We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
machine needle found in Primark shorts
Comments
-
If the manager suggested they had been washed then I assume they didn't have the labels on them? Providing you brought it back within their return period which I think is 30 days and it was with labels they should have exchanged it, but if it didn't and they didn't agree it wasn't fit for purpose then they don't have to refund or exchange. It depends whether they consider the loose threads to affect the actual usage of the product.0
-
you have no right to refund for change of mind with or without receipt. only for a faulty item.0
-
erm primark...
not known for high quality
It doesn't matter, the goods should still be of a merchantable quality, no matter how much you pay for them.The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
There are often peices of thread hanging off garments when bought new. All they take is snipping off, so not faulty.
I reduced the dialogue greatly when posting the question to just get to the point really. I left thinking to myself that the counter assistant didn't like their job or wanted to annoy the manager. I couldn't decide which.If your wife wanted an exchange it would probably have just gone smoothly if she had said just that.
Yes that's exactly what we asked for. Since the vests we bought were becoming unravelled. Signs of stitching coming undone and thready.Why shouldnt they get managerial approval, they are risking their jobs for someone who has stood there, been defensive from the off and called them pathetic.
Normally exchanges don't require managerial approvals, perhaps on a normal cashier desk, but I've not encountered this before at a returns station.Rudeness gets you absolutely nowhere, fast.
I completely agree. Having worked in a restaurant and spent time in customer service trenches I've learnt to grow a thick skin, however this person in particular just wanted to find a reason, in my eyes to refuse to exchange the goods.Pretty much sums it up really.
Can you imagine the reverse, some young person coming on here and saying we had this ........... come to the counter today and.....etc. etc.
I would agree, however, from what others have said faulty goods are entitled to refund. The annoyance in my opinion is that they felt that the vests, becoming unravelled were fit for use, in my eyes that's not the case, I wouldn't expect someone to wear that to work if they had to, and I wouldn't expect to have to mend it myself from new.
Interestingly, to try and defend the product, the assistant said the garments only being suitable for three washes so they're ok.0 -
I don't use primark but my friend does and she regularly takes stuff back to swap and never has any problems. I believe that if you exchange within 7 days you have no problems. The fact you had problems sounds more to do with how you treated the staff than anything else.
That's exactly what I'd expect, a problemless exchange.
The pathetic comment was made towards their system. Not one person in particular, to quote "That's pathetic" not "You're pathetic".
Although I think this person was being a bit more than a jobsworth. Every single refund and exchange needing managerial approval, ask your friend if they've ever encountered that!0 -
The staff have to check the garments before accepting back with or without tags on - as items can only be returned in re-sellable condition so the fact he checked doesn't seem to be much surprise as every other store in the same market does it - (Ever tried returning something to River Island?!)
Goods only get taken back faulty if it is a manufactoring faults, people can unpick threads so this again is standard. If staff have any doubts or issues it is good practice to confirm with a manager, why should they risk getting into trouble for taking something back they shouldn't? Better to be safe than sorry.
That of course is correct, however the Sales of Goods Act allows the assumption that if the fault appears in the first six months, it is inherent, i.e., present at the point of sale. This puts the onus on the seller to prove that the fault was caused by the buyer.The attitude of calling them pathetic this is just disgusting, do you not understand how hard it is to work in retail? Its so pressurised with a number of different customers, these people are doing their job sticking to policies and have customers giving them attitudes calling them pathetic? To me its the customer thats the pathetic one in that case. Try treating them with respect and you might get some back.
The OP did not call the staff pathetic, but their processes and procedures. The point that it is a pressured environment is somewhat irrelevant; it is not the concern of the consumer how hard people have to work, when exercising their statutory rights.
Respect goes both ways, it does appear as though the staff at the store were not exactly respectful in this matter either.The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
i could see shop's POV- if worn and washed it, may be deemed that yo have 'accepted the item, and its condition..?Long time away from MSE, been dealing real life stuff..
Sometimes seen lurking on the compers forum :-)0 -
brightonman123 wrote: »i could see shop's POV- if worn and washed it, may be deemed that yo have 'accepted the item, and its condition..?
Not if the fault did not become apparent until after washing.
That said, the store would have to prove that the item had been worn and washed. Even if it had been, that would not prevent the OP from exercising their statutory rights to return faulty goods.The greater danger, for most of us, lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low and achieving our mark0 -
It doesn't matter, the goods should still be of a merchantable quality, no matter how much you pay for them.
Would you like to quote where the SoGA states this?
Because I was under the impression the SoGA states this:(2)Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business, there is an implied term that the goods supplied under the contract are of satisfactory quality.
(2A)For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.
So yes, price IS a factor. Nor would I saw a loose thread is a "fault".You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
unholyangel wrote: »Would you like to quote where the SoGA states this?
Because I was under the impression the SoGA states this:
So yes, price IS a factor. Nor would I saw a loose thread is a "fault".
how many loose threads would you consider to be a fault?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards