Refused Repair/Exchange. Advice please.

Nukumai

StretchedElf wrote: »

So are we any closer to knowing whether they can legally refuse a repair/exchange?

Logically, even if there is no statutory requirement for the consumer to provide personal details when returning goods (as has been described)...from a practical perspective any subsequent legal remedies sought by the consumer would, procedurally, require these details to be disclosed, I imagine (eg. to initiate a small claims process).

And I don't think the irony would be lost on the presiding judge/magistrate.

I hope we get an authoritative answer to this one, as it is interesting.

m_13

We were next to somebody at Homebase customer service the other day. He had brought back a faulty item and had it exchanged without providing anything other than a receipt (they gave him a refund for the item and sold him a new one). We left at the same time and as we left the store I heard them discussing how they were now going to put the item back on eBay now they'd swapped it for a working one. My guess is that they bought one of the actual items from the store, used the receipt from that one to exchange the faulty one, have now got a new receipt as part of the exchange and can now return the original one they bought!

Companies can have whatever internal controls they like to state but that doesn't mean they don't have to follow the law. As it says on the Consumer Direct website "Whatever the store policy says, it will not detract from the consumers’ statutory rights".

For example, various companies - including M&S - have had to change their website terms and conditions because they didn't comply with the distance selling regulations. Companies often quote that they charge a restocking fee but the distance selling regulations allow you to return things within 7 days of receipt and no restocking fee can be charged!

The Consumer Direct website says:

Do I need a receipt to get a refund, repair or replacement?
The Sale of Goods Act and other related legislation makes no requirement on the trader to provide a receipt to a customer at the time of sale so it would be unfair to say that you have to produce one to obtain a refund; however the trader may reasonably request you to provide some proof of purchase and this can be in the form of a credit card slip, bank statement or cheque stub etc.

Based on this information whether you need to provide your name and address seems to come down to whether it is a 'reasonable request'. If they are going to repair the item then I suspect being able to contact you and return the repaired item may require them to know who you are and where you live.

mumOf2wonderfulkids

when i returned a faulty item to toys r us just after christmas they took all my details

but then asked me for id?! i didnt have any on me the assistant said ''oh well its christmas'' and then put dvla on the bit of paper.

im all for preventing fraud but having to show id when you want to exchange something faulty seems a bit ott to me

hollydays

Some people steal stuff,then deliberately damage it to attempt to get a cash refund.Perhaps this is trus ham fisted way of checking who people are,and hence deterring others from trying to do the same.

Idiophreak

I'm fairly sure that they have no legal right to the information...Sure, you're being a little...difficult...by refusing to provide it, but I'd suggest you're within your rights to do so. If their system doesn't allow them to proceed without it, *they* can lie on the forms - they can't expect you to do that for them.

whatmichaelsays

It was common practice at the retailer where I worked. Manufacturer issues were one but the other was simply to identify any suspicious return patterns.

The most common ruse was for customers to buy something (most commonly expensive DJ equipment) and then return it a few days later, either as faulty or under the no quibble. Eventually it was the same names and customer postcodes that were cropping up on a regular basis - these people were effectively treating us as a hire shop.

Obviously that isn't the case here, but the retailers have a right to protect their own interests.

Esqui

If I may answer....

StretchedElf wrote: »

I don't see how taking a person's details solves this. First, if a person has stolen the item they would not have a valid receipt (and just how common is it for people to steal something and return it rather than selling it on?). Second, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of preventing customers giving false details.

On the first point, some less scrupulous people will buy something to get a receipt, then steal one and return it for a refund, keeping the original. It's rare, but it happens. There was also one time I managed to uncover some very dodgy goings-on with one of our staff by the refunds that were going on under a single name (clearly they weren't that bright). I agree...there's nothing to stop someone giving false details, which does make it a bit pointless.

They may hate it, but is it legal to refuse? This is the crucial question which hasn't been answered yet. I do have some sympathy with the reasons given, but trying to enforce my participation in a process that makes your life easier by refusing something that is my right as a consumer cannot be right.

I have honoured refusals in the past, and replaced details with "refused", but it does then make it more difficult if, for example, the money hadn't gone back onto the card.

Where did I say there was a conspiracy? Identity theft is real, it isn't made up. Without knowing the ins and outs of how, where and why my information will be stored along with who will have access to it it's perfectly reasonable to not wish it stored.

You didn't, but I sometimes get the impression that people are worried that we're going to remember their details, or access them later and take out a loan in there name, or something. Only a very corrupt employee would do so, and there's no reason they wouldn't instead clone your card or something like that, if they couldn't get their hands on your details.

StretchedElf

whatmichaelsays wrote: »

the retailers have a right to protect their own interests.

They do, as long as they do so within the law, which is what I've been trying to find out.

StretchedElf

Esqui wrote: »

If I may answer....

On the first point, some less scrupulous people will buy something to get a receipt, then steal one and return it for a refund, keeping the original. It's rare, but it happens. There was also one time I managed to uncover some very dodgy goings-on with one of our staff by the refunds that were going on under a single name (clearly they weren't that bright). I agree...there's nothing to stop someone giving false details, which does make it a bit pointless.

You say it's rare, but retailers are willing, at the very least, to push the boundaries of SOGA, not to mention consumer relations! I wonder if there isn't a better system that could be implemented, where an individual item can be matched to the receipt to rule out these rare occasions of dodginess, or better yet, keep this system if it works for you but respect the wishes of the one or two customers who aren't happy giving their details out.

I have honoured refusals in the past, and replaced details with "refused", but it does then make it more difficult if, for example, the money hadn't gone back onto the card.

I'm not sure how that would happen really as I don't work in retail, but I'd have thought having the customer authorise a transaction covered that.

You didn't, but I sometimes get the impression that people are worried that we're going to remember their details, or access them later and take out a loan in there name, or something. Only a very corrupt employee would do so, and there's no reason they wouldn't instead clone your card or something like that, if they couldn't get their hands on your details.

I imagine the risk of my details being lost, stolen, abused or sold either by an employee or someone else would be quite small (like the risk of dubious returns, for example), but at the end of the day whether or not I take that risk, however small, is my decision. It really shouldn't come down to forum members judging me or anyone like me for being cautious. What gets my back up more than anything is the contempt this practice seems to show for the customer. Retailers act as though they are entitled to your details and that you aren't entitled to your refund!

Zippy123

They don't need it and are obliged to refund, replace or repair fault goods even if you do not have a receipt but can prove purchase.

If you do not want to give it to them, then don't give it to them.

Call customer services and have a whinge.

I hate giving extra info, next they will be asking for your inside leg measurements just to put people off!