Currys.co.uk not abiding by Distance Selling Regulations

SuperHan

londonTiger wrote: »

what an load of old tosh, every minion on this board is getting hot and bothered about currys not adhering to the 7 day DSR guideline.

Kind of missing the forest for the trees. OP opened the package, USED the iPad and now is having second thought. Currys lose £50-£100 off of that iPad if they take it back and have to sell it on as a refurb, dont forget theres just a £20 margin here for them to begin with.

Cant find the official DSR page, but this which.co.uk article should be sound. http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/distance-selling-regulations

could be argued that the tablet is hardware and SOFTWARE.

DSR was intended to protect consumers from damaged goods and goods not as described. it gives consumers any reason what so ever to return the product as protection (which prevents sellers pushing their luck and going backwards and forwards and wasting time to avoid taking goods back). It is not an excuse to try peoples product and then return it if you dont like it.

If you want to trial an iPad, borrow one, or got to an apple store and play with one for 2 hours

Believe me, I am the FIRST to defend Curry's in 99% of situations when disgruntled people come on here posting about terrible customer service because they are expecting treatment over and above their rights.

However, in this instance I am ENTIRELY on the side of notken, and it is the first time I've read a thread and really believed that Curry's are demonstrating shocking customer service, and I will fully support any decision made by the OP to never shop there again as a perfectly rational and justified choice.

The spirit of the law is to try the item out. Maybe he didn't have time in the shop on the day? He didn't have to arrange time to play with an iPad because the law is undisputedly on his side.

I've even scrutinised Currys.co.uk T&Cs to see how they have covered their back on this one, but it appears they haven't when I personally believe they may well have been able to by adding in a clause that Pay and Collect sales are only concluded on collection of the item in store.

I worked in retail for a fairly substantial amount of time prior to my job now, and I have seen customers kick up a fuss and e-mail CEOs about the most irrelevant of things and customer services have bent over backwards to offer more than the consumer is legally entitled to to keep the custom.

I am disgusted that escalating the case in this situation has not had the same effect.

OP, I recommend e-mailing or tweeting Sebastian James if you haven't already. He is CEO so will have more power than Mark Webb who you initially dealt with via Twitter, and will probably have more knowledge of consumer law.

It is also apparently true that Curry's ignore all complaints post (I don't believe this to be entirely true, as I know some complaints and praise letters do get fed back down to store level) including Letters Before Action.

If you've got the time and the energy, I'd threaten them with small claims court, then go ahead with it and you'll win by default when they don't attend (or you'll still win if they do, it's quite clear the law is on your side).

If it makes you feel better, the story has infuriated myself as well as Currys staff and management who I know socially and have recounted the story to. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone important enough to help you any further!!

wealdroam

londonTiger wrote: »

DSR was intended to protect consumers from damaged goods and goods not as described.

DSRs were never intended to do that.

We have the Sale of Goods Act which does that and more, and SoGA was around long before DSRs arrived.

frugal_mike

SuperHan wrote: »

I've even scrutinised Currys.co.uk T&Cs to see how they have covered their back on this one, but it appears they haven't when I personally believe they may well have been able to by adding in a clause that Pay and Collect sales are only concluded on collection of the item in store.

That's exactly the point. They could have done reserve and collect much like I think Argos do. It sounds like just a misunderstanding over what the DSR's allow. They certainly aren't the only retailer to state returned items must be unused though.

londonTiger

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

So do you honestly think that there were no computers or other electronic items in existence before 1997?
This is when European Directive 97/7/EC was drawn up and it was incorporated into UK law in 2000.

Couple of significant differences between 1997.

Computers back then were beige boxes packed in a brown box - nobody gave a damn about the cosmetic differences. Things are different, people expect iPads to be in mint sealed boxes - currys cannot resell this on to another customer as a brand new item. (In 1997 ocworld could resell a returned beige pc in it's brown box as a new product).

Another point: guideline mentions "software in it's original sealed package". OP is taking that to mean surely they mean software as in a CD-ROm. Well hello, it's 2014 and the vast majority of software is not sold in CD roms it's downloads. So do I have free reign to get a refund on all downloadable software? after all it's "distance selling" when I buy it from the net.

