The Auswine Forum

Truly amazing in this day and age. Statements verbatum from conversation.

The wine: '96 Fox Creek Reserve Shiraz.

"If you have a record of where you purchased the wine from (oviously not, it's a '96), you may take it back to the retailer. If you are on our mailing list, we are happy to replace it for you."

I'm not on the mailing list, I offered to send the bottle to them at my expense as verification!

"Sorry if you're not on the mailing list, we are under no obligation to replace it."

The outcome was that the Melbourne Wholesaler, who I didn't buy it from, but I do buy other stuff from, has given me a credit for the current vintage price. The winery stated they will give him a return credit as well.

Everyone else the winery deals with gets a return on corked wine, except the poor sucker who isn't on the mailing list, didn't keep a record of purchase, and has lovingly cellared thier wine for years!

The mind boggles.

Rory

Tell them you bought it from Wine Planet......

GW

Then they might tell you to return it to Camperdown Cellars.

Tiggrr

Tell them you won't buy their faultly wine anymore!

Gary wrote:Tell them you won't buy their faultly wine anymore!

Better still, tell'em you won't buy any of their wines anymore!!

Send death threats?? Burn down their vineyards?
Jokes aside, this is certainly very unprofessional on Fox Creek's part...

Lets not get too carried away here. Ric called them and I emailed them on this issue and got a slightly different perspective on this.

They are concerned about the issue and the adverse publicity and will no doubt attempt to clarify / rectify the situation.

Rory, if you didn't leave your details, I suggest you email or call again.

Hi Brian,

Actually, I wouldn't mind hearing the "slightly different prespective" either, if you feel o.k. about it.

It kind of smacks of "cover your tracks".

Rory

Hi Rory,

Its not really a case of cover your tracks. Firstly, they are genuinely concerned about both your problem with the bottle and their obligations to the consumer in general.

Lets just say, they may not be as fully aware of their obligations as they should be (my words) and are looking into it.

The person who has to make the decisions is away till Monday and at that time Fox Creek will probably post their own comments here so it would be presumptive of me to post anything more at this stage. Lets give them time to work out their official position.

For the record, there was no dispute in what Rory has stated here as being factual. But there are other things which may have been said which have not been included. As always, there is two sides to the story and lets just give FC a chance to have their own say.

All that being stated, as we all know, there are legal obligations re TCA affected wine but they may not be as knowledgeable about the facts as we are but it was not a case of "get lost" so lets not crucify them over it.

If the response is not satisfactory, then its a different matter.

Hi Ric,

Factually, the only other thing that was said by the person I dealt with at Fox Creek was that, yes the person who could make a decision about it was away, and the matter would be discussed then, and "if" the policy was changed, and the "if" was emphasised, it would be taken further.
There was some other point made about this is the problem with cork and why the company is going to stelvin (as is the case with thier current vintage).
The fact of the matter is, that at no time was I made to feel I had any justification or right to expect a return bottle, and that's the unacceptable part. Customer policy is just that, a policy, and I doubt the person I spoke to on the phone came up with the company's points without some direction from somwhere. This had to have been discussed sometime , somewhere within the company.
In almost all other cases of corked wine I've had, no questions are asked. Replacement is a matter of course.
Cynically, it's a little bit late to profess concern with my predicament AFTER they find out about some negative press. The concern should have come immedeately when they new someone had a faulty product of thiers, a fault any wine company factors in to costs.
What if I hadn't pushed the issue fruther and voice my dissapointment in what I was being told (and offer to send them the wine at my cost), it was only after this point that the offer to conatct the senior person was made?

For the record, I didn't leave any contact details, as the tone and wording of the conversation was dissapointing enough not to want to deal with them again.

Rory

I had a bad experience with Fox Creek. Last year a 97 Reserve Shiraz magnum was leaking, the magnum was purchased from them through the mailing list, they later confirmed this. I called the winery to report the problem and was asked to return the magnum including the wooden box. 4 weeks later I called them to ascertain the status of the problem, I was told the winemaker was away and on his return he would analyse the problem and call me. 2 weeks later I called again and the winemaker told me the magnum was faulty but could not make a decision on its replacement until the manager returned. 3 weeks later I called again and told the lady at cellar door that their customer services was pathetic, not to bother to replace the magnum and to delete my name from their mailing list. Withing ten minutes I received a call from their manager apologising for their mis-understanding, I reminded him it was not a mis-understanding because the problem had being going on for 2 months and everyone in his organization had being aware of it . He agreed to finally replace the magnum but without the box. To me they are arrogant, not return calls, believe their product is immune to faults, we the customers dont know what we are talking about, thus, the onus is on us to prove they are wrong. Fox Creek badly needs customer service upgrade otherwise they will continue to loose customers like myself - I will never purchase from them again.

I am the Manager of Fox Creek Wines and have just returned to find out about the bottle of 1996 Fox Creek Reserve Shiraz which “Rory” informed us was “corked” on Friday the 19th of July.

