Scholle — stolen laptop, refund flip-flop (MyBroadband)
MyBroadband, December 2022
- src/data/content.ts — CLAUSES[14] (marketplace-sellers) angle on stolen-goods + flip-flop refund pattern See on homepage →
- ../press/knowler-scholle-stolen-laptop-timeslive-2022-11-06.md — corroborating second source on the same case See knowler scholle stolen laptop timeslive 2022 11 06 →
MyBroadband, December 2022
Why the site cites this
The Scholle / Nanotec Digital case is the strongest documented example of Takealot’s marketplace-vetting failure intersecting with the platform’s tendency to flip-flop on refunds. The MyBroadband article is paired with Knowler’s TimesLive column (Nov 2022) on the same case — the two sources together provide an unusually well-documented record. Both highlight that even after Takealot had suspended the third-party seller for stolen-goods sale (in August 2022), Takealot still tried to refuse Scholle’s refund on a “tampering” pretext.
Verbatim extracts (fair-dealing quotations)
The transaction and discovery
“Consumer rights journalist Wendy Knowler first reported the experience of the shopper — Somerset West resident Axel Scholle.”
“Scholle had bought an HP laptop, advertised as new, from one of these resellers for about R14,000 in November 2019. He was able to use it with no problems for nearly three years. But in October 2022, he was locked out of the device and presented with an on-screen notice informing him that it was the property of the South African Department of Agriculture.”
The seller suspension (post-discovery)
“It later asked for the laptop to be returned for a full refund and informed Scholle’s wife that the laptop reseller — Nanotec Digital — had been suspended from Takealot’s platform two months earlier.”
Takealot’s account
“Despite our seller onboarding process, the contractual undertakings we have in place, and our compliance protocols, the marketplace seller Nanotec Digital was found guilty of selling stolen goods and was suspended from trading on our platform in August 2022 — after a full investigation.”
The flip-flop
“However, Takealot apparently made a sudden about-turn on the refund after receiving the device, telling Scholle his return was declined due to tampering because the unit showed signs of being opened.”
“Scholle told MyBroadband that the laptop had been upgraded with a new hard drive and RAM bought from a local IT store. The shop performed the upgrade itself.”
“Before the return, the components were removed to ensure the machine was in its original condition.”
Knowler’s view (cited in MyBroadband)
“Knowler found Takealot’s reaction highly questionable, given that it had already suspended the seller two months before for selling stolen goods.”
The repeated flip-flop pattern
“Scholle replied to Takealot’s refusal, explaining the whole sordid situation to customer care, and the retailer finally credited his store account with the amount he paid for the laptop.”
“However, a few days later, Takealot subtracted the amount from his account again, again citing ‘tampering’ as the reason for the reversal.”
“In the latest development, Scholle told MyBroadband that Takealot again refunded his account two days ago. He requested the money be paid into his bank account to avoid the retailer potentially flip-flopping again.”
The seller-vetting framing
“All our sellers are vetted and have also provided contractual obligations and warranties that they comply with the law.”
“Takealot confirmed to MyBroadband that it had offered a full refund and apology for the inconvenience caused. It has also opened a case against Nanotec Digital with the police.”
Site reliance
- Clause 15 (Marketplace Sellers): the case demonstrates that a Takealot-vetted seller sold genuinely stolen goods; that Takealot’s seller-vetting can fail; and that even after suspension, Takealot’s first-line response on the consumer side was to refuse refund on a procedural pretext. The flip-flop pattern (refund → reverse → refund → reverse → refund) is documented.
- Practical lesson: when the consumer is in a dispute that has already flipped once, demand the refund to bank account, not store credit — Scholle’s specific request, the only thing that prevented further reversals.
- Pairs with: TimesLive Knowler article (06 Nov 2022) for second-source corroboration.
Wayback / archive status
Wayback Machine snapshot pending re-archive on next OPS refresh.