Lunch Boy with Pilpa Hudson and now Consumer Talk featuring with Wendy Nola.
Before we bring in Wendy.
Tracy, thanks for your message, already responding saying, yay, I love rugby and I've tried for years but still don't understand the rules. Now with two boys playing the game, I need to understand the rule book from a sport dummy. Well, Tracy's book to spot with us on Tuesday at two o'clock next week. I hope you will join us and learn more about the sport of rugby.
Tracy, thanks for the enthusiasm.
We're all really excited about the series and we've got some fantastic guests lined up, so really looking forward to it. For now, though, we are switching our focus to consumer affairs and Wendy Nooda joining us by a zoom this afternoon from Johannesburg. We are going to be discussing another aspect of risk associated with online shopping, and this is particularly today, the problems associated with platforms that include third
party vendors. If you are quite sure what that means, we'll explain in just a moment, but just to say, if you've had experience with these issues that we're talking about today. If you'd like to join the conversation, give us a WhatsApp to seven two five six seven one five six seven or a call to two one four four six o five six seven.
Great.
Have you with us, Wendy welcome. We don't seem to have.
Audio on your sound Wendy, if you can just check that you're not muted on the zoom on that end, apologies for that. Wendy joining us from Johannesburg this afternoon to discuss the matter, and.
There we go. I think we've got you now, Wendy. Welcome, Rookie Era.
Sorry, yes, good to be with you.
There's been a while since we did by zoom, so you are forgiven, Wenny. Today's topic isn't just fueled by listener complaints, although we have had a number of those. It's actually been flagged as a problem by the Consumer Goods and Services on But hasn't.
It Yes, indeed to the umbut who is the Consumer Goods and Services on Board?
Lee Sobrati.
He spoke out just last week at the release of the ubert's twenty twenty four to twenty five an Your Report, But he actually had led this issue many consumers buying, as you said, products on large, well known retailed websites, so there's a trust factor there, right, not realizing that they are actually dealing with an unknown third party vendor that are being you know, that are piggybacking on that big player being hosted on the site. And obviously there's
a fee that they pay for that. But it's only so many of these these transactions. These purchases would go off without a hitch, no problem, but when things go wrong with the product or the delivery, or the customer realizes that, you know, they were doing business with a company that they you know, they didn't realize, then there can be disputes and some you know, unfortunate kind of dispute, well, disputes and problems that arise out of that.
It all sounds quite familiar.
We've actually tackled a case or two like this fairly recently, Wendy.
Yes, the one was a little while ago, but it was one of my standout cases. It was a summerset where man who bought a laptop from take a Lot which turned out to be stolen. Weirdly, I think it
was more more than a year. I mean close to two years later, he was working on it and suddenly this screen popped up, freezing his his laptop, making it unusable for him, and saying that it was stolen from a government department, a contry member, which one remember that, and yeah, and so naturally he wanted, you know, a refund, and it got very messy, went on for months and months, even after our intervention, and finally he you know, take
a lot to take responsibility. And the other one was was earlier this year Amanda, also of Cape Town, she ordered a Guardina specific brand, well known, reputable brand of host pipe off the Macro website, only to receive a cheap and nasty knockoff. She was given a real run around when she tried to return it because once again the seller was not actually Macro itself but a third party vendors selling on their platform. And she was finally refunded.
I think it was two months after the purchase, after she came to us for help.
Okay, so thanks thanks for reminding us of those examples. I'm sure listeners will remember them. But Wendy, as you said at the start, it's not just our complainants raising the red flags here. Last week the consumer goods and services Onbitsman Lisa Brati highlighted this issue in the release of the latest annual reports. Can you tell us a little bit of an overview of what he said?
No, I think it's best for me to quote exactly from his report. He said, it's clear that many consumers do not understand the implications of transacting with legitimate online platforms that host third party suppliers commonly referred to as marketplaces.
As these proliferate, he said, we anticipate that's the orbit's office that more complaints from consumers who think they are trading with a well known platform, only to find themselves having to deal with an unknown vendor when things go wrong. He then went on to say that his office was working hard to ensure that consumers, especially vulnerable ones, understand
what to look for when shopping on marketplaces. He says, the tease agencies are usually clear in this regard, but a surprising number of people, even experienced online shoppers, fail to read them.
And don't we know that.
We know that all too well. Guilty has charged and we've spoken about this very very often.
