Internet company will not give refund

agrinnall

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Would rejecting it under Distance Selling regulations be better than Soga?

It depends what their T&Cs say about paying for returns - if there's no charge then DSR may be the best option as no proof of a fault is required. But if there is a charge, and the SOGA case is solid, then that will be the zero cost option.

lovinituk

But under SOGA they are not obliged to refund, they can offer a replacement instead.

frugal_mike

lovinituk wrote: »

But under SOGA they are not obliged to refund, they can offer a replacement instead.

This is not absolutely true, and in this specific case its false. The SOGA defines a concept of acceptance. If goods do not conform to contract and acceptance has not occurred then the goods can be rejected. The retailer has to give a full refund, and has no option to repair or replace unless the customer agrees otherwise.

Only after acceptance occurs can the retailer refuse a refund, and even then they can only refuse the refund if it would be more costly to them than a repair or a replacement.

frugal_mike

Takeaway_Addict wrote: »

Would rejecting it under Distance Selling regulations be better than Soga?

It doesn't have to be an either or. The retailer can't charge for returning things under DSR where the customer has a right to reject the goods.

agrinnall

frugal_mike wrote: »

It doesn't have to be an either or. The retailer can't charge for returning things under DSR where the customer has a right to reject the goods.

Not true, if their T&Cs specify it correctly they can insist that the customer pays the cost of return under DSR.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange#web

See the final sentence of "How to cancel the contract".

shaun_from_Africa

agrinnall wrote: »

Not true, if their T&Cs specify it correctly they can insist that the customer pays the cost of return under DSR.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange#web

See the final sentence of "How to cancel the contract".

That doesn't matter.
It is para 14-5 of the DSR's that allows a retailer to insist on the return postage costs, but para 14-5 doesn't apply if there is any other legislation that overrides it (such as the SOGA stating a retailer must cover the cost for faulty goods being returned to them.)

(5) Subject to paragraphs (6) and (7), the supplier may make a charge, not exceeding
the direct costs of recovering any goods supplied under the contract, where a term of the contract provides that the consumer must return any goods supplied if he cancels the contract under
regulation 10 but the consumer does not comply with this provision or returns the goods at the expense of the supplier.
(6) Paragraph (5) shall not apply where—
(a) the consumer cancels in circumstances where he has the right to reject the goods
under a term of the contract, including a term implied by virtue of any enactment,

frugal_mike

agrinnall wrote: »

Not true, if their T&Cs specify it correctly they can insist that the customer pays the cost of return under DSR.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shopping/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange#web

See the final sentence of "How to cancel the contract".

You missed the bit were I mentioned the customer having right to reject the goods. See Regulation 14, paragraph 6a)

(5)!Subject to paragraphs (6) and (7), the supplier may make a charge, not exceeding the direct costs of recovering any goods supplied under the contract, where a term of the contract provides that the consumer must return any goods supplied if he cancels the contract under regulation 10 but the consumer does not comply with this provision or returns the goods at the expense of the supplier.

(6)!Paragraph (5) shall not apply where—

(a) the consumer cancels in circumstances where he has the right to reject the goods under a term of the contract, including a term implied by virtue of any enactment, or

(b)the term requiring the consumer to return any goods supplied if he cancels the contract is an “unfair term” within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999(10).

(7)!Paragraph (5) shall not apply to the cost of recovering any goods which were supplied as substitutes for the goods ordered by the consumer.

Edit: I was too slow! My phone did not cope well with copying from the DSR website.

lovinituk

*edit* - ignore me! Reading 2 similar threads at 2am is obviously too confusing for me!

hollydays

Just updating old thread.
This company now called " sensory education limited" search the boards.

daytona0

Lol at the bump!