What are my rights in this situation?

bb999

babyemily wrote: »

Are they??? Because my two are chalk and cheese.
I was not referring to buying on impulse, I was referring to removing the tags and taking it to town. For all we know the op could have taken it on a ten mile hike. You cannot find it acceptable to "test" something by removing all the tags - Yes by all means buy it, examine it etc... but by removing the tags and taking it on a jaunt to town or wherever the op has accepted the goods. To be honest something in this does not ring true. And as for your child would you not teach them that they cant go and remove the tags if they want to send something back? I am sure you would.

The thing is, legally they CAN remove the tags and still return the goods under DSR.

meer53

tomwakefield wrote: »

But the T&C's are unenforceable as they attempt to deny statutory rights. Therefore, essentially, the company is holding on to money they have no legal right to.

What happens if someone informs a company they wish to return an item, tags attached, still in original packaging and the company refuses to refund?

If the customer can establish that because the retailer will not refund that there has been a breach of contract, then (if they have paid by Credit Card) they would be able to purse a Section 75 claim.

Visa Credit/Debit chargebacks don't cover situations where the customer has just decided that they don't want the items. Breach of contract doesn't come into play with chargebacks, thats covered under Section 75.

Flyboy152

meer53 wrote: »

There is no chargeback right for this situation.

Excuse me??

Flyboy152

mountainofdebt wrote: »

Given that its the ruddy issue of the tags that everyone is getting their knickers in a knot over answer this one simply question :

The OP somehow manages to convince the retailer to take the rucksack back and be held to the law and give her a refund. You then order a rucksack and receive this particular one through the post. It's obvious (by lack of tags) that this rucksack is not a brand spanking new rucksack but one that has been returned.

Would you be happy to pay £90 for this not really never been used rucksack?

That is up to the retailer to deal with. Such are the vagaries of running a distance selling business. If they don't want to carry out their statutory duties then they should try a different business.

Flyboy152

meer53 wrote: »

It's my job. I work in the Fraud/Disputes department of a bank, have done for nearly 18 years.

Non receipt of refund will only work if the OP sends the goods back and the retailer has processed the refund but it hasn't appeared in the OP's bank account. The OP will also need to be able to provide a copy of the refund receipt from the retailer before the card issuer will action this chargeback. Without the receipt, the chargeback will fail. Plus, the retailer has up to 60 days to respond to the OP's card issuer with their side of the story. If they say that their T & C's state no refund is due then it's back to square one for the OP as you only get one attempt at a chargeback. The OP will then need to decide whether to pursue it further.

Are your bank's terms and conditions identical to all others?

I would say that breach of contract would cover it.

Flyboy152

meer53 wrote: »

If the customer can establish that because the retailer will not refund that there has been a breach of contract, then (if they have paid by Credit Card) they would be able to purse a Section 75 claim.

Visa Credit/Debit chargebacks don't cover situations where the customer has just decided that they don't want the items. Breach of contract doesn't come into play with chargebacks, thats covered under Section 75.

I think are you getting a bit confused now.

mountainofdebt

Well if I was the retailer I would give the OP her money back and then take action against her for not taking reasonable care of the rucksack so that it was returned in the same condition was sent to her in.

Flyboy152

mountainofdebt wrote: »

Well if I was the retailer I would give the OP her money back and then take action against her for not taking reasonable care of the rucksack so that it was returned in the same condition was sent to her in.

But there is no requirement for the consumer to do so, thus any suit on those grounds would fail.

tomwakefield

Flyboy152 wrote: »

But there is no requirement for the consumer to do so, thus any suit on those grounds would fail.

The DSR does say that the customer has a statutory duty of care, just that the refund isn't dependant on it. If a customer wrecked something then returned it under DSR, a shop could legitimately claim for damages and may well win. However, while it's not clear cut what would be deemed a breach of the duty of care, it isn't necessarily a breach simply because it's not in exactly the same condition (tags and all)

Flyboy152

tomwakefield wrote: »

The DSR does say that the customer has a statutory duty of care, just that the refund isn't dependant on it. If a customer wrecked something then returned it under DSR, a shop could legitimately claim for damages and may well win. However, while it's not clear cut what would be deemed a breach of the duty of care, it isn't necessarily a breach simply because it's not in exactly the same condition (tags and all)

But there is no requirement to return "as new" and with original packaging, which is what Mountainofdebt was alluding to. Returning the goods without the sales tags is not breaching the consumers' statutory duty, thus the suit would fail if brought on those grounds.