When there were particular key issues within the sort of category of problems that he flagged. You want to just elaborate for us.
Sure, so he said, There include who exactly is responsible for the delivery of the goods and the successful delivery of the goods. Who must provide customers or their receipt as proof of purchase, especially when it comes to needing to lodge a warranty with the manufacturer on the goods purchased if they become somehow effective.
And also whether the housing this.
Is very important, not housing, whether the hosting platform that big name will assist with a plant relating to non delivery or return should goods become defective, because you really don't want to be left on your own trying to deal with a third party that you didn't even know existed before you place the order came.
So yeah, it.
Would seem then, judging from his remarks, which went on for a number of paragraphs in his report, that that office has also been fielding complaints around this issue.
Okay, so we've had a couple of new ones as well. Do you want to tell us about the case of Kyle Wells also here in cape to on our caped on shoppers having unfortunes experiences by the looks of things.
What happened?
Yeah, this is the case I took up.
He bought a laptop on Take a Lot last April, and when its charger exploded earlier this year, he went looking for an invoice on the app in order to make a warranty claim it was founder warranty.
When he couldn't find.
Any invoice or any proof of purchase, he turned to Take a Lot for help, but Take a Lot said its third party supplier was nonrous re sponsors to its request to provide said proof of purchase. Take a Lot's tease and c state that third party sellers are responsible for providing an invoice to the registered user that would
be the buyer KYL in this case. But the UMBERT says consumer protection laws compel intermediaries that's their technical name in terms of the CPA, such as Take a Lot, to ensure that a full record of the transaction be provided to the consumer. Take a Lot in this case said well, we can't get hold of them. You know, it's over to you. And he came to me and said, well if I can't get hold if they can't get hold of them, I don't take a Lot, am I supposed exactly.
I mean, Wendy, surely these platforms should be doing due diligence about who they allowed to trade as a third party. I mean, it's in their best interests because it's their reputation that's compromised.
Kyle isn't telling his.
Friends I bought a laptop and the charger exploded, and I bought it from third party vendor Xyzz.
He's telling them me bought it on Take a Lot exactly.
So Take a Lot.
When I questioned them about this, said that all third party sellers have to go through a robust vetting process before they can start trading on the platform.
I was told.
They are required to submit documentation and information which is automatically checked and validated using a matrix of databases. They check with plice, and they check company registration records and if this and also the seller's sources of supply are validated using previous invoice checks. If the seller doesn't pass the checks and overall vetting process, they are not permitted
to trade on Take a Lot, I was told. And on the rare occasions when the checks and balances fail, as in this case, we assist customers as best as possible and then they said, you know that the cell had been unresponsive in this case.
Excuse me, horrible frog.
Okay, you source off the frog while I read a question that's coming from Jenny, who I think is asking the million dollar questions that everyone's wondering. If I've bought an item from Take a Lot, surely my contract is with Take a Lot rather than with the vendor who supplied the item to Take a Lot.
And we're going to delve Jenny. Thanksful for that, You've nailed it.
That is the key question here is where does the responsibility sit in that contractual relationship. And we're going to delve a little bit into that because the omber has had quite a lot to say about how the law views all the parties in this case. When the important to say that, in Kyle's case, Take a Lot has suspended the supplier of that exploding laptop charger until such time as they have been able to establish contact with
them and resolve this matter. But in the meantime, I mean, Kyle's got no way of lodging a warranty claim in respect of the defective product.
Indeed, but after I'd started making a bit of noise about this and the OMBUD had champed in with his feelings on the matter. Take a Lot didn't tell me this, but they let Kyle know that they were giving him a replacement laptop and he got said laptop, so he was sorted out that way. But yes, it does speak to the responsibility factor when you go to a certain retail online retail site and you have a certain level of you feel a certain level of comfort and protection.
Yeah, yeah, that what is it in reality?
Yeah?
Okay, Now to Journey's point about here, where does the responsibility lie here? Who is your contract with and what are the obligations in that contractual relationship? When you asked the OMBUT for comment on this case, and they were absolutely clear that in terms of the Consumer Protection Act, and intermediary in any transaction has got to keep proper records of all relationships and transactions, and that for the purposes of e commerce, they would regard the hosting platform
as an intermediary. So, in other words, whether it's take a Lot or Macro or any other major sales platform that is hosting a third party vendor, the major platform is regarded officially as an intermediary and they are obliged to comply with the Consumer Protection Act in that regard. So they were absolutely unequivocal in that.