Our policy about corked wines is the same as most wine companies. As far as I can ascertain what our very good and polite Customer Service Officer, Brenda told Rory reflected that policy. If anybody calls her about a corked wine, an effort is always made to have the wine returned to us or to our distributor at our cost. This can be impracticable if the bottle cannot be returned without delay or if the bottle is ullaged or if the cork has been discarded and another is unavailable. For somebody like Rory who lives in Melbourne and is very knowledgeable about such matters, all this would have been possible by contacting our distributor, whom he knows, in that city. I believe that Rory was credited for this wine on the same day by Nelsons, our distributors who would not have had stocks of this wine.

As far as replacement of a “corked” wine is concerned, our policy is to replace it without delay, naturally at our cost, if we sold the wine directly to the customer. If bought from a retailer, the wine should be returned to them. Unless the customer accepts a credit, our distributor will then replace the wine or certainly inform us if they have no stock. If we have no stock the wine is replaced with the current vintage wine.

Of course this does raise the question about just how long a winery should be responsible for a wine where no claim is made on its release for its longevity and where the winery has no control over the storage conditions of the wine over seven years. I can imagine the likelihood of unquestioning replacement if Penfolds were asked to replace a 1996 Grange!

We do replace wines like the 1996 Reserve Shiraz but we do not believe that there is any regulation through the ACCC or other organization that demands that a corked, aged wine be replaced.

Rory, we do have some stock of this very fine wine and are happy to replace it through our distributor for what we must accept was an unsatisfactory bottle. If you do this, I expect Alan Nelson, our distributor, will want his credit payment reversed! Please let me know your address.

I am happy to discuss this matter further if anybody wishes. Incidentally, all our white wines are now closed with screw caps and only last week we made a long considered decision to close all our red wines with screw caps as well. My view is that it is quite extraordinary just how long we have tolerated the use of a biological product like cork to close our wines as a malleable plug. The use of an inert cap rather than a plug is obviously the future in my view. However the perfect cap and bottle neck has yet to be designed.

Jim Watts

Am I missing the point here? If it is bought from the winery or retail, what is the difference? The wine was still made by Fox Creek and will have to be replaced by Fox Creek (either direct or through a credit to the distributor).
Hence, why wouldn't you save the hassle of visiting the wine merchant and saying' you might remember me, when in the summer of 98....'. and replace the bottle. I'm sure Rory has probably bought numerous cases of Fox Creek and he deserves to be treated in the best possible manner. It's easy, 'was the wine corked? no problem, will have a replacement to you ASAP'...end of story...

cheers
dom

dom wrote:Am I missing the point here? If it is bought from the winery or retail, what is the difference? The wine was still made by Fox Creek and will have to be replaced by Fox Creek (either direct or through a credit to the distributor).
cheers
dom

As a beancounter (although not ITB) I can imagine that it wouldn't be unreasonable that a small/medium sized company like Fox Creek might have an arrangement with its distributors whereby a fixed allowance is made each quarter for faulty bottles, returns, etc. So the company says to the distributors 'We'll give you 3% discount (or some mutually agreed amount) to cover all faulty bottles, returns etc. If there's a problem with the $ amount keep some statistics and we'll revisit the % when we renew the contract"

I'm just speculating of course, but when consumers go direct to the winery under these circumstances then the winery is effectively paying for it twice. This might explain Jim's position.

And the TCA issue is different from all the others. Leaky bottles, oxidation, even bacterial spoilage to some degree, can all be chalked up against storage. But a wine is tainted with TCA from Day One, and I don't see why the consumer should ever have to wear the cost of a product compromised in that way. I understand that its rarely possible for a winery to replace 'like with like', especially when a few years have passed since purchase, but some form of restitution is in order I believe.

Pleased to hear about the forthcoming screwcaps. Looking forward to the whole range becoming available under modern closures shortly.

cheers,
Graeme

Jim,

Thanks for the response. In it you state "Of course this does raise the question about just how long a winery should be responsible for a wine where no claim is made on its release for its longevity and where the winery has no control over the storage conditions of the wine over seven years. I can imagine the likelihood of unquestioning replacement if Penfolds were asked to replace a 1996 Grange!"

The fact is plain and simple. This is not about storage conditions or about longevity. TCA is a result of a manufacturing defect.

You also say "....but we do not believe that there is any regulation through the ACCC or other organisation that demands that a corked, aged wine be replaced. "

Let me state that is in direct contradiction of my understanding of the consumer protection laws.

In every state in Australia, good must be of mechanisable quality. I refer you to the Dept of Fair Trading NSW web site http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/shopping/refundsrepairs.htmlwhich states "When do you have a right to a refund?

Simply, a refund (or replacement) would be in order if the goods:

have a fault that you could not have known about when you purchased them."

As stated, TCA is a "fault" therefore the winery either has to replace or refund. Longevity or storage is not at issue here, TCA is a manufacturing defect, pure and simple and as such the producer is liable.

