Support quality, independent, local journalism…that matters

From just £1 a month you can help fund our work – and use our website without adverts. Become a member today

A Senedd member was investigated after leaving a negative review about a pair of crystal sherry glasses bought on eBay for £9.99.

Douglas Bain, who is the Senedd’s standards commissioner, launched a formal investigation after the seller made a complaint against the unnamed politician.

The complainant claimed the politician, who Nation.Cymru reports to be Conservative MS Janet Finch-Saunders, had posted false information questioning their “integrity, reliability and honesty”, according to a report published on October 17.

The Senedd member bought two Waterford crystal glasses online but, when they arrived, disputed that they matched the seller’s description, leaving a stinging review.

Mr Bain, who was appointed in 2021, was satisfied the complaint – made under rule two of the Senedd’s code of conduct (members must act truthfully) – was admissible.

‘Trivial’

“At first sight this whole matter might appear trivial,” said Mr Bain.

“Why should a disagreement between a seller and buyer of two glasses costing £9.99 be the subject of a complaint about a member of the Senedd?

“However, the matter is one of concern to the complainant who believes that her reputation as an eBay seller may be damaged by the allegedly untruthful feedback report posted by the member who was the buyer.”

The dispute centred on whether the crystal glasses, which were purchased in January, were signed with an etching of the word “Waterford” or an image of a seahorse.

In the course of an investigation spanning the past year, Mr Bain went as far as to have an independent expert inspect the item in pursuit of the truth.

‘Stunning’

In the advert, the glasses were described as a “stunning” pair of Waterford Kylemore small liqueur glasses, in “super” condition with no signs of use.

But the politician was dissatisfied when they received the item, sending a private message to the seller complaining the glasses were “not as described, smaller and not signed”.

The seller asserted the glasses were as described and sought any evidence to the contrary, with the Senedd member no longer responding to messages.

On January 21, the politician posted a review: “Wrongly described and they are not signed. Will not deal with this E bay [sic] seller again.”

The seller urged the Senedd member to review their feedback, stating: “Glasses ARE the size stated and ARE signed,” but they continued to be blanked.

‘No trace’

Seeking to make amends, the seller left replacement glasses at the Senedd member’s office but the member did not accept them and the complainant took them back.

A vital piece of evidence was lost in March, with the politician telling the complainant they had broken one of the original glasses.

Then, in April, the one remaining glass was examined by Mr Bain’s investigator who could find no trace of any etching nor mark.

The seller refused to accept the outcome of that examination.

During a telephone conversation with the standards commissioner in May, the complainant said the sherry glasses were smaller than the politician had expected.

In an effort to put the matter to bed, Mr Bain selected an independent expert who examined the glass in June before producing a report.

The expert concluded the item was a crystal liqueur glass, cut in ‘Kylemore’ pattern, on a hexagonal section baluster stem and 16-point star-cut circular base.

‘Moral turpitude’

While the glass guru found no visible mark nor seahorse, they were satisfied “on the balance of probabilities” that the glass was made by Waterford and was not a fake.

Mr Bain concluded: “Even if, as the complainant asserts, the height of the glass was within tolerance and there was some vague mark which could have been the remnants of a Waterford crystal mark, it would still be my opinion that there had been no breach of rule two.

“I am satisfied that the member’s feedback report, even if it was factually incorrect, was honestly given. There is no evidence of any deceit, fraud or moral turpitude. Whilst it may, on the complainant’s account, have been imprecise and inaccurate – it was not untruthful.”

After discussing the report behind closed doors, politicians on the Senedd’s standards committee agreed with Mr Bain that their colleague had not breached the code of conduct.

In its annual report, the standards commissioner’s office, which cost £133,992 in 2023/34, said it had received 190 complaints, up 167% annually, with 84 ruled inadmissible.