So the major plate there intermedia. Yeah, there's exactly, and they must comply with what the Act says about that and their responsibilities accordingly.
Okay, as a matter of interest, did he give you any indication of just how many of these kinds of complaints they are receiving about third party vendors?
No, they in the annual report released last thursday. As I said, there were a lot of stats in there and break certain breakdowns, but it doesn't dive that deep in terms of, you know what categories of online complaints. Obviously this was one of them to be singled out. But all all they shared was that of the twelve two hundred odd complaints received between the beginning of March last year and the end of February this year, online
complaints with the largest category at nineteen percent. And that was a trend that began in twenty twenty when a lot of people who had been sitting on the sad lands, maybe only you know, booking an airline ticket online but not shopping, you know, jumped in with both feet and as the numbers go up, as the online starts from life eight, so you know the number of complaints about things going wrong then you know continue to arise every year proportionately with with the Onbird's office.
I've just done a quick calculation in the background here, and if they've received twelve two hundred and seven complaints in a single year, that means approximately thirty three people are lodging complaints every single day of the year, Wendy. Okay, And I'm surprised you've said that, So six or seven online complaints that with twenty percent is the accurate figure.
That's six or seven complaints a day. As you said, considering the huge escalation in online shopping usage, I'm also a bit surprised the figure isn't higher than that.
Now.
You also had an interesting engagement with another local supplier, Wendy, about another aspect to the third party story, which is third party vendors selling knockoffs of legitimate brands products.
Yeah.
So the Waco Group, which owns the Yellow brand, shared with me is concerns about Yellow knockoffs being put up for sale by vendors on various online marketplace places. I was told by their head of marketing, Carl Lucas that it happens, you know, across the board, take a lot, Amazon, Macro and others. He says, Fortunately, we have established channels within those e retailers to report and remove fake listings, and now that the removal of those listings happens usually
within twenty four hours in the space of a month. Recently, he said, I think it's June to July, the Wicco team successfully requested online retailers to remove more than one hundred fake listings and in one month, they said. He said, the company puts that down, you know, being able to do it, you know, efficiently and quickly in you know, with their relationship with those marketplaces. It's due to their size and resources. But he said, smaller brands and customers
probably don't stand a chance. And we're sure these fraudsters are targeting other shopping categories too, and we know that they are.
So what the.
Fakers are doing, I'm calling them the fake is they use various combination of Cello's brand name, product titles, images, written descriptions, even the product codes on those marketplace, says, you know, piggybacking on the on the big names, creating the impression that customers are purchasing authentic Sealo items and he says, I've lost my place.
When they.
When they complain, when they when they when they report this, obviously they are removed quickly. But the people fulfilling those orders though, the ones that you know where customers buy before the listings are removed, they're using substant materials and constructions, and they they reckon.
It's small backyard.
Artfits just seeing the pictures and trying to do a cobble together and not something that looks but usually not normally quite badly, and the moment there arrived, the purchaser knows something that is definitely wrong. But you can imagine the damage to the brand if someone does, think well, because the complaints would go to them, right, what if you what kind of quality is this?
Yew Okay, thanks for flagging that.
After the news break, we're going to come back to another aspect of the third party vendor issue that also applies to other brands and established platforms as well. So stay with us, and if you've had experience with this issue of buying from a major platform thinking you were buying directly from that platform, only to discover that you'd been receiving an item from a third party vendor and then had difficulty engaging with them for any reason.
WhatsApp seven to five, six seven one, six to seven.
Well, here's the what's up from Moyra with an example of what we've just been discussing, and then Melane will get to your particular issue in just a moment because it's directly relevant to the next thing we want to talk about first. Though, Moyra has had the experience Wendy. She says in May, I bought a Mylex vacuum from Lout and when it broke five weeks ago, was told I need to get in touch directly with the supplier
to sort it out. I had a long wait, firstly for that first feedback from lut and then secondly for feedback from Mylex themselves, and I still don't have a vacuum cleaner, is her comment. She said happily. The previous time she had an issue with something bought on Take a Lot, she again was asked to deal no, sorry, take a Lot. I bought a scale from Take a Lot, she says, it didn't work. They sent me a replacement
that also didn't work. I sent it back and was given credit, but I did then contact the supplier who curied me a new scale at no cost, So in that case it ended well for Moira. In fact, she got a double whammy. She got a new scale and she got a credit from Take a Lot.
