You would think with a website like laptop.com.au you would be sitting on a gold mine of opportunity. It would take real effort not to turn such a domain advantage into a real advantage, to become the country's specialist and expert provider of laptops. But alas, some effort is required in this regard and it involves what, in my considered opinion, is not doing the right thing. I leave you, gentle reader, to form your own opinion on the matter from the facts provided.

In mid-August 2018 I purchased a laptop from said provider. I didn't require anything fancy, but it did need to be light and small. The Lenovo Yoga 710-11ISK for $699 seemed to fit the bill. The dispatch notice was sent on August 14, and on August 21st I received the item and noticed that there were a few things wrong. Firstly, the processor was nowhere near as powerful as advertised (and no surprise there - they're advertising the bust-speed of a water-cooled processor, not an air-cooled small laptop). Further, the system came with half of the advertised 8GB of RAM.

With the discrepancy pointed out they offered what I considered a paltry sum of $100 - which would be quite insufficient for the loss of performance, and it was not the kind of system that could be upgraded with ease. Remarkably they made the claim "We would offer to swap over, however, it's expensive to ship back and forth and we don't have another in stock at this time". I asked that if this was the case why they were still advertising the supposedly absent model on their website (and, at the time of writing, October 8), it is apparently still available. I pointed out that their own terms and conditions stated: "A refund, repair, exchange or credit is available if on arrival the goods are advised faulty or the model or the specifications are incorrect", which was certainly the case here.

Receiving no reply several days later I had to contact them again. The screen on the system had completely ceased to function. I demanded that the refund the cost of the laptop plus postage, as per their own terms and conditions. The system was faulty and the specifications are incorrect. They offered to replace the machine. I told them I preferred a refund, as I now had reasonable doubts about their quality control, as per Victorian consumer law.

I sent the laptop, express post with signature, and waited. A week later I had to contact them again and provided the Australia Post tracking record to show that it had been delivered (but not collected). It was at the point that, instead of providing a refund as I had requested, they sent a second laptop, completely contrary to my wishes. They responded that they had "replaced machine with original spec that u ordered. Like new condition" and that "We are obliged under consumer law to provide a refund within 30 days of purchase" (any delays were due to their inaction). At that point a case was opened at the Commonwealth Bank (it was paid via credit card), and Consumer Affair Victoria.

But it gets better. They sent the wrong laptop again. This time with a completely different processor, and significantly heavier and larger. It was pointed out to them that they have sent the wrong machine, twice, and the second time contrary to my requests. It was pointed out to them that all they had to do was provide a refund as requested for the machine and my postage costs. It was pointed out that it is my fault that you sent the wrong machine and that was their responsibility. It was pointed out that that it was not my fault that they sent a second, wrong, machine, contrary to my request, and that, again, their responsibility. Indeed, they could benefit by having someone look at their business processes and quality assurance - because there has been many years of this retailer showing less than optimal customer service.

At this point, they buckled and agreed to provide a full refund if I sent the second laptop back - which I have done and will update this 'blog post as the story unfolds.

Now whilst some of you gentle readers may think that surely it couldn't have been that bad, and surely there's another side to this story. So it is in the public interest and in the principle of disclosure and transparency, that I provide a full set of the correspondence as a text file attached. You can make up your own mind.