Not sure tapping your watch on the palm of your hand is the correct way to wind a watch

kiter65 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 06, 2024 3:50 pm Not sure tapping your watch on the palm of your hand is the correct way to wind a watch

Obviously the OP knows how to wind a watch.

kiter65 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 06, 2024 3:50 pm Not sure tapping your watch on the palm of your hand is the correct way to wind a watch

Tapping the watch wasn't winding it, it was attempting to get it going again and it worked, briefly.
I am sure a watch that has cost me several hundred pounds breaking after 3 hrs is not the way to win this customer's money.
Therefore I have asked for a refund and I will spend my money elsewhere. I appreciate CW has many happy customers but I am not joining that happy group.
Such is life. It's just a watch.
I appreciate this is a group for CW enthusiast, and I have said all I have to say about my broken watch. I don't want to upset the CW tribe.
Have a fantastic day! (courtesy of Kelly's email from CW earlier).

Devon wrote: ↑Tue Aug 06, 2024 5:43 pm

kiter65 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 06, 2024 3:50 pm Not sure tapping your watch on the palm of your hand is the correct way to wind a watch

Tapping the watch wasn't winding it, it was attempting to get it going again and it worked, briefly.
I am sure a watch that has cost me several hundred pounds breaking after 3 hrs is not the way to win this customer's money.
Therefore I have asked for a refund and I will spend my money elsewhere. I appreciate CW has many happy customers but I am not joining that happy group.
Such is life. It's just a watch.
I appreciate this is a group for CW enthusiast, and I have said all I have to say about my broken watch. I don't want to upset the CW tribe.
Have a fantastic day (courtesy of Kelly's email from CW earlier).

I don't think anyone is upset. The main point, is that your watch doesn't have a Christopher Ward movement, it has a ubiquitous Swiss movement used in literally hundreds of other brands and its performance is not going to be any different in any other brand, besides which, even if there is a fault with a watch movement, one simply has to request a fix.

I’m still a bit confused about hitting on your palm, why didn’t you give it 30ish turns of the crown

kiter65 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 06, 2024 6:34 pm I’m still a bit confused about hitting on your palm, why didn’t you give it 30ish turns of the crown

I wonder if possibly it might be a bit of misdescribed technique: the way to see if a mechanical watch might run would be to hold it flat in the hand and give it a left/right flick?

I agree that a good wind might be informative.

After returning the watch to CW, I eventually received this email:

Quote:" The watch has been diagnosed as heavily worn, with the technicians advising that there is a large dent to the crown suggesting impact damage which has caused the movement to stop.
Our technician had advised that no repairs should be covered under warranty due to the damage to the watch, so it was a goodwill gesture to process this as a free of charge and urgent repair.
However, I have processed the refund for you due to the delay in returning your email as I was on annual leave and held up in some meetings yesterday hence the delay."

So the 'Nearly New' watch was actually totally unfit to be retailed, and apparently repairing it was a 'goodwill gesture' and actually refunding me was a bit like doing me a favour?
Well I have now received my refund and it is unlikely I will be buying any CW product for a long time. Compared to other watch retailers I have dealt with recently CW could learn a thing or two about dealing with customers and communications. 1 out of 5 from me.

Did you not notice a dent on the crown when you bought it?

rsg wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2024 9:56 pm Did you not notice a dent on the crown when you bought it?

No I didn't notice a dent or any mark on the watch, and I actually carefully checked the watch.
I am also a little confused how a screw-in crown on a tool watch that is supposedly sturdy enough to be waterproofed to 600m can be damaged to the extent it writes the watch off.
I have found the whole experience disappointing and CW very unprofessional. Obviously CW has a lot of satisfied customers (which is why I dipped into the brand) and I presume I have just been very unlucky.

Heavily worn?

It's curious.

A heavily worn watch would surely have a heavily scratched case, and be readily identified as such. .the photo in the first post didn't look like a damaged watch.

I must say the NN watches I have received from CW on occasion have been indistinguishable from new with no marks that I could see.

@Devon didn't mention the watch as being damaged which he surely would have noticed, just not running properly. I think we just thought it might not have been sufficiently wound to run for a long period.

JAFO wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2024 12:44 am Heavily worn?

It's curious.

A heavily worn watch would surely have a heavily scratched case, and be readily identified as such. .the photo in the first post didn't look like a damaged watch.

I must say the NN watches I have received from CW on occasion have been indistinguishable from new with no marks that I could see.

@Devon didn't mention the watch as being damaged which he surely would have noticed, just not running properly. I think we just thought it might not have been sufficiently wound to run for a long period.

Here are a couple of pictures. As you can see, it does not appear to be 'heavily worn'. Unfortunately I didn't take a picture showing the crown, but the pictures show the watch without any damage or scratches.
I fully inspected the watch when it arrived and before I returned it and it appeared as new. I would have rejected it immediately if it had arrived marked or damaged. The watch simply stopped working.
I am careful with my watches and the watch was returned in exactly the same condition as it was delivered.

That doesn't look heavily worn at all. I'd ask CW for photos of the alleged wear and crown damage.

rsg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2024 5:49 pm That doesn't look heavily worn at all. I'd ask CW for photos of the alleged wear and crown damage.

I am not worried about the watch now, I have received my refund which was my main concern.
I posted this up as a warning to future buyers to be aware CW have staff who are capable of poor customer communication and service.

This thread was disturbing to read. My first Bremont was a Supermarine S300 and after a two days of having received it, it was clear that the auto winding feature wasn’t working. Luckily I had bought it from an AD and could take it back. They initially thought I didn’t know how to wind the watch etc. They took me somewhat seriously when I share my mechanical watch experience. Anyway, they sent it off for a check and offered a repair vs refund. I opted for the refund and pretty much decided on no more Bremonts until they handed me an S302 GMT to look at. I took it and it’s been perfect since.

I can’t fathom how the OP can be assumed responsible for heavy wear of a watch just received. A drop, yes, but not heavy wear and tear. Their quality inspection prior to offering as a near new offer at a discount is certainly brought into focus.

This would need investigating and will only happen with a complaint. The assumption may well be that the OP dropped the watch… he will deny it and without proof we will have to give the benefit of the doubt and issue the requested refund. Not good.

The silver lining for CW is that they seem to give the benefit of doubt to their customer, though on the surface, reluctantly so in this case. IMO, the ideal thing would have been to have an invited discussion with the customer by not simply reporting the findings and decision.

Was it the same watch sent that was examined and reported on? Were serial numbers verified etc?

maclink wrote: ↑Sat Aug 24, 2024 2:09 pm
Was it the same watch sent that was examined and reported on? Were serial numbers verified etc?

This is what I was wondering too.