So two weeks should rectify that?
Yeah, yeah, but you should rectify one thing about the credit. The retailers tend to default to that, but you don't have to accept that. If you want to refund, you're entitled to it, and they normally do say that if you if you prefer, But what they should ideally do is before they do anything, say which would you like if you're a regular shopper. On that side, it makes sense to have a credit because it's immediate, and if
it's a refund it takes much longer. So I'm just just saying, if you want your money back, you don't have to accept a credit.
If the dict is defective, do you have.
To accept being told you must sort it out with the supplier or should it not be the platform you bought it from?
Problem to rectify?
I think no.
If it's in the first six months, certainly under the CPA they must take responsibility, and certainly in a case like this, where the customer is coming to you as this reputable, dependable, major player in the industry. This is not somebody that would nor merely choose to buy from Sunshine one to three.
You know what I mean.
It's they are trusting you to have properly vetted and stand by this third party that you are now allowing allowing on the site. So they should do their due diligence and if something goes wrong, and it's a question to ask, and I would certainly do that so you know what you can expect if something does go wrong. So I think in some cases they do, in in other cases they don't.
But I would.
Certainly if it happened to me, I would certainly insist that they deal with their supplier and not make it your problem, not make it properly because they should have vetted them properly.
Right, absolutely, absolutely.
You are putting your trust in the brig, the big brand, and shopping on the big brand for a reason because it is a trusted brand. So they need to do there, but to ensure the integrity of what that brand represents in terms of how they're vetting who goes on that platform.
So I mean the bottom line for listeners.
Here, Wendy is obviously again playing cost attention to the small prints. When you are buying a product, if there is a line there saying that this is a third party vendor seller Xyz for example, an even I heard of that person.
I mean, I've done it.
Many times, but be mindful that both take a lot and Macro for example, they will use the words.
Sold by and it'll be a company. Don't know.
I should just say I did ask Macro for comment and they said they opened their website to third party sellers in twenty eighteen. Items sold by third party sellers are indicated on the product display page as I've seen through a message saying sold by.
And the business name.
All suppliers, including marketplace sellers, are contracted to comply with relevant legal obligations, including those prescribed in intellectual property law and the Consumer Protection Act. I was told by Macro if the authenticity of products, and this was my quer was specifically around the knockoffs. If the authenticity of products is in question, including through proact of weekly scanning of the marketplace product catalog, then those products are removed from sale.
I also had a case just quickly say talking about just thinking about it when they said they require the vendors to comply with the CPA. I had started corresponding. Someone bought a kettle and it it became defective within six months.
And I saw the.
Correspondence that the supply had sent to Macro, and it included it said this.
You've had the product.
For four months or five months, and that's it's it's very long and so that basically there's no recourse. And I was like, and the and the and the Macro person didn't correct that in relaying the information to the customer. So that kind of thing needs to now be you know, stamped out. There needs to be a lot of oversight because they're inviting these people into into our trusted app and we need to know that they're doing their due diligence.
Okay, now, Wendy, just an interesting sort of did you know addition here before we move into the issue of returns on items that we're on sale. All online vendors actually have legal obligations under the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act in terms of the kind of information that they're obliged to display. Won't you just walk us through what you should be looking for.
Sure there are a lot, but I think just to simplify this and the onbut actually made mention of this in his report as well, because so many people, even experienced shoppers, don't know this. So if this doesn't happen, then's a red flag and I would say move on.
So number one, they.
Need to clearly display the refund and returns policies and plan easy to understand the language and to and often the tes as we'll get you now are not legally compliant, but people don't know they're not legally complied, right, So I think arm yourself with the correct knowledge by listening to shows like this would be a good start. And
then they must provide a full, physical, valid address. When I say valid, I've seen many that just put the street name suburb and you look at it quickly and you think, oh, there's a street address, But if you try to find them, you couldn't because there's no number all right, Or if you try to if you wanted to check them out on Google Maps, which is a very good idea, you can't because you don't you just have a street and an entire street to go on.
So it must be a full address. They can't just have an email address or just a city, which so often is the case. So you know, in many cases we discussed this on the show. You go into the website and they have an embedded email form contact that, so there could be anyone anywhere. There is no contact ability, traceability. So if you see that, I don't care how much you want the product and how cheap it is, you.
