Lost Christmas Gift: Amazon, Reliant, and ArrowXL’s Shocking Failures and Broken Promises My Experience with Amazon UK, Reliant, and ArrowXL (Part 2): Accountability and Responsibility Failures This is a critical review of my recent purchase of a TV via Amazon UK, highlighting serious accountability and responsibility failures involving Amazon, Reliant (seller), and ArrowXL (courier). The experience has caused emotional distress, financial strain, and logistical inconvenience, especially since this purchase was intended as a Christmas gift. The Issue 27th November: I ordered a TV sold by Reliant via Amazon, with delivery promised by 30th November. 30th November: Delivery missed, and the date was pushed to 3rd December, but it still did not arrive. 3rd December: Amazon informed me the TV was "likely lost", while ArrowXL confirmed they never received the item. 3rd December: Despite this, £888 was debited from my Barclays bank account via direct debit — not credit card — contrary to Amazon’s claim that "payment authorization was incomplete." Failures of Accountability Amazon's Role False Claims: On 3rd December, Amazon falsely claimed that payment was "pending" and authorization was incomplete, yet the payment had been successfully debited from my Barclays account. Broken Promises: On 3rd December, Amazon promised in writing to issue a refund within 24 hours, but this was not done. The refund deadline was later shifted to 13th December, despite evidence the item was lost. Failure to Escalate: Amazon failed to resolve the issue with Reliant or ArrowXL, forcing me to pursue direct contact with the seller. Reliant (The Seller) Failure to Dispatch: Reliant failed to release the TV to ArrowXL. Reliant’s system shows the order as "pending", confirming that the item was never released to the courier. No Transparency: Reliant only responded after I contacted them via customer service email and left a review on Trustpilot. Payment Issue: Reliant provided Amazon's message, which incorrectly claimed that payment authorization was incomplete. This was factually incorrect, as the payment of £888 was debited on 3rd December. ArrowXL (The Courier) No Custody of the TV: ArrowXL confirmed they never received the TV, and since Reliant’s system shows the order as "pending", it’s clear that ArrowXL is not at fault in this case. No Proactive Updates: Despite being the assigned courier, ArrowXL failed to communicate the non-receipt of the package proactively. Accountability Failures False Payment Claims: Reliant and Amazon falsely claimed payment authorization was incomplete, despite the payment being successfully debited from my account on 3rd December. False Delivery Claims: The TV was listed as "damaged in transit" (according to Amazon) and "pending dispatch" (according to Reliant), while ArrowXL confirmed it was never received. Broken Refund Promises: Amazon promised a refund within 24 hours on 3rd December, but then delayed it to 13th December, despite clear evidence that the TV was not dispatched. Impact on Me as a Customer Emotional Distress The TV was a Christmas gift, and as we approach Christmas, the chance of finding a replacement is rapidly decreasing. This has caused emotional stress, especially since delays are likely to increase as Christmas approaches. Financial Strain £888 was debited from my bank account on 3rd December, but no refund has been issued. This financial strain has limited my ability to purchase a replacement gift. Breach of Trust Amazon provided a written assurance of a refund to be processed within 24 hours, but this was not honored. This has eroded my trust in Amazon, Reliant, and ArrowXL. Consumer Rights Violations Failure to Deliver Goods Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the seller (Reliant) is responsible for ensuring delivery. As Reliant never released the TV to the courier, this is a clear breach of their legal obligation. Withholding Refunds Without Justification Under the Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013, refunds must be issued without undue delay. The delay until 13th December is unlawful since the TV was never dispatched. Breach of Written Assurance On 3rd December, Amazon provided written assurance that a refund would be processed within 24 hours, which was not done. This constitutes a potential breach of obligations under the Misrepresentation Act 1967. Final Thoughts This experience demonstrates a complete failure of accountability from Amazon, Reliant, and ArrowXL. Reliant failed to release the TV for dispatch. Amazon falsely claimed payment authorization was incomplete, even though £888 was debited on 3rd December. Amazon broke its written promise of a refund within 24 hours. Escalation Plan: Complaint to Trading Standards, chargeback request, and media exposure via BBC, Guardian & more.