Amazon selling dangerous lighting

[ban-all-sheds]

Certainly. So if Amazon decided to move all its operations to, say, some Pacific island which is completely outside of U.K. jurisdiction, how would any law in the U.K. affect things? They'd continue to provide services just as now, and it would still be the person buying the goods from the Chinese supplier who, legally, would be importing them. You'd have exactly the same problem as already exists.

I am as sure as I can be that fewer people would go to a .tk or .vu etc website with the same equanimity as a .uk one.

Is it Amazon's fault if people can't be bothered to read what's in front of them and which indicates quite clearly that a certain order is to be fulfilled by the Acme Export Co. instead of by Amazon itself?

You often talk about people being responsible enough to learn how to carry out a certain wiring job properly and safely before just tearing into it and getting stuck. Is it too much to ask to expect people actually to look at Amazon's site enough to understand that in many cases Amazon is just the middleman?

It seems it is.

So are you suggesting that we must continue to allow people to be put at serious risk because their low intelligence, or naivety, or misplaced trust in a household name like Amazon makes it all their fault, and we must not do anything to limit Amazon's ability to profit from the sale of the items which put those people at serious risk?

I acknowledge that some people do seem incapable of reading what's in front of them. For example, I've seen reviews of DVD sets on Amazon U.K. in which somebody is complaining about having to return a set because they were "disappointed that all the notes on the box are in Dutch" even though it's quite clearly stated that the item in question is a Dutch import. Or they ask questions about a product which are already clearlt answered in the description. But that doesn't make Amazon's model of acting as a middleman for other sellers wrong.

There's a huge difference between that example, and the endemic problem of poor-to-the-point-of-lethally-dangerous quality electrical goods. I would be amazed to learn that you genuinely don't realise that.

If we're talking about deceptive practices by the seller, then we're on slightly different grounds and yes, I would like to see eBay, Amazon et al actually clamp down on such things - Sellers on eBay who give a product location as London, for example, but who in fact are in China and shipping directly from China.

I thought your position was that it is not even slightly reasonable to expect eBay, Amazon et al to check what people were doing with the eBay, Amazon et al resources which they were paying eBay, Amazon et al to use?

If deception is involved, such as claiming to be shipping within the U.K. when it's coming from China, claiming that a product is compliant with some standard when it is not, or selling counterfeit goods, then no, there needs to be something done.

Done to whom? Where is that person? Who, and under what legal auspices, will do the "something" to them?

But on the other hand, just how far do you want "consumer protection" legislation to go in guarding against some people being unable to read what's in front of them, or simply not bothering to read it?

We could start with as far as it does now when people pick up an item from a shelf in a High St shop.

The shop is responsible for the item being there for people to buy.

We end the fiction which says that when Amazon etc provide the entire web retailing infrastructure and sometimes the physical logistics infrastructure of warehousing and delivery for an item being available for people to buy that they are not in any way responsible for it being available for people to buy.

 

[JohnW2]

I honestly cannot see what is wrong with this general principle. If it should not be on sale in the UK|USA|France|Germany|etc then it should not be offered for sale on a .uk|.com|.fr|.de website.

I can sympathise with that idea, but, as has been discussed, it's quite obvious what the big players in this game would do if what you suggest were legislated and enforced.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I am as sure as I can be that fewer people would go to a .tk or .vu etc website with the same equanimity as a .uk one.

You're probably right, but I am almost equally sure that they would not have any such hesitation to go to a .com website.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

To expect someone else to be held responsible because the authorities are not doing their job adequately is, IMO, not appropriate

Why do we not operate on the same principle with illegal drugs, smuggled tobacco and alcohol etc? Why do we not think it inappropriate to hold the sellers of the shipments which do get through customs accountable?

I thought that we were talking about direct shipments of individual items from China to individual buyers in the UK (rather than 'container loads'). If so, the importer, who would be 'the criminal', would presumably be the individual buyer. Do you really want individual buyers to face "total loss of every single penny they have, and the loss of several years liberty" just because they bought a phone charger on-line?

I asked you that question - it's not really fair for you to ignore answering it and then ask it of me.

When Joe Bloggs is injured or suffers a loss when his flaky phone charger goes bang, are you going to prosecute him for importing it?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I can sympathise with that idea, but, as has been discussed, it's quite obvious what the big players in this game would do if what you suggest were legislated and enforced.

They might.

But the move would have to be real, not a fiction. There would have to be not one Amazon et al employee left in the UK, or the EU, or whatever the jurisdiction(s) were which decided to put an end to this farce.

 

[JohnW2]

To expect someone else to be held responsible because the authorities are not doing their job adequately is, IMO, not appropriate

Why do we not operate on the same principle with illegal drugs, smuggled tobacco and alcohol etc?

I think we do. I can't imagine that anyone 'further down the chain' would be prosecuted for the illegal import (by someone else) of drugs, tobacco or alcohol.

Why do we not think it inappropriate to hold the sellers of the shipments which do get through customs accountable?

Accountable for what - see above. It could well be that by using, handling or selling goods that had been illegally imported by someone else that they had omitted other criminal offences for which they could be prosecuted, but they could not be 'held accountable' for the illegal import. In the case of the purchase and use of one phone charger (or whatever) which (unbeknown to the buyer) was illegally 'imported', I'm not at all sure what, if any, criminal offences the buyer would have comitted.

I thought that we were talking about direct shipments of individual items from China to individual buyers in the UK (rather than 'container loads'). If so, the importer, who would be 'the criminal', would presumably be the individual buyer. Do you really want individual buyers to face "total loss of every single penny they have, and the loss of several years liberty" just because they bought a phone charger on-line?

I asked you that question - it's not really fair for you to ignore answering it and then ask it of me.