All what a platform you're shopping.
If the third party vendor doesn't provide that kind of information on their site, walk away from the deal because it's not the deal you think it is. Okay, very short break, and then we're back onto another aspect of online shopping here, which is to do with your right of return and particular questions around returning items that were on sale or discounted on promotion. Me'lane will get to your question. It's directly relevant to this part of the conversation. After this short break.
Consumer Talk with Wendy Norler, you can join.
The conversation right Besides the issue of third party vendor problems, Wendy, the Onbitz report flagged a second issue which comes up quite often with regard to online sales, and that is companies refusing to accept returns and refunds and issue refunds on items which were sold on sale or promotion of
some kind. We encountered this poor old demand and her hose pipe had the same issue because her hose pipe had been bought on promotion, and at the time, that was the first stumbling block she encountered, being told there's no return on sale items, all those on promo. And I know you've got another recent example to share with us, but before we do that, here's one justin on the WhatsApp line m'lane writing in to say, I recently placed
an online order with Boody. I love their underwear, so I decided i've their clothing range, and on Earth Day, they sent out an email stating that for one day only, everything on the website would be twenty five percent less.
I jumped at it.
I ordered two tracksuits from their newly launched range along with an underwear item, but when they arrived, the tracksuits were not a good fit, so I logged a return. I was then informed the items were not eligible for return due to their being sale items. I was baffled by this, as my opinion when placing my order was that I would be allowed to return them if they weren't suitable because it was an online purchase. My question is twofold. Firstly, does using a promo code make an
item a sale item? It doesn't really seem to fit the traditional understanding of a sale item, especially when ordering a newly launched product. And Secondly, am I entitled to a full refund based on the cooling off period regardless of whether or not the item was on sale? I would love to hear Wendy's thoughts. Wendy has lots of thoughts on this one, Milaenium sideline. You raised it, Wendy before we answer, maybe also, do you want to share Kim's example, which was a similar sail the.
Case indeed, and just to say that this wasn't flagged by the boot. This was separate issue that I am seeing and and I'm so gratified that we got that call.
It's almost as if we put her up to it, which we didn't. So Kim off Cape Town she.
Was about to buy something from Cape Town based retailer Daka Parel when she spotted the no return of sale item policy, and the reason she looked for it was because the site had automatically applied a promotional discount okay on her on what she'd put in her basket. And so she queried that with the company and she copied me, which I was grateful for. So I and she wrote, I'm about to place an online order.
Just what I've said.
The TZNC state that I can't return anything that was part of a sale or promotion. As I told Kim and the retailer in the same email, that clause is definitely not okay.
The law is clear on that if.
You buy something online, the Electronic Communications and Transaction Acts applies, and that gives you seven days in which to return it, whatever the reason. So you don't even have to give them a reason. You just get to change your mind and send it back for at your cost, unless the company chooses to absorb that, which very few do. So you've got a pay to send it back, which is, if it's something heavy, you might want to consider that because it might be a barrier to you to your
right to return. And that's because you haven't had the opportunity to engage with the product as you would in the store, to try it on, specifically in these to feel.
The fabric, to see if the shade of red is actually as it appears on the screen, that sort of thing.
Okay, exactly, So there is no exclusion on sale items because if they were think about it, Papa, all ever retail online retailer would have to do to rob their customers of the right to return within that cooling off period and get their money back with me to say that everything is on item, either through a line saying you know it was seven ninety nine now five ninety nine, or to automatically a pro promotional discount, which you think is so lovely, or a first time by a discount,
which is very common, common and so doing saying exactly what happened to our listener? Oh sorry, they don't fit well, you got them on promotion, so that is illegal. And I pointed that out to Duck Apparel, as I said, and gratifyingly, they got back to me very quickly to say we've revised our terms and conditions. They now read
refunds and exchanges. Sorry, they used to read refund and exchange are not available for sale items brought on promotional Black Friday, And now they say customers are entitled to return any item, including sale and promotional items within seven receiving their order, providing it in a resealable condition, which is absolutely fine because they mustn't lose the sale. They must be in a position to resell it onto someone else.
So that was very gratifying. But I know, and we've just our listeners just underlined it that it is very common this and you must call it out when you see it.
If they won't change it, report it to us.
