DS Colour Labs - Shocking Customer Service!

Status
Not open for further replies.
FlyPhot

FlyPhot

Messages
4,159
Name
Jim
Edit My Images
Yes
I ordered a large (expensive) print from DS Colour Labs last weekend, which arrived today. the print is for a customer who is expecting to have it by the end of this week.

The print arrived and it is shocking quality with some really bad 'banding' across it. I phoned DS who said I should email pictures of the poor quality image - I did this.

I then received an email back stating that they would replace the image no problem and it would be sent out today. I asked if it could be sent Special Delivery, as a gesture of good-will (as I have a customer waiting for the print) and they said that would be fine, if I pay the extra cost!

Personally, I don't see why I should be paying extra cost to have a print sent out, to replace something that was awful in the first place. I noticed the banding straight away so why this wasn't picked up by their own quality control process I really don't know (the person packing the print must have very bad eyesight!), and if it had have been they should have reprinted it the same day and sent the decent quality version, which would have been here on time.

DS Colour Labs have now lost a customer, in me, as they have not shown particularly good customer relations, in my opinion.

So, beware if you use DS Colour Labs, it seems that customer service is not one of their highest priorities.
 
Don't see what the problem is, they are willing to replace the image and send it out to for free, good customer service imo.

If you want special delivery, pay the extra if it means that much to you.

Talk about an over reaction or what!
 
Irishman said:
Don't see what the problem is, they are willing to replace the image and send it out to for free, good customer service imo.

If you want special delivery, pay the extra if it means that much to you.

Talk about an over reaction or what!
Click to expand...

Not an over reaction at all, the image should never have left their print shop in the first place, it is so bad (I immediately saw the terrible banding across the print). It should have been reprinted there and then and the decent quality copy sent out, which would have been here today.

As a small businessman myself I wouldn't dream of sending out substandard products in the first place (which is, IMHO, real customer service). So, now I have to wait (and it's a Bank Holiday weekend) even longer for a print that I should have had today.

If you think that's over reacting then great, well done, but I certainly don't - I do think it's bad customer service to send out very sub-standard products in the obvious hope that the custoer wouldn't notice or complain, and just accept it.
 
Last edited:
Well I've always been happy with their service.

If it's being sent today what's to say you won't get it tomorrow?
 
bovey9 said:
DS colour are one of the cheapest labs around and therefore have to keep costs down somehow. The vast majority of work I get from them is good and if on the odd occasion it's not they sort it. It's the price you pay for going with the cheapest lab possible. If you want the the very best service possible, pay more and go elsewhere .
Click to expand...


So, you;re saying that because their prices are cheaper than most I should expect to have a print that isn't fit for purpose? Wow, that's a new philosophy on me, I must say - I always thought that you pay for a product and then expect to get what you've asked for, not something that is in effect damaged.

If they'd have sent the print with no flaws in the first place then this wouldn't be a problem (and they would have saved themselves even more money by not having to pay twice for postage). But they didn't, they sent a flawed product, when I expected a perfect product by the end of the week - that's the service I paid for, and is the service I should expect, surely?
 
FlyPhot said:
So, you;re saying that because their prices are cheaper than most I should expect to have a print that isn't fit for purpose? Wow, that's a new philosophy on me, I must say - I always thought that you pay for a product and then expect to get what you've asked for, not something that is in effect damaged.

If they'd have sent the print with no flaws in the first place then this wouldn't be a problem (and they would have saved themselves even more money by not having to pay twice for postage). But they didn't, they sent a flawed product, when I expected a perfect product by the end of the week - that's the service I paid for, and is the service I should expect, surely?
Click to expand...
You don't get what you have asked for, you get what you have paid for - and you have paid for cheapness so expect to get cheapness. The fact that you have promised the print to your customer is no concern of the printer unless you made the timing clear at the point that you ordered the print.
 
I would say they've shown average customer care in this instance. As Nick alluded to, they are an average quality print lab with good prices, that deliver reasonable results. However, "average" means there will be some with good, and some with bad experiences. How a lab deals with that is a measure of their "quality" and offering a same day reprint & dispatch is pretty much what I'd expect. I'd be disgruntled, but would accept that it was my choice to use them.

