Retailer refusing to pay return postage costs on return under SOGA

beefturnmail

Enough of a difference that I have already ordered a larger pan and will send this one back (as I said it's noticably smaller) - the question is about whether I should pay £5 postage or not.

I admit it is a point of principle more than anything else, but £5 is still £5 - if I buy a pan advertised as a 28cm I don't see why I should accept one as anything less than 28cm, unless the advert clearly states 28cm +- 0.5cm (which it did not). The same way as if I bought a newspaper and it had the back page missing I wouldn't accept that etiher.

I agree that it was a mistake to state size was the reason for returning - I would have been better off being dishonest, scratching it, and claiming it was like that when I received it - there would have been no argument then.

System

beefturnmail wrote: »

I admit it is a point of principle more than anything else, but £5 is still £5

Its not a point of principle you just want to save £5. Thats fair enough as £5 is a lot of money for some people. However you should just be honest and admit thats the driving force behind this complaint.

System

Also on the newspaper example, it woudn't be the same as having a back page missing. It would be the same as the paper being on slightly smaller paper than you expected.

VitaK

If you buy a 28cm pan and there is no deviations advertised, then I think its quite fair to expect it to be spot on 28cm.

The functionality may not be affected, but it could mean everything, if you have a lid you were planing on using together with the pan.

mattyprice4004

0.5cm and you're returning it? Seriously?
That's less than the thickness of a pencil.

Madness. You want to swap problems?

CharlieRabbit01

goater78 wrote: »

I would agree with this.

I don't see how a pan being 0.5cm smaller is going to make a massive difference in your cooking.

It does seem a very random thing to be complaining about.

I agree it seems to be complaining for the sake of it.

I would also suggest that it depends on where they take the measurement from as well.

beefturnmail

goater78 wrote: »

Its not a point of principle you just want to save £5. Thats fair enough as £5 is a lot of money for some people. However you should just be honest and admit thats the driving force behind this complaint.

What is it with some people on this forum who feel they have a right to be so judgemental? As it happens I am being honest by saying it is the point of principle, not the £5 being the driving force - my current situation means that £5 isn't really a 'lot' to me - it is the principle in that I feel I have been misled and I am having to pay for the retailer's error (by not correctly advertising the pan). As I have said numerous times, if the seller had advertised the size as 28cm (+-0.5cm), or even as 28cm* and then a footnote at the bottom saying something like *sizes are approximate and can vary within 0.5cm, then I would have no issue.

I don't agree it is the same as buying a newspaper printed on slightly smaller page than I expected - in my experience newspapers are not often advertised as e.g. 'size A3 paper' being a fundamental selling point - whereas the frying pan was advertising its size as 28cm as a fundamental selling point.

The point is I have got less than what was advertised. The newspaper was perhaps a bad example as newspapers don't often advertise numbers of pages either, a better one would be a pint of milk - when you buy this do you expect a pint or 96.5% of a pint? Or a savings account paying 2% - do you expect it to pay 2%or 1.93% and when you query it with the bank they say rates are 'approximate'? Yes some may say the amounts are 'small' in every case, but the principle remains.

CharlieRabbit01

beefturnmail: please may I ask really why your disputing the difference of half a centimeter?

How does this really affect its use?

Are you able to post the link to item for other forum users to look at?

I recently also purchased a 28cm frying pan to replace my old it looks slightly different in size but i put that down to the shape I certainly did not feel the need to get out my tape measure.

Looksguywalker

beefturnmail wrote: »

What is it with some people on this forum who feel they have a right to be so judgemental? As it happens I am being honest by saying it is the point of principle, not the £5 being the driving force - my current situation means that £5 isn't really a 'lot' to me - it is the principle in that I feel I have been misled and I am having to pay for the retailer's error (by not correctly advertising the pan). As I have said numerous times, if the seller had advertised the size as 28cm (+-0.5cm), or even as 28cm* and then a footnote at the bottom saying something like *sizes are approximate and can vary within 0.5cm, then I would have no issue.

I don't agree it is the same as buying a newspaper printed on slightly smaller page than I expected - in my experience newspapers are not often advertised as e.g. 'size A3 paper' being a fundamental selling point - whereas the frying pan was advertising its size as 28cm as a fundamental selling point.

The point is I have got less than what was advertised. The newspaper was perhaps a bad example as newspapers don't often advertise numbers of pages either, a better one would be a pint of milk - when you buy this do you expect a pint or 96.5% of a pint? Or a savings account paying 2% - do you expect it to pay 2%or 1.93% and when you query it with the bank they say rates are 'approximate'? Yes some may say the amounts are 'small' in every case, but the principle remains.

The amount in question is very small. Do you know for certain that the tape measure you used is accurate and that you measured the pan properly?

somethingcorporate

Is there going to be a difference in performance of it as an item if it is half a centimeter smaller?

Sorry, but you sound like a proper jobsworth. God forbid anything actually serious happening in your life, you'd have no idea how to cope.

Arguing over a 6mm difference in the size of a frying pan, wonders will never cease.