I had to take The Cell Store to court in order to get my refund.

My experience with The Cell Store was a rather unpleasant one. I purchased a phone that was advertised with 64gb of internal memory. The phone that was delivered to me had 32gb of internal memory. Upon realizing the error I immediately informed The Cell Store. The owner or manager named Duncan acknowledged their error and immediately offered me a full refund. I was very impressed with his prompt response and willingness to rectify their mistake. Based on that, I decided that since I am going to purchase a phone, I'd rather purchase another device from The Cell Store, instead of taking back my money and taking my business elsewhere.

I decided on another model with 128gb of internal memory but at a higher purchase price for which I was willing to pay the difference i.e. the difference of the 2 advertised prices. He advised that that specific model was not in stock and as soon as he could order it, he would do the exchange. I emailed him and asked him to collect the supp**** device in the meantime and when he receives stock of the 128gb model, we could conclude the transaction, to which he did not respond.

I emailed him several times enquiring about the availability of the 128gb model and his responses were that he did not have it in stock or he was unable to order it. Several weeks had passed and I suspected that he had changed his mind and had no intention of doing the exchange anymore or had other reservations with the agreed arrangement. He later confirmed my suspicion and informed me that he could not do the exchange at the full price that I had paid as the device had been used. He advised that he would have had to buy back the device from me at a lesser amount than what I paid and do the exchange based on whatever that amount was. That amount was only revealed in court and never during our correspondences. His neglect to reveal the amount at the time led me to the belief that he no longer wanted to honour the exchange agreement and hoped I'd simply drop the matter.

He stated that he had studied law and imp**** that he had consulted with an attorney and came to the conclusion that according to the Consumer Protection Act, I was not entitled to a full refund. He later revealed in court that he actually sought legal advice from an accountant.

I made several attempts to try and resolve the matter in a way that was fair to both parties. He refused all my offers. As mentioned above he didn't even respond with an offer of his own. I advised Duncan that I spoke with an Advocate and he advised me that I am most certainly entitled to a full refund. He refused to budge and stood by his decision to not fully reimburse me. I advised him of my intention to pursue legal action against The Cell Store. Based on his knowledge of the law and his accountants legal advice, he was adamant that I did not have a legitimate case against him and advised me that legal action would prove futile and would be a waste of both parties time.

Neither Ducan nor any other representative of The Cell Store attempted to resolve the matter. The matter landed in court. During the hearing, he attempted to settle by offering me a lesser amount than what I had paid, for which I rejected. He proceeded to make me a higher offer but not the full amount that I had paid, for which I again rejected.

Based on various points from the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act (ECTA), judgement was awarded in my favour for the full purchase price that I had paid plus interest and costs. The Cell Store had to pay me a higher amount than what I originally paid. Furthermore in the legal analysis of the Judgment, the court found that the refund policy to be incorrect and not easily found.

A professionally operated business would prioritize the satisfaction of the customer especially since the dispute resulted from an error made by the company, instead of looking for salvation in the Consumer Protection Act and presenting me with invalid points from the CPA to substantiate their claim of me not being entitled to a full refund. One would assume that a company would understand their legal obligations towards their customers and not infringe on their customers legal rights.