We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Misinformation on return policies - My rights?
Options

SoulScribe
Posts: 8 Forumite
Recently I purchased, paying in cash, a pre-owned game from a well-known high street entertainment store. I asked before I purchased the game what my rights were as to returning the item if it turned out to be faulty. I was assured that if the game was faulty, I could get a full cash refund. I asked again to confirm as I purchased the game, and was given the same answer.
A few days later, I found the game faulty and attempted to return it to the store I bought it from, with my receipt as proof of purchase. When I tried to gain a refund, I was informed that I could have a credit note or a replacement. I brought up what the employee selling me the game had told me, and was informed that the cash refund policy was only for new and unopened games.
I honestly believe that it was a mistake on the part of the first employee rather than an attempt to mislead, but the fact still stands that I was misinformed. I would not have bought the game there if I had known the returns policy was as it was (I have very bad luck with that kind of thing - I buy something, it doesn't work, I take it back and they don't have a replacement). I took a credit note in this case, but I need to know what my rights are if this happens in future.
As the buying of goods is a contract between you and the store, I was wondering if, like most other contracts, misinformation on the contents of the contract renders it void. A returns policy would surely be covered in the contract - I'm taking this product on the understanding that if it is faulty, my options are x, y and z?
A few days later, I found the game faulty and attempted to return it to the store I bought it from, with my receipt as proof of purchase. When I tried to gain a refund, I was informed that I could have a credit note or a replacement. I brought up what the employee selling me the game had told me, and was informed that the cash refund policy was only for new and unopened games.
I honestly believe that it was a mistake on the part of the first employee rather than an attempt to mislead, but the fact still stands that I was misinformed. I would not have bought the game there if I had known the returns policy was as it was (I have very bad luck with that kind of thing - I buy something, it doesn't work, I take it back and they don't have a replacement). I took a credit note in this case, but I need to know what my rights are if this happens in future.
As the buying of goods is a contract between you and the store, I was wondering if, like most other contracts, misinformation on the contents of the contract renders it void. A returns policy would surely be covered in the contract - I'm taking this product on the understanding that if it is faulty, my options are x, y and z?
0
Comments
-
The contract is whatever is agreed between the two parties.
If, in this case, the two parties agree that a full cash refund should be given if the product is returned because it is faulty, then that is part of the contract.
That's the simple bit.
The difficulty comes when trying to enforce verbal contract terms.
In other words, verbal contract terms are effectively worthless... in my opinion.0 -
The item is faulty then you want to reject it under the sales of goods act. This superceeds their returns policy as it is your statutory rights.0
-
what was the game/format/fault?You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0
-
unholyangel wrote: »what was the game/format/fault?0
-
SoulScribe wrote: »Saints Row the Third - Xbox 360 - disk just did not play. At ALL.
The Sale of Goods Act gives you a 'reasonable' time to inspect goods before acceptance occurs. If within this reasonable time you discover the item does not conform to the contract then you can reject it under the Sale of Goods Act for a full refund. A few days is certainly reasonable in my opinion.
As Inside Insurance said the terms of their returns policy are irrelevant because the Sale of Goods Act cannot be contracted out. The first employee was not mistaken with the advice they gave you. The second employee either did not understand that the item was faulty, or has not been properly trained in what the shop's legal obligations are.0 -
The Sale of Goods Act (1979) (SOGA) implies into consumer contracts the right to receivable goods of satisfactory condition.
So the contract you agreed with the retailer includes the right to reject the goods within a reasonable time if they are not.
This right can not be removed by the retailer (An exception being if they told you of the existence of a certain fault, then you could not reject it for that fault).
Additionally if they were foolish enough to have written down and displayed their 'Returns Policy' restricting your rights. Then they would likely be committing a criminal offence under the Consumer Transactions Restrictions on Statements order.
However no major retailer will write these 'Refund' rules down for precisely that reason. Instead many try and play on peoples ignorance to deny them their rights.
Long winded way of saying SOGA trumps retailers policies, and you would have been entitled to a cash refund if requested within a reasonable time.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards