BHS won't refund

mo786uk

BoGoF wrote: »

Another headline that isn't actually true......this site is like tabloid journalism.

It is quite true, if, as the OP implies, BHS didn't make clear at the point of sale that they were placing restrictions on their own refund policy and the customer relies o nthe standard terms on the receipt.

Obviously it is impossible to prove it one way or the other.

ma_larkin

I cant say either if there were signs or anything at the till on the 24th when we bought it. it was my husband who got it, and true he is not known for his observant nature!! (hence wrong size!) he does swear that he never saw any such signs, and i can say with all honesty there was nothing at the till point today to say, apart from the girl. it is the annoyance factor more than anything.

unholyangel

Flyboy152 wrote: »

They cannot vary the terms of the contract, without the agreement of the other party though. In this case, British Home Stores entered into a contract, agreeing that they will refund the item within one month and made no allusion to there being a minimum waiting period.

Care to link any case law or common law that backs up that theory of yours? I'm still waiting for you to provide proof for your far fetched understanding of "law" from around what? A dozen or so threads now? And if you take in the other members that have asked you to provide proof........I'm guessing that number would be around 100.

Providing the store make the facilities available to refund within a month, they HAVE fulfilled the contractual agreement. Unless it says "we will exchange/refund immediately on any day", there was no express or implied term with regards to returning on any day. The OP would really only have a case IF they refused to exchange/refund because it was outside of the 1 month limit AND that OP would have been able to return within the limit had their tills been open for returns.


You'll also find that in most cases such as these customers will be told to ask in store/check online for full terms and conditions and/or that it is at the managers/stores discretion.


Remember, there is an implied duty of care in every contract. It could be reasonably argued that forcing the stores to accept returns on their busiest day/s is in breach of that statutory duty. And as we know well on this forum, statutory overrides contractual terms.

Morally, if they were quiet then they should have made an exception. But what is morally right and what is legally right is often 2 very different things.

unholyangel

ma_larkin wrote: »

I cant say either if there were signs or anything at the till on the 24th when we bought it. it was my husband who got it, and true he is not known for his observant nature!! (hence wrong size!) he does swear that he never saw any such signs, and i can say with all honesty there was nothing at the till point today to say, apart from the girl. it is the annoyance factor more than anything.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking for a goodwill gesture if you have been inconvenieced, or even making a complaint!

But nor do I think that retailers should be made out to be the devil incarnate for perhaps not bending the rules a little (not referring to you personally, just threads like this in general). They have a good returns policy over and above statutory rights. I think shops should be praised for this because at the end of the day, if the policy causes them too much hassle.....they can withdraw it and only offer consumers what is afforded by law. I believe we've had threads on here over the past year stating that some big name retailers are already doing this.

It would be bad for quite a lot of consumers if these policies weren't offered and I for one wouldn't want to solely rely on my statutory rights right down to the letter. I like having the odd goodwill gesture or a hassle free returns (rather than them only accepting if faulty and before offering a remedy, sending it away for "inspection").

visidigi

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Really? Were you there?

No, because if I was there I would have said its 100% guaranteed now wouldn't I.

As someone who had unfortunately had to be in a number of chain stores in the last week before Christmas I can say EVERY single one I shopped in said no refunds between XX and XX after Christmas due to sales.

This included HMV, BHS, John Lewis, Marks and Spencer, Debenhams etc.

For crying out loud they are NOT saying they won't refund, but due to logistics of the business they cannot refund for a few days - they are clear about this on all the tills in the above shops and they have also been this way for many years...

Honeydog

It might be easier (to avoid similar upsets next year) to exchange your HUSBAND for another who is a bit more on the ball and who knows what size you actually take!

Tips for a stress-free Xmas from HD!

George_Michael

unholyangel wrote: »

Care to link any case law or common law that backs up that theory of yours? I'm still waiting for you to provide proof for your far fetched understanding of "law" from around what? A dozen or so threads now? And if you take in the other members that have asked you to provide proof........I'm guessing that number would be around 100.

You've no chance of that happening angel.
When flyboy makes one of his ridiculous "legal" claims and is asked to provide proof of this, he either just goes silent or reverts to the "I can't proof that it's true, so I want to prove that it's not" argument.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3686931

Originally Posted by George Michael.
So you keep saying, but this is only your opinion. (unless of course you can provide a ruling or similar to back this up).

Originally Posted by Flyboy152
Why can't you come up with a ruling or similar that says Currys can insist that they are the ones who fit the goods?

unholyangel

George_Michael wrote: »

You've no chance of that happening angel.
When flyboy makes one of his ridiculous "legal" claims and is asked to provide proof of this, he either just goes silent or reverts to the "I can't proof that it's true, so I want to prove that it's not" argument.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3686931

Oh i know that all too well from personal experience And while in the past I have provided/been able to provide proof for what I've said many many many times, I'm still yet waiting for flyboy to provide proof even once!

Oh you forgot his "It exists, i'm just not going to provide it because you should find it yourself". Must be another one of those "secret laws".

Flyboy152

one_hot_minute wrote: »

For as long as I can remember as a customer and working in retail whilst studying, many large retailers have displayed signage at tillpoints from mid Dec specifying that for operational reasons no refunds will be given on boxing day.

It must be a local thing to you, because I did a lot of shopping before Christmas and never saw such a sign. I have probably been a consumer for a good deal longer than you and I have never, ever seen them.

It's not reasonable for them to agree this in writing / verbally with every customer so legally these signs fulfil their obligation in making a temporary minor amendment to purchasing t&cs.

It is perfectly reasonable to agree this with the consumer, because it is a material component of the contract they have with each other. If the signs are not there, they have not agreed to anything.

Flyboy152

mo786uk wrote: »

It is quite true, if, as the OP implies, BHS didn't make clear at the point of sale that they were placing restrictions on their own refund policy and the customer relies o nthe standard terms on the receipt.

Obviously it is impossible to prove it one way or the other.

I would think that, as they seem to not have the sign there now, it is a good bet it wasn't there before Christmas.