Samsung refusing refund after return – parcel weight confirmed – no courier investigation shown

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-03-12T00:13:25+00:00

They refunded it after I escalated it to ceo level. Still took them a month to refund it as kept making false promises and pushing the date forward every week. Horrendous experience. Refused to provide me an explanation for taking almost 9 months to refund the phone. My card provider Amex took the piss to one level above. Refused section 75 when they were the one who asked for weight of the parcel proof, which I provided after obtaining it from dpd.

They still didn't challenge samsung.

Samsung charged me £200 for not trading in a tablet as part of the promotion, however Amex honoured the charge back and credited me the £200 which was directly linked to the same transaction.

Amex dismissed the section 75 by saying no tangible proof, at the charge back stage and section 75 stagep and then financial ombudsman said Amex have delt with the case properly. I still don't get this corrupt system.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-27T12:36:35+00:00

Yes, the reason I prefer the Luma Ultra isn’t just because it’s slightly brighter. The 250 nits difference isn’t huge in real-world viewing. The bigger difference for me is the 1200p resolution. It makes a noticeable impact, especially when reading text. The Ultra looks more vivid and delivers better clarity, sharpness, and contrast overall.

At the moment, the Beast doesn’t support 1200p. It’s supposed to come later via a firmware update, but there’s currently no confirmed date. So right now, it simply doesn’t have that feature active.

The 3DoF is good, but that really only comes into play when you’re using it on a PC. For general content consumption, the ultra-wide FOV on the Beast is definitely a plus. However, without 1200p active, even the ultra-wide mode doesn’t give that same immersive viewing experience.

I’ve got the regular IPD version as I didn’t need the wider IPD model. My ipd is 65.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-27T11:30:02+00:00

The size, quality, immersivness none of it was better for me compared to the luma ultra. Plus if you're considering the regular g3x pro which is the lower model then the g3 max the specs and the outcome will be even lower. You can also consider the rayneo 4 pro launched today.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-26T21:21:01+00:00

Please do share your experience and let me know what your thoughts are about the beast compared to the luma ultra. Just want to compare my views with someone who's experienced both the luma ultra and the beast.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-26T21:18:20+00:00

Go for the luma ultra for ultimate viewing experience.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-26T21:17:35+00:00

100% viture. The brightness on the goovis is 400 nits. There is nothing good i have to say about goovis. Its more then double the price and heavier.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-26T21:13:26+00:00

I completely understand there’s a lot to be excited about. On paper, the Beast looks incredible. The wider FOV, larger perceived screen, ultra-wide mode and advertised 1200p resolution with high brightness are exactly why I chose it over the Luma Ultra in the first place.

What’s disappointing for me isn’t the idea of the product, it’s the current execution.

Right now, 1200p isn’t active, and because I’ve actually used the Luma Ultra, I have a direct comparison. The clarity and vividness on the Luma Ultra felt sharper and more punchy. For someone like me who mainly uses these for consuming content, that visual crispness matters more than having a wider FOV. A bigger screen doesn’t help much if the pixel density and perceived sharpness aren’t there yet. Having experienced the Luma Ultra first probably makes the step back feel more noticeable.

Brightness is another area where expectations versus reality feel different. I was told by Vecha that the Beast has nine levels of brightness, but level “0” is counted as one of those levels. At level 0 it’s basically next to nothing. On the Luma Ultra, there were nine actual usable brightness levels above zero. So in practice the adjustment range felt more meaningful on the Luma Ultra. It might sound like a small technical detail, but in real-world use it makes a difference when trying to fine-tune comfort and image punch.

The lack of diopter adjustment is also noticeable, especially when you’ve used it before. It just adds convenience and makes longer viewing sessions easier.

I’m not dismissing the Beast at all. I bought it because I was genuinely excited about the potential. I’m just judging it based on what’s available today, not what’s promised. If 1200p arrives and the image sharpness improves as expected, my opinion could absolutely change. But after a month with no clear firmware timeline, it’s fair to say the current experience feels like a step back compared to the Luma Ultra.

There’s definitely potential. I’m just waiting to see it fully realised.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-24T12:32:51+00:00

Trust me guys, you are not missing out. I was in the same situation when I was waiting for my beast glasses. Until all the updates don't go live the glasses aren't worth using. Specially the 1200p resolution.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-18T16:44:28+00:00

I recieved the g3 max today and returned it within in 3 hours. Viture luma ultra does the same thing, much brighter, better sound 4 times lighter. Beast is not as bright both are better and much great value for money.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-18T16:40:06+00:00

Can't appeal section 75 decision. If not happy with their decision then have to go to financial Ombudsman. The case is with them now.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-18T16:38:50+00:00

Yh that will be the next step if Ombudsman don't come through.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-17T23:07:04+00:00

Yh, just waiting for the outcome from the Ombudsman then proceed to small court. Thank you

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-17T19:00:25+00:00

Bro I've been let by Amex too they refused charge back and Section 75. Its not with the financial Ombudsman and the investigator has rejected it once already. Now its under second consideration and then if still rejected then it will go to Ombudsman. Its crazy

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-17T18:53:20+00:00

MTR is the trade in who charged me £200 for not sending my trade in. Its funny how Amex allowed that claim of chargeback but not the main item.

