Zara wont accept proof of purchase

neilmcl

ILW wrote: »

A bank statement showing that someone spent something with a store at some time, is not exactly proof of purchase. Why not just keep the receipt?

If it's the exact same amount and ties in with time period in question then, within the balance of probabilities, it would probably be proof enough.

Slowhand

neilmcl wrote: »

If it's the exact same amount then within the balance of probabilities it would probably be proof enough.

OP has said:-

I_Love_Shoes wrote: »

...I had the bank statement with me, but I went to show them and they didnt even want to see it. It had a number of items from Zara on there, it was about £200 I think.

neilmcl

Slowhand wrote: »

OP has said:-

Thanks, I missed that bit, in which case it could be argued that the bank statement in this instance doesn't specifically prove that this item was purchased at that time. Apologies.

Uncertain

neilmcl wrote: »

If it's the exact same amount and ties in with time period in question then, within the balance of probabilities, it would probably be proof enough.

Maybe, maybe not.

If the shop sold lots of different items at the same price (e.g £19.99 etc) then the bank statement only proves that the OP bought something of that value.

If they bought several items at the same time and only one is faulty then it gets even more wooly.

Reasonable proof of purchase?? Debatable...

Edit: Just seen that they did in fact buy several items.

Another complication would be if the item was not unique to that retailer.