Sainsburys wanted to say no

Mankysteve

zppp wrote: »

Stores would have access to some form of audit trail, so once it has been identified on the statement, they should be able to bring up the details via the card (PAN) number, and look at the day's transactions. (Although it is starred on receipts, the full card number is stored on their audits)

The only problem I see is if you can't remember the exact date and you shop there regularly - you may not be able to identif the relevant transaction.

Not all stores can, I work for supermarket where store with the older system cant do this not sure about the new system were rolling out. Our till back office is out of the ark.

Helix

Mankysteve wrote: »

Not all stores can, I work for supermarket where store with the older system cant do this not sure about the new system were rolling out. Our till back office is out of the ark.

Sainsburys can, although it would depend when you went into store and only a few members of staff know how to do it and in the store I worked it they were only their during office hours.

High__Flyer_2

kazzah60 wrote: »

If the receipt that you had was a guarantee with the date of purchase on it then you ahd every right to demand a refund because your goods were faulty within their guarantee period
as others have stated you don't legally need a receipt - simply proof of purchase- which clearly you had

No. The OP Had no right to demand a refund, the store could have opted for either a replacement or a repair, now, granted that this is only a cheap product that the store would replace, the customer still doesn't have a right to a refund.

Mupette

I didn't demand a refund, i asked for a replacement. I paid an extra £3 for another kettle.

kazzah60

High__Flyer wrote: »

No. The OP Had no right to demand a refund, the store could have opted for either a replacement or a repair, now, granted that this is only a cheap product that the store would replace, the customer still doesn't have a right to a refund.

Why not?
the kettle CAME with a one year guarantee
this implies it should be in full working order for at least one year
it broke within the first year
they had proof of purchase date ( the guarantee)
therefore the kettle was NOT fit for purpose and the customer was fully entitled to a refund or replacement

shaun_from_Africa

therefore the kettle was NOT fit for purpose and the customer was fully entitled to a refund or replacement

No they weren't.
They were entitled to a repair or replacment and not a full refund.
After about 7 months of using the kettle, A retailer is only required to give a refund if a replacment isn't available and a repair can't be carried out.
They are also allowed to deduct a reasonable amount from the refund to cover the use of the item that the buyer has had since the purchased it.

You can demand a refund for faulty goods but only if this is done within a "reasonable time" after purchase. (this isn't defined in law, but the OFT have stated that it is generally assumed to be a few weeks and possible a couple of months for expensive items)

High__Flyer_2

Mupette wrote: »

I didn't demand a refund, i asked for a replacement. I paid an extra £3 for another kettle.

No offence intended, I was referring to kazzah60's post who stated

kazzah60 wrote:

If the receipt that you had was a guarantee with the date of purchase on it then you ahd every right to demand a refund because your goods were faulty within their guarantee period

I wasn't saying that you Demanded anything, I was just correcting Kazzah60

Mankysteve

High__Flyer wrote: »

No. The OP Had no right to demand a refund, the store could have opted for either a replacement or a repair, now, granted that this is only a cheap product that the store would replace, the customer still doesn't have a right to a refund.

Well as they have no proof of purchase they not entitled to anything but your wrong on saying there only entitled to repair or replacement if they had proof of purchase.

Its there choice of refund which can be a portion based upon the time the item is expected to last and actually use. A repair or a replacement. The only condition on the person choice is that which ever is choose must not be significantly more expensive than the other to the retailer and that option is actually available.

shaun_from_Africa

Its there choice of refund

Well, according to the UK Government, a buyer only has the option for a refund if the goods can't be replaced or repaired, or it is too expensive to carry out a repair.
If the shopcan repair or replace, then the buyer has no right to demand a full or partial refund.

• If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/consumers/fact-sheets/page38311.html

Mankysteve

SOGA says otherwise and that the actually law.