Just pointing how old, out of date these guidelines are. Feel free to test this in court if you wish.

londonTiger

notken wrote: »

The spirit of the law is that I have a right to try goods at home. The spirit of the exception is to prevent copying of software. Everything I have done and I am claiming is within the spirit of the law. You suggesting that they won't accept it because it's software is twisting the spirit of the law. (And, as it happens, not anything that has ever been claimed by Currys. As repeatedly stated, they have just said they do not refund opened goods.)

I had no opportunity to test the software on their demo iPads because I had never been in a Currys store until the purchase had been concluded. This was an entirely online purchase. My purchase was with Currys.co.uk, the same as if Amazon or eBay: distance selling, giving me the right to examine the goods in my home.

The spirit of the DSR is to allow a customer a no quibble easy and effective way to return unwanted products in order to prevent sellers from ripping people off by advertising a product in a way which makes it substantially better quality than what you get.

Couple example =
premium soft toy made to look like it's made from the finest wool = received cheap acrylic toy that's not even fit to be a mop.

A desk that's made to appear like heirloom tables and desks made of solid wood = but you receive cheap veneered fibreboard table that was advertised as "solid wood laminated" as in the laminte/veneer is solid wood.

DSR gives you a catch all legal backing so you can return products back for no reason what so ever in order to clamp down on missold or misadvertised products.

I have no qualms with someone returning an item because they didn't want it. But the product has to be in the original condition it was sent out - breaking the seal significantly changes the product in a way which the DSR guidelines set in 1997 could not have imagined.

Reasons for not wanting it is not valid IMO, If I buy a sheepskin jacket because I thought it would look great and then after wearing it feel that the wool itches my neck and not very comfortable to wear in the long run. Is that a good enough reason to want to return it?

No, that's life, you take your chances in the hope that you will like what you are buying. But you end up not liking it. Tough, sell it on ebay at 75% of what you paid and be done with it.

Similarly if I go to watch a film and didn't like it am I entitled to get my money back? No, you read the reviews, you get a critics opinion, you pay the fare and take your chances.

londonTiger

wealdroam wrote: »

DSRs were never intended to do that.

We have the Sale of Goods Act which does that and more, and SoGA was around long before DSRs arrived.

In a roundabout way, DSR does that too, probably does a better job with it. SoGA will mean seller and buyer will just get into an endless communication chain as to whether the item was as described. Most dodgy sellers will just argue til kingdom come just to stall and hope the buyer stops pestering. DSR just means you don't need a reason - you can just return it without any reason what so ever.

zaax

londonTiger wrote: »

So do I have free reign to get a refund on all downloadable software? after all it's "distance selling" when I buy it from the net.

You will when the new DSR laws come out in June

wealdroam

londonTiger wrote: »

In a roundabout way, DSR does that too, probably does a better job with it. SoGA will mean seller and buyer will just get into an endless communication chain as to whether the item was as described. Most dodgy sellers will just argue til kingdom come just to stall and hope the buyer stops pestering. DSR just means you don't need a reason - you can just return it without any reason what so ever.

Unbelievable.

We have here a thread of around 150 posts that seems to be saying something different.

I am sure the OP will be suitably re-assured and comforted by your last sentence. :rotfl:

londonTiger

wealdroam wrote: »

Unbelievable.

We have here a thread of around 150 posts that seems to be saying something different.

I am sure the OP will be suitably re-assured and comforted by your last sentence. :rotfl:

Thant's because all these people sit on the consumer side of the fence and dont run a business.

I have nothing against DSR, just don't open the package and destroy it's value. It is now a second hand/refurbished product. It is not in its original condition, case closed

Slowhand

londonTiger wrote: »

Thant's because all these people sit on the consumer side of the fence and dont run a business.

I have nothing against DSR, just don't open the package and destroy it's value. It is now a second hand/refurbished product. It is not in its original condition, case closed

This is a Consumer Rights board so expect answers that are from the consumers side. If you have nothing against the DSR you will not mind people exercising their rights under it.