As John said - it's not the lab's fault you have a customer waiting and if I were running such a business, I'd be looking to bake in delivery times when I set my customer expectation.

They messed up (which they shouldn't have done but as you say, their qc is obviously cheap/non-existent), & they offered to replace and send out another print - which I would argue is the minimum anyone should offer. It's disappointing for you, but fortunately you have the choice to go elsewhere to perhaps get a more reliable service.
 
Harlequin565 said:
I would say they've shown average customer care in this instance. As Nick alluded to, they are an average quality print lab with good prices, that deliver reasonable results. However, "average" means there will be some with good, and some with bad experiences. How a lab deals with that is a measure of their "quality" and offering a same day reprint & dispatch is pretty much what I'd expect. I'd be disgruntled, but would accept that it was my choice to use them.

As John said - it's not the lab's fault you have a customer waiting and if I were running such a business, I'd be looking to bake in delivery times when I set my customer expectation.

They messed up (which they shouldn't have done but as you say, their qc is obviously cheap/non-existent), & they offered to replace and send out another print - which I would argue is the minimum anyone should offer. It's disappointing for you, but fortunately you have the choice to go elsewhere to perhaps get a more reliable service.
Click to expand...

Well, as it happens it would seem that they didn't like the adverse social media activity that I produced and they have in fact now re-posted on a next day delivery service. I'll still look elsewhere in the future but at least the power of social media has worked, for me, on this occassion.
 
Last edited:
john.margetts said:
You don't get what you have asked for, you get what you have paid for - and you have paid for cheapness so expect to get cheapness. The fact that you have promised the print to your customer is no concern of the printer unless you made the timing clear at the point that you ordered the print.
Click to expand...

So why do they promise top quality prints on top quality fine-art paper and not something like "select our mediocre quality prints, that may be flawed, here and we'll do our best to get it to you in good time but please be aware that you take your chances as we are cheap as chips andour quality control is a bit hit and miss at times" ? :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

I didn't pay for cr@p, I paid for what they advertised and didn't get it, simple as that.
 
FlyPhot said:
So why do they promise top quality prints on top quality fine-art paper and not something like "select our mediocre quality prints, that may be flawed, here and we'll do our best to get it to you in good time but please be aware that you take your chances as we are cheap as chips andour quality control is a bit hit and miss at times" ? :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

I didn't pay for cr@p, I paid for what they advertised and didn't get it, simple as that.
Click to expand...
Legally, it is called "salesman's puff". The customer is supposed to understand that all salesmenpeople exaggerate their wares and the customer is supposed make a decision based on price and reputation. I don't know what you paid but if you had paid £500 for an A3 print you could (should) expect a hand finished print of the very highest standard. If you paid £5 for an A3 print you should expect an image of some sort. An in-between price gives an in-between quality.
 
john.margetts said:
Legally, it is called "salesman's puff". The customer is supposed to understand that all salesmenpeople exaggerate their wares and the customer is supposed make a decision based on price and reputation. I don't know what you paid but if you had paid £500 for an A3 print you could (should) expect a hand finished print of the very highest standard. If you paid £5 for an A3 print you should expect an image of some sort. An in-between price gives an in-between quality.
Click to expand...

Sorry, salemans puff isn't 'legal' at all as it represents an opinion and not fact and as such cannot be taken to be legally bound, e.g. Red Bull Gives You Wiiiings (I wouldn't seriously buy a tin of Red Bull and expect to be able to fly! would you?).

A product should arrive with the customer as it is advertised, the print I purchased was advertised as a high quality print on fine art paper - this is the legal part, not sales puff - I didn't get what was advertised, simple as that; it's called the Sales Of Goods Act, and states that a product must be as advertised, not a guess based on its price. The Sales of Goods Act states that good must be:
  • as described
  • of satisfactory quality
  • fit for purpose
 
Last edited:
FlyPhot said:
Sorry, salemans puff isn't 'legal' at all as it represents an opinion and not fact and as such cannot be taken to be legally bound, e.g. Red Bull Gives You Wiiiings (I wouldn't seriously buy a tin of Red Bull and expect to be able to fly! would you?).

