Van Wonderen Watches B.V.

Comentario del comprador:

Cette société propose des montres qu’il n’a pas pu dont il est pas sure de la provenance

Comentario del comprador:

No contesta a los mensajes de los compradores en varios dias

Comentario del comprador:

I'm disappointed in this seller since he send me absolutely new watch but didn't put in the parcel the instruction which is necessary for this watch. All my request to send me the missing instruction were ignored by the seller. As a result I bought expensive limited edition watch but without instruction. That's why all future clients of the seller I strongly recommend to discuss every item before making an order. Otherwise you can get incomplete set.

Comentario del comprador:

How to describe the fact that apparently a pro dealer sends away an expensive watch in its original wooden box without protective airbubbles wrapping and packing box around in a simple thin plastic Fedex envelope? Who offers a watch against standing Chrono 24 guidelines in "Zustand 1 sehr gut" and qualifies it in writing "mint condition", writes after precise question regarding spots on the photos of the watch arise, that they are quote "shades of the camera" and when the whole thing arrives at the buyer "shades of the camera" turn out beeing not shades but good visible real existing scratches and or marks, the watch having furthermore several, long deep scratches on almost half of the back housing of the watch, the same dealer providing a leather strap and wooden box totally ruined, looking as well nice and apparently as well in Zustand 1 sehr gut "mint condition" on photos, myself wondering that if this might by "Zustand 1 sehr gut mint condition" , what "condition 5" then is ? Then writing about "mistake" or "disappointment"... sorry what... a "mistake"? Since when the fact of publishing and advertising a such non-accurate description could become legally overnight a simple "mistake" ? In times of "fake news" ?