Sale goods

Eliza_Bennett

Hello

First of all I hope I'm in the right place for this query.

This morning I bought a top in a sale and as I was stood waiting to pay I heard the assistant tell the woman in front of me that items with a blue cross symbol on the tag were not eligible to be exchanged and no refund was possible ....in short once you bought it that was that!!...being faulty wasn't mentioned

I always thought there were statutory rights or some such on sale items ...allowing you to get a refund or to exchange them within a certain amount of time, providing you kept the receipt...am I wrong?

Any help would be appreciated...:)

unholyangel

Someone may be able to advise with 100% certainty but personally i am sure that even if they sell you something that is faulty/damaged......if a different fault becomes apparent, the SOGA still applies.....it just doesnt apply for any faults/damage you were made aware of at time of purchase.

Also, a stores terms and conditions cant overrule your statutory rights as a consumer and most of their terms and conditions will state something like "this does not affect your statutory rights".

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/what-are-my-rights-if-i-buy-an-item-which-i-know-to-be-damaged/
If an item is reduced in price due to a sale, your rights are the same as if it were a full priced item. If however, the item is reduced due to a defect and you are made aware of that defect, you cannot then return the item on the basis of that defect. Sounds obvious, but in many cases, the shop assistant will tell you that you cannot bring the item back at all – which is misleading.

Pollycat

Yes, you are wrong.

Unless an item is faulty you are not entitled to a refund or exchange.

Some shops (M&S, Next, Primark etc) do allow returns and even full refunds just because you decide you don't like the colour, have changed your mind or it doesn't fit - but they are not obliged by law to do this.

M&S sometimes have a rail with very reduced items on and a notice saying no returns allowed unless the item is faulty.

unholyangel

Ahhh i misunderstood the OP.

Thought she meant they had said they wouldnt refund/exchange even if the item was faulty.

*puts on dunce hat and heads for the stool in the corner*

Eliza_Bennett

unholyangel wrote: »

Someone may be able to advise with 100% certainty but personally i am sure that even if they sell you something that is faulty/damaged......if a different fault becomes apparent, the SOGA still applies.....it just doesnt apply for any faults/damage you were made aware of at time of purchase.

Also, a stores terms and conditions cant overrule your statutory rights as a consumer and most of their terms and conditions will state something like "this does not affect your statutory rights".

If an item is reduced in price due to a sale, your rights are the same as if it were a full priced item. If however, the item is reduced due to a defect and you are made aware of that defect, you cannot then return the item on the basis of that defect. Sounds obvious, but in many cases, the shop assistant will tell you that you cannot bring the item back at all – which is misleading.

Hello unholyangel

Thanks for your reply

I don't know if I made myself clear in my first post .....:)..there was no fault with the top - my main query is about the inability to exchange the goods (just say when I got it home I wasn't as keen as when I saw it in the shop and wanted a refund/exchange)) or to get a refund on the items in the sale that are marked with a blue cross...I have never come across that before .....

I have had to take your link out because I am a new poster ....even though it wasn't my link ....:)

Eliza_Bennett

Pollycat wrote: »

Yes, you are wrong.

Unless an item is faulty you are not entitled to a refund or exchange.

Some shops (M&S, Next, Primark etc) do allow returns and even full refunds just because you decide you don't like the colour, have changed your mind or it doesn't fit - but they are not obliged by law to do this.

M&S sometimes have a rail with very reduced items on and a notice saying no returns allowed unless the item is faulty.

Thanks for that,Pollycat....I thought the shop in question was trying to pull a fast one....:)

unholyangel

The right to exchange/refund due to a change of mind isnt covered by the SOGA.

I would actually say its more common to not be able to exchange/get a refund for sale goods.

A lot of stores do operate a 30 day moneyback guarantee or something similar but this is in addition to statutory rights rather than actually being available due to statutory rights.

I should pay more attention, just preoccupied

Eliza_Bennett

unholyangel wrote: »

Ahhh i misunderstood the OP.

Thought she meant they had said they wouldnt refund/exchange even if the item was faulty.

*puts on dunce hat and heads for the stool in the corner*

..Don't do that unless you feel like making yourself a nice cuppa and having a quiet five minutes on the stool....reward for trying to help me....:)

unholyangel

Lol not at all. It was my own mistake. Just as my previous post said, preoccupied although also trying to keep myself busy to occupy my mind.

I think its being counter productive though! :rotfl:

sarahg1969

It is actually illegal to make that simple statement, unless she ended it with "your statutory rights are not affected", which she probably didn't. That's why they say it instead of having a sign; because it's actually not allowed. It's not just that the statement is ineffective; it is illegal to make such a statement.

http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/corporate/SmallBus.nsf/20b1663bdac8d4e180256ca700457904/7c0c0bf562e2acf980257013002eabee?OpenDocument

fthl

Actually, trading standards are wrong there - the 1976 order to which they refer has been repealed. The replacement law - the consumer protection from unfair trading regs, talks in generalisms and so whilst it still might be an offence, there are more caveats which makes it not so straight forward. For example the statement might be misleading but it still needs to entice the buyer into making a 'transactional decision' because of it. The argument would need to be that the buyer will not seek to enforce rights he has, I suppose.

Got to give the old trading standards chaps pops for sticking with tradition...