A product should arrive with the customer as it is advertised, the print I purchased was advertised as a high quality print on fine art paper - this is the legal part, not sales puff - I didn't get what was advertised, simple as that; it's called the Sales Of Goods Act, and states that a product must be as advertised, not a guess based on its price. The Sales of Goods Act states that good must be:
  • as described
  • of satisfactory quality
  • fit for purpose
Click to expand...
And satisfactory quality is defined by the price.
 
john.margetts said:
And satisfactory quality is defined by the price.
Click to expand...

And 'as described' is defined in the advert ;)

And 'fit for purpose' means not with flaws that mean it can't be used for its intended purpose. ;)
 
Last edited:
It appears to be the timing of the replacement that is the issue.

Did your original contract with the supplier have an agreement or clause about timing of the delivery?
 
FlyPhot said:
Sorry, salemans puff isn't 'legal' at all as it represents an opinion and not fact and as such cannot be taken to be legally bound, e.g. Red Bull Gives You Wiiiings (I wouldn't seriously buy a tin of Red Bull and expect to be able to fly! would you?).

A product should arrive with the customer as it is advertised, the print I purchased was advertised as a high quality print on fine art paper - this is the legal part, not sales puff - I didn't get what was advertised, simple as that; it's called the Sales Of Goods Act, and states that a product must be as advertised, not a guess based on its price. The Sales of Goods Act states that good must be:
  • as described
  • of satisfactory quality
  • fit for purpose
Click to expand...

Funnily enough they were sued for using that slogan and had to pay millions in compensation, so I guess not so much of a valid point.
 
Pound Coin said:
It appears to be the timing of the replacement that is the issue.

Did your original contract with the supplier have an agreement or clause about timing of the delivery?
Click to expand...

I ordered last Friday and paid for 48 hour delivery service (i.e. I entered into a contract with them to supply the goods and deliver in 48 hours - their terms). Now, I know that this is 'working days' and didn't expect it by Monday, but I did expect it by Thursday at the latest (a reasonable expectation in my opinion), hence I told the customer to expect it on Friday/Saturday.

It arrived in a state that was not as advertised, or fit for puropse, so I asked them to replace it (and sent them picyures of the flawed areas - to which they agreed it was not right) and send the replacement Special Delivery (which would get it here today, Friday) to meet my original delivery expectation - not an unreasonable request either, in my opinion. I was, initially, told that this would not happen unless I paid for the Special Delivery, which is the main thrust of my complaint (the other being the shoddy item that was sent). If they had done proper QC in the first place they would have re-printed the image there and then and sent it on, the same day, and it would have got here on time but they sent an image that was not fit for purpose (god knows why, after all it isn't a tiny blemish, it is huge banding on the image!).

But, they have now sent it SD, as I had posted on social media which obviously got their attention, at no extra cost to me - and admitted, publicly, their mistake and bad handling of the issue.

I must say i'm astounded by the fact that some people seem to suggest that as I used a cheaper company I should expect to receive a print that is sub-standard, and not what is advertised. But hey, if that's what others are happy to expect then that's up to them, after all 'a fool and his money are easily parted', as the saying goes.
 
TGphoto said:
Funnily enough they were sued for using that slogan and had to pay millions in compensation, so I guess not so much of a valid point.
Click to expand...

Exactly, sales puff isn't legally binding - so correct, not much of a valid point to bring it up in the first place ;)
 
Yes, I understand it was faulty, and they were in the process of rectifying that. I was trying to establish if contract with them had a deadline, which it doesn't appear it did. It seems that they were compliant under consumer law, but their customer service wasn't as good as it could have been.
 
They didn't ask you to pay to send out a reprint. they asked you to pay because you wanted an expedited delivery. Not sure what the problem is.

I agree that a sub standard print should never have been shipped in the first place but I suspect that DSCL have a largely automated process so goods are probably not individually checked. If you want that level of service then you are going to have to pay more.
 
ecoleman said:
They didn't ask you to pay to send out a reprint. they asked you to pay because you wanted an expedited delivery. Not sure what the problem is.

I agree that a sub standard print should never have been shipped in the first place but I suspect that DSCL have a largely automated process so goods are probably not individually checked. If you want that level of service then you are going to have to pay more.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it was packed by hand and they have already admitted that it should never have been sent out. I asked, reasonably, that I get the reprint within the expected timescale of what i'd originally paid (they have even said that themselves now).

