The Tanning Shop - numerous consumer issues

YorksClare

I decided a few weeks ago to go to the Tanning Shop. I work in a basement, haven't had a chance to catch the sun abroad this year, and my skin was looking dreadful and not healing properly. I know from past experience the lack of sunshine is to blame, and the weather has been particularly poor of late...

When I went to book a tanning session, the counter girl asked if I wanted any lotions. These were described as tanning accelerators, most of which contain various levels of bronzer - essentially something that dyes your skin.

I said I didn't want anything with bronzers in - don't want to look like little miss tango orange! The product I was pointed toward was something that apparently had "tanning accelerators" which were supposed to boost the melanin production in the skin. It sounded quite good to me.

Here is where the consumer issues begin:
1. While several sample packets were prices up as on offer on the counter, none of the bottles of lotion had a price marked, individually or on the shelf. The cheapest - on enquiry - were £20, the most expensive with "triple accelerators" was £80 for about 300ml! :eek:
I bought the one without bronzers which was £40. I thought it would not be such a bad thing if it meant spending less time in the UV lamps and less money on the UV sessions.
2. Got home to my computer and looked up the "active ingredient". - tyrosine. According to just about any reputable science-based site, tyrosine is part of the body's melanin producing system, but sticking it on the skin is not the way to do anything for your tan. It has to be metabolised through your diet. The only sites promoting tyrosine are either tanning companies, naturally, or bodybuilding sites - the sorts that also promote anabolic steroids and illegal tanning pills from Mexico...
3. Took product back the next day, but the counter staff said that they could only do refunds on products "on the day", because it was now "in the system" and could not be undone. I would have to phone or email head office. I explained that I had not used any of the product so there was no issue there, but still no help. I said that this was very fishy under consumer rights, but the counter person said she could do nothing.
4. Emailed head office who sent a .pdf which showed a no refund policy - like the prices this was invisible in the shop. However, the customer services lady offered £50 worth of tanning sessions instead.

I accepted the replacement sessions by returning the unused product, because it seemed to be the only way to get the credit back, but I wonder what rights I really had? The SadFart thing is all about physical products like broadband services, TVs or jumpers, but there is no mention of products like this that will not do what they say on the packet/in the store. :question:

It feels a bit churlish to post this after accepting something that puts me £10 to the good, but I do think that they were not complying properly with Trading Standards/Consumer Rights, and so I would like to think that I have helped someone else.

In case anyone is wondering, the sessions are on a tanning bed that promises to tailor the power output to your own skin to prevent burning, which makes the sessions more expensive (exclusive machinery) but that part of their product range I have to say is true to it's word. The extra sessions are most welcome!

Barneysmom

'Houses of ill repute' those places are more dodgy than massage parlours.

YorksClare

How about answering the consumer rights issue instead of slagging me off? I wasn't asking for your opinion on using tanning beds, I only used it as an example.

Fake tan does not help your skin process vitamin D, but UV exposure does. Hence the tanning bed. Which has a system to prevent burning by scanning your skin first and turning down the power output. Which actually works. And thank goodness, because working in this so-called air conditioned bunker with no windows, I am fed up. I am getting seasonally affected disorder - in August - and have skin (until recently) like some sort of cross between a goth and a zombie; it does not heal.

FYI a lot of people are now getting ill because they do not get enough sunlight exposure, and at the minute I am definitely in that category. Dermatology departments regularly use PUVA - a form of tanning bed system - to HEAL skin. So I am doing exactly the same.

So: If anyone can be bothered to answer the actual consumer rights issues:

1. Where do consumer rights stand on being sold a cream based on a lie?
2. Where do consumer rights stand on something that is consumable like a cream as opposed to something like a screwdriver that is not readily changed by its use?
3. What sort of rights can be applied when prices are not advertised clearly?
4. What sort of rights are there when the shop claims it cannot do refunds at all? Is this legal?
5. What can be done if a shop presents a list of terms and conditions which are not clearly notified or available at the point of sale?

Proper answers appreciated.

lynzpower

Speak to trading standards in your local council?

They are selling you a lie then they are the only peeps you can ring to be honest.

YorksClare

Thanks lynzpower. I feel as if I couldn't do it now, having accepted credit in another form, but I do think that they need to change the way they treat customers financially at the tanning shop. I would prefer to make it so that they have to admit that the tyrosine is not clinically proven, and display prices and terms and conditions.

I have just seen something that said it is not right for them to say that customers can never have a refund, because it could be a criminal offence!

Hintza

YorksClare wrote: »

haven't had a chance to catch the sun abroad this year,

That is awful. :eek: