Sead return terms worth asking first

I bought a 126200 from Sead / SuperMirrors in May, using available EU stock and paying by bank transfer. The delivered price fell between EUR 390 and 440. Before paying I asked what would happen if the watch arrived with a fault, where it would need to go and who would pay postage. In Budapest, the journey a parcel takes can become the entire story, so I wanted a real answer rather than an assumption based on stock location.

Sead answered those questions for this order and said a fault should be reported promptly with photographs or video. I paid on 11 May, approved photographs on the 12th and received the watch on the 18th. The clasp would not stay shut securely. I sent a video that evening. He offered a replacement clasp or inspection of the complete watch; I chose inspection because I could not tell whether the problem was confined to the clasp.

We confirmed the return address and postage arrangement before I sent it. The repaired watch came back on 2 June, and the clasp now closes with a definite click and stays closed through normal wear. The agreed postage was reimbursed. I am satisfied with that outcome. I am not posting the arrangement as a universal policy for every country and every order. My point is that I had the terms before there was a dispute, and could refer back to them when the fault appeared.

I have had two seizures in three orders, so I ask about every journey now, including a possible return. That history does not tell me anything certain about your parcel, but it has cured me of assuming a repair is just a quick trip in reverse. Written arrangements would have saved me at least one argument.

I would keep the correspondence tied to the specific order, exactly as you have described it. People copy a helpful answer from a forum and later discover it was offered for a different situation. Your clasp fault also sounds much easier to demonstrate on video than in a paragraph saying it feels wrong.