Apologies - I thought your question was essentially rhetorical (as was mine). If we're treating them as real questions, my answer is "no" - what is yours?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I can sympathise with that idea, but, as has been discussed, it's quite obvious what the big players in this game would do if what you suggest were legislated and enforced.

They might. But the move would have to be real, not a fiction. There would have to be not one Amazon et al employee left in the UK, or the EU, or whatever the jurisdiction(s) were which decided to put an end to this farce.

And the reason they wouldn't do that (if the law had made it otherwise impossible for them to continue trading) is?

Kind Regards, John

 

[PBC_1966]

Every time H. M. Customs look at an import the buyer gets a bill often way above the cost of the item. The bill comes from the carrier who add their bit to it so even when there is no import duty, the buyer ends up with a £10 ~ £30 bill just because it was looked at.

And in my opinion, that is wrong. Charging import duty & VAT which is due is one thing, but there shouldn't be extra fees just for the package being inspected, as that's part of Custom's job.

It gets worse with small packages coming in by regular mail, since any time a packet gets processed by Customs so that Royal Mail can collect the duty and/or VAT due, Royal Mail then adds its own administration fee on top. It wasn't too bad years ago when it was £1, but the last time I received something in England which had tax due, Royal Mail had increased the charge to a whopping £8. Worse yet, the time I got caught with the increase the shipper had split the order of parts into two packages to save postage, so I got hit with a double fee - It ended up costing a £16 fee for Royal Mail to collect about £3 in duty/VAT. It's dubious whether Royal Mail actually has a legal right to demand such a fee and whether your local post office can legally refuse to hand over the package once the duty/VAT has been paid, but, of course, it would probably take quite a legal challenge through the courts to do anything about it.

What about the individuals who try to evade UK VAT and other taxes by buying goods from outside the UK?

Where does tax evasion come into the picture in the cases we're discussing? If the value of the package is over the relevant customs limit then duty and/or VAT will be charged when it arrives in the U.K. (plus, in many cases, an additional fee as above) and if it's below the limit then no tax is due anyway.

If it should not be on sale in the UK|USA|France|Germany|etc then it should not be offered for sale on a .uk|.com|.fr|.de website.

I am as sure as I can be that fewer people would go to a .tk or .vu etc website with the same equanimity as a .uk one.

I don't doubt you are right on that last point. But perhaps you're not aware of the fact that anybody, anywhere in the world can obtain a .co.uk domain name? Some top-level country domains have restrictions, e.g. Ireland restricts the .ie TLD to those who have some sort of substantial connection with the country, and the .us TLD is restricted to U.S. citizens and those others with some sort of physical presence in the United States. But there would be nothing to stop eBay, Amazon or whoever from moving to that remote Pacific Island base and retaining a .co.uk domain name.

You're probably right, but I am almost equally sure that they would not have any such hesitation to go to a .com website.

And as I'm sure John was alluding to in this comment, there are absolutely no restrictions on who may operate a .com domain or where they have to be either.

 

[JohnW2]

You're probably right, but I am almost equally sure that they would not have any such hesitation to go to a .com website.

And as I'm sure John was alluding to in this comment, there are absolutely no restrictions on who may operate a .com domain or where they have to be either.

Exactly.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

To avoid confusion the questions listed were ones I cut and pasted from the amazon site about these lights!

I posted them because it show an alarming lack of knowledge about the products they sell, and the possible implications of their advice

I asked them what was the IP rating. I received 2 answers: one stating "more than happy with the product", which appears to be from a purchaser, and one from Buyee "Dear customer,
Thanks for your message.

The IP rating is one class.

Hope this can help you.
Any question,please just feel free to contact us,we are always here to solve your problem,please rest assured.

Best regards
Tiffany"

I think we should all bombard them with questions to draw attention to their woeful lack of knowledge.

 

[stillp]

What about the individuals who try to evade UK VAT and other taxes by buying goods from outside the UK?

Where does tax evasion come into the picture in the cases we're discussing? If the value of the package is over the relevant customs limit then duty and/or VAT will be charged when it arrives in the U.K. (plus, in many cases, an additional fee as above) and if it's below the limit then no tax is due anyway.

Not every package is inspected. Many people buy from, for example, the USA, in the hope that their package is not one of those inspected. Those that are unlucky are often disappointed when they are charged the full duty and VAT, plus an admin fee, and discover that they've paid more than the UK list price.

 

[stillp]

When Joe Bloggs is injured or suffers a loss when his flaky phone charger goes bang, are you going to prosecute him for importing it?

Why not? If he imported a handgun and shot himself in the foot with it, should he avoid prosecution for importing an illegal item?

 

[stillp]

While I have some sympathy with the view that Amazon, ebay, etc should be made to take some steps to limit the sales of illegal/dangerous items, let's not forget that there are plenty of sites that are even worse. Alibaba.com (very appropriate name for a gang of thieves) for example seems to exist mainly to facilitate the trade in counterfeit or copied products.

 

[PBC_1966]

Not every package is inspected. Many people buy from, for example, the USA, in the hope that their package is not one of those inspected.

Indeed, and as I was having items shipped from the U.S.A. to the U.K. for many years, I'm well aware of the fact that there were sometimes packages which were due for duty/VAT but which slipped through without there being any request for payment.

Is it our fault if H.M. Customs doesn't do its job properly?

By the way, to present the converse side of the story, far more often than I care to remember I had packages for which they were trying to overcharge, the most outlandish example of which I can recall was where they took the price in U.S. dollars and then calculated the tax as if the figure was pounds Sterling! I wonder how many people get overcharged and don't bother to query it because they figure that Customs officials must know what they're doing?

 

[stillp]

Is it our fault if H.M. Customs doesn't do its job properly?

Yes. Do you conceal income from the Internal Revenue?