And as I've said, they are sending the reprint by 24 hour service, free of charge, so it's all sorted now.
 
Last edited:
Irishman said:
So you can now change your title to 'Excellent Customer Service' ;)
Click to expand...

Or, "good customer service, but only after being called out publically on social media after being shocking" maybe would be better, as it's been far from excellent IMHO ;)
 
I don't think its to much to ask that a print gets a look over before despatch.
 
Last edited:
FlyPhot said:
So, you;re saying that because their prices are cheaper than most I should expect to have a print that isn't fit for purpose? Wow, that's a new philosophy on me, I must say - I always thought that you pay for a product and then expect to get what you've asked for, not something that is in effect damaged.

If they'd have sent the print with no flaws in the first place then this wouldn't be a problem (and they would have saved themselves even more money by not having to pay twice for postage). But they didn't, they sent a flawed product, when I expected a perfect product by the end of the week - that's the service I paid for, and is the service I should expect, surely?
Click to expand...
It's rare to get the cheapest price and the very best service and quality. They cut some corners to keep costs down. It's like buying a supermarkets own brand bake beans and moaning they do not taste as nice as heinz (other brands are available :) My advice if the job is time critical use someone else and pay more.
 
Rule One should be "keep the customer happy" and being cheap (not sure they are?) is no excuse... I only ever used them once and found them to be totally useless.. the fact that I use photobox over them says it all :)
 
KIPAX said:
Rule One should be "keep the customer happy" and being cheap (not sure they are?) is no excuse... I only ever used them once and found them to be totally useless.. the fact that I use photobox over them says it all :)
Click to expand...

The point i'm trying to make, exactly (y)

I find it astonishing that peole are happy to accept sh1te just because they are slightly cheaper than someone else! Still, as i've already said, a fool and his money are easily parted.
 
I can't argue you point except for expecting them to pay for a SD service.
However, perhaps more lead time with the customer would have help?
 
Last edited:
As far as I'm concerned, it's not unreasonable to expect them to pay for special delivery as it is there screw up. They set the prices, not the customer. The quality should be perfect whatever the price is. The idea that people should expect an inferior product as its cheaper makes no sense. Going back through history, priced were lower to fight for customers, not for "well we are cheaper do don't expect much" I would have insisted.
 
hashcake said:
I can't argue you point except for expecting them to pay for a SD service.
However, perhaps more lead time with the customer would have help?
Click to expand...

I ordered it on a Friday, paid for 48 hour service, i'd kind of expected to get something that I could pass to the customer by the following Friday! As it happens, they capitulated and did get it to me by the Friday but if I hadn't called them out on social media I wouldn't have got it until today at the earliest (12 days later!!)
 
FujiMatt said:
As far as I'm concerned, it's not unreasonable to expect them to pay for special delivery as it is there screw up. They set the prices, not the customer. The quality should be perfect whatever the price is. The idea that people should expect an inferior product as its cheaper makes no sense. Going back through history, priced were lower to fight for customers, not for "well we are cheaper do don't expect much" I would have insisted.
Click to expand...

Glad i'm not the only one that feels this way, I was beginning to think the average UK consumer had gone mad for a minute (perhaps they have?), thanks for restoring my faith :giggle:
 
FlyPhot said:
The point i'm trying to make, exactly (y)

I find it astonishing that peole are happy to accept sh1te just because they are slightly cheaper than someone else! Still, as i've already said, a fool and his money are easily parted.
Click to expand...
It is more of a case, on my part, of knowing that cheap will be s*** and deciding that it is better to pay for quality.
 
Donnie said:
How much did the print from DSCL cost you and how much are you charging your customer?
Click to expand...

well, that would be between me, DSCL and my customer really. And why would any of that make a difference anyway?
 
Last edited:
FlyPhot said:
well, that would be between me, DSCL and my customer really. And why would any of that make a difference anyway?
Click to expand...

It would make a difference but unfortunately I can't really say what that would be without the information so looks like you've made that a dead end.
 
Donnie said:
It would make a difference but unfortunately I can't really say what that would be without the information so looks like you've made that a dead end.
Click to expand...

How would the price I charge a customer make any difference, at all, to the service I got from a supplier? No correlation at all, whatsoever!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top