Just seen and ad on Farcebook for a mini chain saw, the one in the filmed demo is a STIHL made unit, but when you go to the shop page to purchase the item shown for £29.99 it is a GTA 26 with no STIHL markings at all. Header says 2020 HOT SELLING-GTA 26 Battery-Powered Wood Cutter. For that price I expect it is a Chinese copy.
Interestingly when you pause the demo video, the demo screen goes black, so I recorded it with a screen recorder.
Why bother? You're clearly not going to buy a Stihl saw for 30 quid. So, either buy the cheap copy for 30 quid ... or don't.
Not buying anything, just highlighting the anomaly.
I've not bought anything off a facebook ad, and your tale doesn't encourage me to. There are some very very dodgy sellers out there, and at least Amazon MP and Ebay give you some protection.
Be very careful with these FB ads. It's quite likely all you get for that
29.99 is a spare chain. They did a similar trick with modelling saw benches. Where you can buy spare blades on Ebay for a couple of quid. But the ad showed the complete saw.
DO NOT BUY FROM FACEBOOK ADS!
I got stung by a Chinese company for an inferior cheaper version of the product I ordered. Initially they claimed ?no refunds? but after taking it up with PayPal, they graciously said I could return it for a refund.
Return postage was twice the value of the product they shipped and about half what I paid.
Tim
There are NO sellers on Facebook selling the genuine articles!
Anyone know if the protection you get by paying with a credit card is any better than Paypal?
I am pretty sure you lose the credit card protection if you use paypal, the onus is shifted to PP.
ISTR that credit card protection only comes in when the transaction value is over £100, may well vary by bank. Also the transaction would have to be direct with the seller, not via a third party like Paypal.
Yes, the statutory ("section 75") applies only to transactions from £100 to £30,000 where payment is direct to the seller.
Confusingly "direct" does include sellers who use a payment processing service to take the payment (eg Worldpay) - and PayPal have one of those. What's clearly /included/ covered is a transaction where you use your own PayPal account.
It doesn't inspire the consumer with confidence.
Governments (nationally and at EU level) have encouraged consumers to think that no matter what they do it'll be someone else's responsibility to bail them out. And legislated - and lent on banks - to make that true to an extent previously unthinkable. But I don't see why credit card issuers should be resposible when a card is used to fund a PayPal account any more than when someone draws cash with the card and uses it to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
Not what I meant. Many things give the choice of paying by Paypal or credit card. Although some will also settle their Paypal bill via a credit card.
Ah - of course. Forgot about the £100 minimum for a claim against the credit card, rather than seller.
Only on section 75 chargebacks which are a legal requirement for all CC companies, and credit providers.
On chargebacks which are offered as a benefit by the compnaies themselves Visa and American Express have no minimum spend, with Mastercard its £10.
michael adams
...
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required