What do you think of the Distance Selling Regs?

DD265

Having gotten myself into a debate with somebody from the US on another forum (who thinks the DSRs are immoral!), I'm curious as to what the people here think.

I can understand it from both sides because I work in a mail order company but I also buy online.

From the company POV, I think the idea of having to refund somebody before you've received the item back (with a view to taking them to court separately) is a bit ridiculous. I also dislike that we have to refund the original postage costs - that service was provided and can't be cancelled! However in reality, from maybe 8000 orders a month we get one DSR return so it's not that big a deal.

As a customer, I've never actually used them. Only time I would've done the postages were free anyway and no issue getting a refund for my item (they didn't do exchanges which is what I wanted, so reordered). However I like knowing that I can return an item if it turns out to not be suitable so I'm inclined to take more risks when buying online. That said, I also quite happily buy from private sellers on eBay whether they have a returns policy or not, so maybe it doesn't make that much difference.

System

I think they are massively in the consumers favour and are probably unfair

Hintza

goater78 wrote: »

I think they are massively in the consumers favour and are probably unfair

I would tend to agree with this.

BUT.......and there is always a but.

BlueAngelCV

goater78 wrote: »

I think they are massively in the consumers favour and are probably unfair

I would second this.

paddyrg

I think they are idealogically sound although a bit harsh for businesses. I believe you can state in your business terms that returns under DSR can be at the buyers expense, but that could increase SoGA Returns (damage being caused to return for free under SoGA), so worth just swallowing it and pricing to account for it.

Distance selling doesn't have the cost overheads of keeping a shop, so the extra costs are still cheap cost of doing business.

Hermione_Granger

Before the DSR's cme into force, I ordered very little in the way of expensive items using online shopping, and the times that I diid, it was usually with a retailer who allowed returns for a change of mind. (such as Amazon).

I now order far more via the internet, and although I know I can fall back on the DSR's if I need to, I have only ever returned a couple of items that were not suitable for me (and for both of these I paid the return postage costs), and both items were returned in perfect condition and with the boxes totally unmarked.

I don't know how many other consumers are the same as me, but having the DSRs in place may well result in retailers getting far more online business and their extra profits may well exceed any losses through returns.

Nilrem

goater78 wrote: »

I think they are massively in the consumers favour and are probably unfair

That's my thought as well.

They can be a very good thing*, but some people do take advantage of them, and in some cases a returned item under the DSR can mean the retailer taking a large hit as they cannot sell them "new" (IE the box or packaging has been damaged "inspecting" it).
I know some people have bought things like video cards from multiple retailers, then sent back the ones they couldn't get to overclock as much.



*I just bought two pairs of Clarks shoes, unfortunately it looks like I'm now a wider foot than I used to be, so the DSR is going to be very handy.

vikingaero

The other side of the coin is that I as a consumer will have the confidence to shop with you the internet retailer because of DSR provisions. I would rather buy from Amazon with the backup of DSR than buy from PCWorld and have to argue with a salesman who has been briefed to avoid as many returns and refunds as possible.

arcon5

DD265 wrote: »

Having gotten myself into a debate with somebody from the US on another forum (who thinks the DSRs are immoral!), I'm curious as to what the people here think.

I can understand it from both sides because I work in a mail order company but I also buy online.

From the company POV, I think the idea of having to refund somebody before you've received the item back (with a view to taking them to court separately) is a bit ridiculous. I also dislike that we have to refund the original postage costs - that service was provided and can't be cancelled! However in reality, from maybe 8000 orders a month we get one DSR return so it's not that big a deal.

As a customer, I've never actually used them. Only time I would've done the postages were free anyway and no issue getting a refund for my item (they didn't do exchanges which is what I wanted, so reordered). However I like knowing that I can return an item if it turns out to not be suitable so I'm inclined to take more risks when buying online. That said, I also quite happily buy from private sellers on eBay whether they have a returns policy or not, so maybe it doesn't make that much difference.

This may be true in theory, but in reality you would be very lucky if a company did actually refund you before receiving the goods back.

bazster

DD265, you make some valid points. But if, as a distance seller, those are the only issues you have with the regs, then there can't be much wrong with them!

zenmaster

Probably fair enough as regards faulty or "not as described" items but ridiculously weighted in favour of those idiots that buy things they don't really want.

• 7 days to notify of intent to reject, if informed of that fact, 3 months if not.
• No requirement to return in original packaging, let alone resalable condition.
• In fact, no requirement to return at all.

The purpose of the DSRs is intended to allow the consumer to inspect the goods as if they were in a shop. I bet 90% of purchasers have already inspected the goods in a shop (abusing the overheads involved in running that shop) then ordered cheaper online.

It's a primary example of the nanny state absolving anyone from their personal responsibilities. Whatever happened to "Caveat Emptor"?

I guarantee that if these regulations did not exist people would be a lot more diligent in their purchases.

Don't get me started on section bl00dy 75 :mad: