Soon to be ex-retailer Jason Richards has started talking about the work involved in shuttering up his business. He’s particularily irate at Diamond:
I was told that my account would be closed as of February 20th and that I would receive my final shipment on the 21st. A week later I will receive an invoice for the shipping charges on that last batch of books (the freight charges are a week behind).
And then, here’s the kicker, I would also receive an invoice for “restocking.” Yes, I will be charged a 10% fee for every single item I ordered over the last three months that hasn’t been shipped (or in some cases even printed) yet.
This is where my feathers ruffle.
Sure, I ordered the items and, in a perfect world, I would pay for them when they arrive, place them on my shelves and offer them to my customers for purchase. However, why am I the one taking the hit for companies not getting their product out on time? If I ordered “Book A” back in October, with the explicit expectation that it would be on my shelf in December and then it doesn’t show up until well into February or even later, how is that my fault?
February 8th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Pay everything else then file the store for bankruptcy. Or did the laws change so you can’t pull that trick?
February 8th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Bankruptcy has concequences.
I wonder how their practice of charging the fee for unshipped items would hold up in court?
February 8th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Yeah…that fee thing is ridiculous…it shouldn’t be able to hold up. The business is closed. Fight it and let it effect the BUSINESS credit report while fighting it.
February 8th, 2007 at 11:37 pm
Dawn wrote:
I wonder how their practice of charging the fee for unshipped items would hold up in court?
It would probably hold up pretty well, since I believe Diamond requires retailers to sign a contract, including in which is the fee in question.
I could be wrong. Any retailers out there who can verify/refute?
February 9th, 2007 at 1:56 am
Diamond’s TOS doesn’t mention a 10% restocking fee, but it is explicit that all orders are non-returnable, and are ordered from Diamond at thier own risk.
“The customer acknowledges and assumes the risk that due to the nature of the products purchased from DCD, variations in such products, including but not limited to, changes in the scheduled ship date, author, illustrator, publisher, character(s) and subject matter may occur. Despite such variations, all merchandise is old by DCD on a non-returnable basis unless otherwise authorized in writing by DCD”
Further down a bit it says:
“Failure of customer to take immediate delivery of merchandise when made available by DCD, or failure to pay for merchandise when due, shall be deemed breach of contract which may, at DCD’s sole discretion, result in legal action and/or held shipments and/or cancellation of outstanding orders and/or loos of check writing priviledges and/or loss of credit terms and/or the exercise of any other rights of DCD under these Terms of Sale and/or any other available remedy at law or in equity. In addition to any other remedy available to DCD, any customer who refuses to accept ordered merchandise, or who, by his payment delinquency or any other cause, forces DCD to suspend shipments to the customer, shall be liable to DCD for a 50% cancellation charge for all merchandise the customer has ordered, regardless of its status”
So, it sounds to me that Diamond is being generous IN RELATIONSHIP TO THIER PUBLISHED TOS.
What I don’t get is why Jason thinks he shouldn’t have any responsability for the stuff he ordered, and that it is legitimate to just stick DIAMOND with the material? It’s not like THEY get to return it…
They should pay because he decided to shutter his business?
-B
February 9th, 2007 at 7:55 am
18 months then close…Sounds like a simple market analysis would have reaveled that the area didnt need another comic shop. Not enough readers to go around.
Explains why he has to close and is not selling the business – everyone else knew this so no buyers.
Cant feel sorry forthose who pridefully venture where where simple information would have said not to…
February 10th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Brian Hibbs said:
“They should pay because he decided to shutter his business?
-B ”
—–
Jason Richards was talking about the items that were months late, things that would most likely be subject to order adjustment before they were delivered, stuff that probably should be cancelled and re-solicited. Doesn’t seem right that Diamond should get 10% of the cover price of those items. Diamond could just go in the computers and cancel those items.