The ACCCÂ’s web site also states
“Goods Under the Act the consumer is entitled to expect to enjoy quiet possession of the goods and to own the goods outright, subject to lawful restrictions made known to the consumer before purchase.
As a consumer, goods that you purchase must:
be of merchantable quality—goods have to meet a basic level of quality and performance given the price and description of the goods
be fit for the purpose—…”

You stated that you did not believe that no regulation that corked aged wine need be replaced. Does Fox Creek contend that TCA is not a fault? Or is there some other reason? I would be fascinated to know why. After having spoken to senior executive staff in the five largest wine producers in the country, (from QA managers to Managing Directors) without exception, they all believe they have both a business and legal responsibility to replace TCA affected wine.

Sections 66 to 74 of the Trade Practice Act http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/0/115/top.htm spells out chapter and verse the responsibilities of a producer (for those that want to read it). Fox Creek must have a legal reason why they maintain wineries do not have to replace older TCA affected wine. I am sure other wineries as well as readers of this forum will all love to know your reasoning, as we all thought otherwise.

I respectfully await your response. I assure you, I am not trying to give you a hard time here. I was the one who brought this matter to the wineries attention as I did not want to see Fox Creek slammed unfairly. Now, you have made some points that are in direct contradiction to my and many peoples understanding so if I (and others) are wrong, I would like to know the reasons why.

Bomber wrote:I had a bad experience with Fox Creek. Last year a 97 Reserve Shiraz magnum was leaking, the magnum was purchased from them through the mailing list, they later confirmed this. I called the winery to report the problem and was asked to return the magnum including the wooden box.

*
Hey Bomber

What were the particulars of your cellaring conditions before you discovered the Magnum was leaking ???

Did you store them in an insulated and refirgerated or airconditioned room at a consistently low temperature, or in the loungeroom under the stereo and next to the wood heater, or a combination of both ???

If your conditions were good then it would be the wineries responsibillty and they would owe you a 2nd replacement bottle for the poor service and response you received after your initial complaint , and if your conditions were poor then you should just drink the wine and not say anything.

Cheers.

Justin
..........

Ps. Great subject guys, keep up the great forum.

To provide some positives to this thread, it is good to see that FC readily accept that they will pay for any freight costs to return possible faulty bottles to the winery for analysis (as is the winery's right under law). There are some wineries (i.e. Giaconda) that refuse to pay freight costs, even though they demand that all corked bottles be returned for verification (I wonder if Rick has asked Halliday to return corked bottles to verify his palate is correct?). As a consequence and after 10 years and many 10's of 1000's of $ later, I am no longer purchasing from them (actually a fateful godsend as there are so many exciting new wineries around today compared to 90's).

FWIW, I don't buy FC wines (I hate american oak!), so these are really arm's length comments based on my experiences with other wineries on this TPA issue. In all facets of any business, the customer is always right - ignore this at your peril. The ultimate power is and will always be with the customer.

oJUSTIN B

My wine is stored in a professional storage facility, thus, no problems with cellaring conditions. My point with Fox Creek is that they do not respond to problems adequately, the manager takes his time to respond to issues concerning their wine, they are hopeless. Do you think it should have taken 2 months to resolve my problem?

In October last year we opened a 73 Grange, the cork was faulty, thus, damaging the wine. 3 days later I happened to be in Adelaide, I drove to Magill, the cellar door manager inspected the cork and bottle and replaced the wine with the same vintage on the spot, now how is that for service.

Fox Creek inspected my wine and just held it there until I got very angry. Just not good enough.

I wish the manager of Fox Creek would respond to my experience with them?

Jim,

For my part, I appreciate the response and the offer of a replacement of the '96 Reserve. (a replacement of the same vintage is not often offered, nor on my part, expected).
I have emailed your sales department my adress.

Regards,

Rory

I must say that the reference to Penfolds approach with Grange rang close to home for me. I served up a 1990 at a Christmas lunch (25th?)several years ago - alas, it was corked. Ring Penfolds on the boxing day (public holiday) - no one there of course, so leave a phone message. Get a call back on the 27th, along with half an hour of solid questioning. In the end, the operator determined that I wasnt correctly describing corked conditions, and couldnt accept a return! ("Sorry madam, what part of wet heshian dont you understand?")

Put to her that I could get the bottle to anywhere in Adelaide to check it out - but response was that their shop was closed until new year, and by then the evidence of TCA would be gone. This upstart then insisted that I must have stored it incorrectly, and the wine was getting past its drinking window

enough was enough - I handed the wife the phone ! She had her for twenty minutes before eventually agreeing that a supervisor would ring on the 28th. After another 30 minutes explaining the next day, its agreed that the bottle will get picked up sometime in the new year, and I will get a bottle of the next vintage upon release - you guessed it - a 1997 vintage !:evil:

This experience left a pretty sour taste - I had been buying 2 bottles a year since 1988, and felt like selling the lot for a long time.

I appreciate that they would get people trying them on at this end of the market, but the sense of trust and good feeling about this company was lost for me. (While I am not one for revenge, I guess the winegods got them back shortly after )

Nevertheless, I was almost over it, until this chain bought back the memories. Still gun shy to this day about pulling the cork out of Grange at Xmas .....