avoid calling it an antique).
Hi All,

I'm truly very grateful for your guidance and advice! Indeed, a lesson well learnt and although I feel embarrassed, let me come clean - I paid 700 for it, that too with a sale discount, without which this was at 990. The guys at Lanes Armoury were extremely friendly and courteous, and although not part of the original description, I have it on email that it was their assessment that this piece is late 19th century or possibly earlier. As an amateur and inexperienced collector, I rely greatly on reputation and integrity of people I buy from and don't even look for a cheap bargain (seller's knowledge point put to rest eloquently by David ). My interest was from an unusual weapon perspective, although I generally stick to swords from the Raj era (born and grew up in Mumbai but have been in the UK for 20 yrs now, hence the fascination).

All in all, pretty disappointed that this seems a lot more recent than late 19th and I absolutely intend to ask for a refund. I'm aware it's always a bit hairy with disputing claims with antiques but let me see how that goes - I'll keep you all posted. Thanks kronckew for the legal bit Any guidance from anybody on how I position this argument would be appreciated.

Lastly, I attach one more snap, sorry for attaching the same snap twice. The official description is as follows:

A Most Exotic & Impressive Indo Persian Double Bladed Short Sword Somewhat reminiscent of the Indian double bladed bichwa. Twin serpent blades with twin fullers, cast copper-brass hilt decorated with ornate designs. To use such an extravagant weapon one had to have been very skilled and highly trained in its use, for the potential for the holder to do harm to his self must have been quite great. 17.5 inches long overall.
Attached Images
 
manishkulkarni is offline   Reply With Quote