tuffel57

Updated Sep 21

1991 Citizen Quartz Day-Date Two-Tone Stainless Steel Jubilee Style Men's Watch

Name: 1991 Citizen Quartz Day-Date Two-Tone Stainless Steel Jubilee Style Men's Watch
Brand: Citizen
SKU: 65035280981d48e9b820047e
Price: 191.0 USD
Availability: OutOfStock

Citizen

$191

Pay in 4 interest-free payments of $47.75 with . Learn More .

Size

This item is sold

Like and save for later

Having belonged to a watch collector friend who's passed, this 1991 Citizen Quartz Day-Date two-tone stainless steel watch. The watch is attractive with its original band and boxes. This watch will fit up to an 7.25 inch wrist. It shows minimal signs of wear.

Category

Color

Style Tags

Shipping/Discount

Seller Discount: 10% off 2+ Bundle
$7.97 Expedited (1-3 day) Shipping on all orders

pachecosmany and 2 others like this

6 Comments

lancemurray11 Would I be able to return if I don’t like it?

Nov 05Reply

tuffel57 @lancemurray11 You must comply with Poshmark’s return policy. Thank you. https://support.poshmark.com/s/article/873327429?language=en_US

Nov 05Reply

lancemurray11 Alright thank you just put in a offer

Nov 05Reply

tuffel57 @lancemurray11 Thx for the transaction. I want to be clear that the watch needs a replacement battery. Somehow that info is missing from the listing. If you’d still like to proceed with the purchase I’d gladly refund you $20 to cover the cost to a jeweler for purchasing and installing a new battery.

Nov 05Reply

lancemurray11 @tuffel57 Hey the watch came in and it’s nice it’s just a lot smaller than I expected I was wondering if I return it if I could get a refund?

Nov 10Reply

tuffel57 @lancemurray11 hi lancemurray11 Just got this message. Heard from poshmark earlier that you submitted a return request which was denied. I’m terribly sorry you’re not happy with the watch. But you did follow the protocol for returns as described on poshmark’s rules page as I mentioned in an earlier part of this thread. Again, I really am sorry that you’re disappointed. I’m sure we both wish it weren’t so.

Nov 10Reply