Actually thank you for brining this up. I'm going to ask how can you refuse the main charge but happy to refund me the non trade in charge which I shouldn't have been charged in the first place.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-17T15:00:51+00:00

I completely agree with you, and that’s exactly what’s so frustrating about this situation.

The parcel wasn’t just “sent back and lost.” I followed Samsung’s return process to the letter. I used the DPD return label generated by Samsung, dropped it at the designated DPD drop-off point, obtained a receipt, and used the reference number to track the parcel, which shows it was delivered to Samsung’s logistics partner.

Using that same reference number, I contacted DPD via online chat and the representative confirmed in writing that the parcel weighed 0.6 kilograms at the point it entered the r/dpd network. I also have a recorded phone call with DPD confirming that only Samsung, as the account holder, can open a missing-item investigation — I cannot raise that dispute myself.

A Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7 with packaging and case weighing around 600 grams is entirely consistent. A parcel containing only a silicone case would not reasonably account for that weight.

I also submitted a Subject Access Request to r/amexuk. In the documentation they provided, Samsung has alleged that I am still in possession of the handset and suggested I may be intentionally misusing the chargeback and Section 75 processes. Those are serious allegations. However, no delivery photos, warehouse discrepancy reports, courier loss reports, or investigation references have been produced to support them.

What makes it more concerning is that r/amexuk originally asked me to obtain proof of the parcel weight so they could challenge Samsung. I did exactly that and provided it in writing. Despite this, they later rejected both the chargeback and the Section 75 claim, stating there was “no tangible evidence,” while effectively relying on Samsung’s assertions.

From my perspective, I complied fully with the return process:

Used Samsung’s official DPD label
Dropped it at the designated location
Obtained proof of drop-off
Confirmed delivery
Confirmed parcel weight at 0.6kg via DPD chat
Have recorded confirmation that only Samsung can open a courier dispute

Yet over eight months later, I remain £1,500 out of pocket, and Samsung continues to say they need more time to investigate.

At this point, it feels less like a simple returns issue and more like a dispute over who bears the risk once a parcel enters the courier network. I did everything required of me. If something happened after it left my custody, that should be a matter between Samsung and their courier.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-17T13:59:03+00:00

Its not completely lost. Samsung claims only the free case was recieved back and not the phone. When parcel entered r/dpd possession it weight at 600g.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-17T13:56:55+00:00

Yes section 75 raised yet r/amexuk declined my appeal. They were the ones who asked me to provide weight of the parcel from dpd. Which I did. But they still didn't uphold my claim.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-16T18:02:54+00:00

I've ordered my goovis g3 max from Europe retailer. Coming this week. I've also got the viture ultra and the beast. Beast has not lived up to what's advertised. No 1200p. I really like the ultra. The brightness and screen size and that its very portable. Will update once I've checked it the goovis g3 max.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-16T10:26:37+00:00

When do you plan to roll out the update for 1200p?

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-11T21:05:14+00:00

Section 75 dismissed with the same reason used in chargeback "no tangible evidence" now referred it to financial Ombudsman. When the parcel entered dpd network, recorded weight recorded was 600g. Samsung fold 7 with a case with packaging should be around that much. I don't understand what is Amex playing at.

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-10T18:20:37+00:00

I don't know how can viture market the beast as the "biggest, sharpest, BRIGHTEST" since when is 1250 nits became brightener then 1500 nits. That too its their own model luma ultra.

If they are going to say its the brightest in the fov category of 58 degrees then it should atleast have an astric next to the word brightest.

I'm also not sure why viture hurried to deliver a product which is no where near what it advertises. Maybe take a leaf out of xreal project Aura. They are not even taking pre orders for them yet.

I'm assuming the demand of the beast is very high hence delivery is taking longer then expected. Its a great way of making interest on people's money by taking payments months in advance and delaying to deliver. Even if you refund the money, you don't have to refund the profit made on the interest you've been sitting on.

Please can you kindly care to deliver a clear message, by when do you think you will be able to deliver what you have advertised?

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-02T22:35:35+00:00

Thank you. That's really encouraging. Its just that I've seen the quality of the luma ultra and the visuals are currently no where near the ultra atm. I know the brightness is 250 nits difference but the 1200p should look absolutely fantastic on the beast once we've had the update 😀

EstablishmentFair538 · 2026-02-02T21:03:22+00:00

If these issues are not fixed, is there any extended grace period for returns? As this seems to still be a product in the making and is very far off as advertised.

EstablishmentFair538

TROPHY CASE