Disputed fault and lack of transparency
I recently sent my Samsung Galaxy Buds3 to SellTechs as part of a trade-in. The Buds3 were fully functional when I sent them and I experienced no rattling issue whatsoever while they were in my possession. SellTechs subsequently informed me that their inspection had found the Buds3 to be faulty and suffering from a “rattling issue”, meaning they were given £0 trade-in value. I immediately questioned this because this was not an issue I had experienced before sending them. I asked them to provide details of the alleged fault, including which earbud was affected and how the fault was identified during their inspection. I have not been provided with any evidence or technical explanation of the alleged fault. I requested that my Buds3 be returned rather than recycled. I have now been told that I must pay the postage to have my own property returned. I strongly disagree with this. I did not send them a product that I knew to be faulty, and I am certain that the alleged rattling issue did not exist when the Buds3 were in my possession. I therefore do not believe I should be financially responsible for returning them based on a fault identified by their inspection, particularly when that fault has not been demonstrated or evidenced to me. There is also a serious transparency concern regarding who actually handles and inspects the devices. I was communicating with SellTechs through one contact number, while the person dealing with this particular issue contacted me from a different 07 mobile number. During the conversation, the individual using that number referred to SellTechs as a separate entity. Taken together, the two separate contact numbers and the way the individual described the relationship strongly indicate that another party is involved in processing or inspecting the devices submitted through SellTechs. This was not made clear to me when I entered into the trade-in process, and I would have expected greater transparency regarding who actually receives, handles and assesses customers' property. The situation is particularly frustrating because I now have £0 trade-in value, despite being certain the Buds3 were working when I sent them, and I have to pay the postage simply to recover them. If I subsequently sell the Buds3 to another company, that postage cost will also reduce the amount I ultimately receive from another buyer. Overall, this has been a very disappointing experience. I sent in working Galaxy Buds3 expecting them to be assessed fairly, only to be told they supposedly have a fault that I never experienced, receive no trade-in value, and then be expected to pay to have my own property returned. I would strongly recommend that anyone considering using SellTechs for a trade-in carefully considers their inspection and returns process, particularly what happens when you dispute their assessment and who is actually handling your device.