refund with 'restocking' 25% deduction

diggerman123

a bit different to what we are discussing here but i agree. all theives should be brought to justice whether stealing directly or indirectly

diggerman123

a bit different to what we are discussing here but i agree. all theives should be brought to justice whether stealing directly or indirectly

4743hudsonj

What they are trying to say is shops have massive overheads,

rent/maintenance, higher staff to customer ratios, insurances, theft troll who get papercuts and smell a claim etc....... The list could go on. Point being this is part and parcel of trading as a shop. The costs are not wanted but are necessary.

Online they do not have theft, they dont need insurances for customer injuries etc, they need far less staff etc. And what do they need to do in return? absorb the cost of a few delivery returns which i bet they get at a cheap rate.

DSR's protect the shops too, if the DSR's were to drop by your opinion. Then yes shops would not have what you are branding as "unfair" costs. BUT they would not have the protection of the right to form contracts on dispatch. If they did not have this then trust me, they would be in to lose FAR more due to errors. Your opinion would turn out to be a false economy hence why the law has remained like this for 10 years and your opinion is thankfully a very rare one.

Remember the aim of DSR to give a consumer the same experience with a product as they would in a store, ie see it, feel it, even use it if necessary. Your point is understood on here but the DSR is by far the lesser of two evils as it were for both parties so your point is rather irrelevant and one sided.

hairy_g

diggerman123 wrote: »

no sour grapes at all . op had no problem (he bought what he asked for ) and at no point has said that they were not fit for purpose or not what ordered or wrong colour / shape /size etc. he was provided what he asked for (not by me ) . why should a retailer stand this loss without recompense ?

Because it's the law.
From the DSR's:


3.23 Where the DSRs give consumers the right to cancel an order, this
right is unconditional and begins from the moment the contract is
concluded. Unlike when buying from a shop, the first time that a
consumer will typically have an opportunity to examine goods
purchased by distance means is when they receive them. The DSRs
give consumers who buy by distance means more rights than
consumers who shop in person. When a distance consumer cancels a
contract to which the cancellation provisions apply they are entitled to
a refund of any money they have paid in relation to the contract even
if the goods are not defective in any way.

Mark_Hewitt

The DSR's exist to allow customers to examine the goods in the same way as they would do before purchase in a shop. Now the internet and catalogues are great, but there is no substitute to having the goods in your hand and trying them out for yourself.

Quite often they prove not to be exactly as you'd assumed, even if they are exactly as described. So it's only right you should be able to return them.