| August 18, 2000 | 02 05 02 61 00081801 |
Ms. Kim Matteson
Customer Advocate
Fraud Department
Maryland Bank, NA
P.O. Box 15019
Wilmington, DE 19891
USA
| Subject: | RMA# 1797954; Return Omnibook 4150 |
|
MBNA Account 5329 0311 6100 4195 MBNA letter dated August 8, 2000 Telecon Jennifer/Rod August 18, 2000 |
Dear Kim,
Your letter on August 8 requests proof of return signed by the vendor.
This request is incorrect and conflicts with MBNA's duty of fair dealing and good faith business practice in that a customer cannot force a vendor who delivers defective goods to perform its duty to correct its mistakes. MBNA is required to take reasonable notice of the record showing its customer, in this case, Welch, has performed its obligation of notify the vendor of defects and that the product is ready for pick up. The customer has no further duty to incur additional time and expense to correct defective merchandise. Welch has performed its duty of notice in a letter to CDW on May 12, 2000, as reported to MBNA in a letter on May 25, 2000.
Industry practice requires vendors to retrieve defective merchandise. For example, CDW shipped a Sony notebook computer that was found to be defective on April 28, 2000. CDW picked up this defective merchandise on RMA #1784487, as reported on May 1, 2000. More recetly on August 14, another vendor, Corporate Express, shipped merchandise that was incorrect, and, like CDW on the Sony transaction, Corporate Express issued RMA #CA-32253 to pick up the defective merchandise. In the instant matter, CDW again issued RMA# 1797954, and was thereafter notified by letter on May 12, 2000 that its instructions had been performed and the merchandise was ready for pickup, as was done with the defective Sony notebook computer.
MBNA's letter on August 8, 2000 submits a letter from CDW dated July 17, 2000 which expressly states it issued RMA #1797954. The letter further states that "...once the merchandise is returned back to CDW, a credit will be issued." That position is incorrect, since the customer does not have a duty to pay for returning defective merchandise, as shown above. Moreover, the customer cannot be forced to pay for defective merchandise merely because the vendor fails to perform its duty to retrieve defective merchandise.
Today, I called MBNA and spoke with Jennifer Conrad to assist in closing this transaction without undue burden to MBNA.
Jennifer asked if CDW was given any follow up notice to retrieve defective merchandise?
CDW was called on May 19, 2000, a week following notice to CDW that its instructions had been performed to prepare the defective merchandise for pickup by CDW's shipper, as was done with the prior failed transaction. Allison Burnett stated CDW had received this notice and would pickup the defective merchandise under CDW's RMA #1797954.
At this time, we have no record showing CDW has been denied its right to retrieve defective merchandise. The record shows the vendor's instructions have been fully and timely performed. This constitutes proof of return to the vendor called out in MBNA's letter on August 8. By copy, courtesy follow up notice is issued to CDW.
THE WELCH COMPANY
Rod Welch
rowelch@attglobal.net
Copy to:
200 N. Milwakee Avenue
Vernon Hills, IL 60061