Let's let's get this stopped, because that is a fundamental right of buying online because you can't try it on, you can't touch your experience the product at all. Excuse me, And if they're going to I was.
Just going to jump in and say, you have a cough in the background there, Wendy. Well, I'll just just flagged this. So this is for online purchases only. The seven day cooling off period does not apply to items you have bought in a physical store, because there you did have the opportunity to try on the pants, to check that you like the fabric, to see the color,
et cetera. This right only applies in terms of electronic purchases made on a website, So if you bought an item online for any reason, if you don't want to keep it, you are allowed to return it within seven days as long as you log that return within seven days. And again you might be asked to pay towards the cost of returning the item, but you do have the
right to return it for a full refund. Where people get confused is there is an overlapping right here, because this overlaps with the issue of the right of return if an item is defective defective, and that one applies to anything no matter where you bought it online or in a store. If the thing you bought had a problem and was not functioning in the way it was meant to, there too you have a right of return. But it's a different story, right yes.
So what is happening and these cases, obviously going to the onbost office, is there something is arrived damage or developed a defect within six months and when the consumer complains to the online retailer, they say, well, you're out of your cooling or fery. That was only a week or sometimes many of them make it actually thirty days,
whereas only legally enough to make it a week. But of course, as the on but pointed out, and there was a case study in the report, the consumer protection legislation that gives the consumer the most protection would override it. So while the Electronic and Communications Transactions of the Communications Act only talks about the cooling off period for changing your mind, you know the goods that are perfectly non defective, but you just don't want them anymore, it doesn't go
on to talk about six months. You know, you have a right to return within six months if it's effective, But the CPA definitely applies here. So as you say, wherever you bought the product, whether it was online or in a physical store, if something goes wrong with it within six months, you have the right to return it, the difference being if it's online at your cost, and you then also have the right to choose the remedy refund, replacement,
or repair. And thank you for flagging that the cooling off period only applies to online sales, because I get so many emails from people who to me, they bought something, the genes didn't fit, the sun, didn't like the shoes or whatever. They took them back and they were told sorry, we don't or they're on sale. And if you buy something in a physical store and there's nothing wrong with that, they do ever right to say, well, you brought it
on sale, we're not taking it back. They don't know if you take back any purchase on sale or otherwise, that's not defective if you brought it in a physical store. And then I get people saying to you, but please tell them they won't honor my cooling off period. Cooling off periods don't apply across the board. They apply when you buy something online.
That's it, and only online. Thank you well. Melanster sent an update saying initially they were adamant that I was not entitled.
To a refund. This is the booty story, she said.
After lots of back and forth and me standing firm, I was eventually refunded. The sad thing is that left me quite annoyed, wasted a lot of my time, and hence I won't support them again. Well, I mean that's the impact the brand, absolutely, Milan, And who would why would you buy again from somebody you've had that experience with? And well done you for knowing your rights and standing
your ground on this one. Yeah okay, Well, so Amy's writing and saying her text House Online always refused returns of anything brought on their sale that's from Amy in front of well. Amy, you need to go back to them and point out to them that's illegal.
Do you want to respond, Wendy, Yes, that is very distressing for me to hear, because during COVID people were started starting to embrace online a huge way.
Her text had a sale.
Online, their first online sale, and somebody bought a rug I remember distinctly, and the color didn't look the same in real life as it did on the website listing. And they've told her you brought it on our sale, so there's no right of return. And I took them up on that and they told me they were going to mean their policy.
Oh sorry, we didn't know. Oh okay, I need to tackle them.
Amy.
Please, if you would like, if you've got a recent case study, send us an email because that's unconscionable and it's been put you know, once you can say maybe they didn't know, but they do know, and Wendy knows that they know because she pointed it out to them several years ago. So if they're still doing a pro putting that into practice, it's very very serious. Indeed, please do send us a follow up email to Pippah at CapeTalk dot co dot sed We have to leave it there, Wendy,
the time has flown. Thank you as always for being with us, and enjoy the rest of your time in Joe Boog and we'll chat again soon.
Thanks prefer Wendy Nyak.
Just a reminder, if you want to flag a case with Wendy, the best thing to do is go onto her website Wendynola dot co dot sede and fill out the contact form there because it prompts you for all of the kind of details that Wendy needs to successfully chase your case. Thanks so much, Wendy Noler