Refund refused instore

Yipeekaiyah

Hello folks, first post here and looking for some advice.

My wife and I had bought 2 football tops for the kids from the nike factory outlet, we realised they were not the teams current top and in fact an older version, when we realised this the kids had only worn them about 1 hour as the football was on while they were eating their evening meal.

We called the store explained our situation and that the kids had worn them and eaten in them, this was not a problem and they said as long as we have a receipt then they can be returned for a refund, the same night my wife returned the tops only to rudely met by someone different who refused a refund as the tops were "dirty" and had thread pulls in the material, the dirty marks were due to my 3 year old daughter eating her meal wearing the top and had dropped a small amount on hers. After a bit of a heated exchange it was pointed out that if the threads are falling apart after only an hours wear then they should be returned as faulty goods it was refused point blank.

She returned home and washed the tops and we tried to return them the next day, the customer assistant who served us agreed that the tops were defective and should be refunded but said he "was over a barrel" as he was under instruction from the assistant manager who served my wife the night before not to accept these tops back. He said our only option was to contact customer services,he gave us the contact number for customer services written down with his name. (which I later found out not to be his real name).

I contacted customer services by phone who asked me to reply to an email they sent me while on the phone with all the details of my complaint, to cut a long story short I got an email from customer services saying that the store would be reaching out to me. I eventually had to contact the store myself who eventually offered to refund me for one top as he said there were "grey areas".

During this call, I was told we wouldn't have been told we could return the tops for the original reason we asked for, although we definitely were,my wife even stressed the fact they had been worn and eaten in.
I was informed that no one in the store has the name given to me on our second visit - and refused the name of assistant who served us even though he admitted he knew who it was.
He also said that from his notes that I was only complaining of one top with thread pulls on it, this is not the case and my very first email and every email after states both tops.

After this call I checked this site and sent the template letter in the "how to complain" section of the main site refusing the goods under the sales of goods act.
I sent this by email to the store and customer services stating to hear back a full response within 7 days or I would be seeking legal advice to take the matter further.

Now.... the 7 days is up without reply,

Thanks for reading this I know its a long story but if anyone can offer advice it would be greatly appreciated as I think my only option is the small courts or take a £50 loss for the price of the tops

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Yipeekaiyah wrote: »

Hello folks, first post here and looking for some advice.

My wife and I had bought 2 football tops for the kids from the nike factory outlet, we realised they were not the teams current top and in fact an older version, when we realised this the kids had only worn them about 1 hour as the football was on while they were eating their evening meal.

We called the store explained our situation and that the kids had worn them and eaten in them, this was not a problem and they said as long as we have a receipt then they can be returned for a refund, the same night my wife returned the tops only to rudely met by someone different who refused a refund as the tops were "dirty" and had thread pulls in the material, the dirty marks were due to my 3 year old daughter eating her meal wearing the top and had dropped a small amount on hers. After a bit of a heated exchange it was pointed out that if the threads are falling apart after only an hours wear then they should be returned as faulty goods it was refused point blank.

She returned home and washed the tops and we tried to return them the next day, the customer assistant who served us agreed that the tops were defective and should be refunded but said he "was over a barrel" as he was under instruction from the assistant manager who served my wife the night before not to accept these tops back. He said our only option was to contact customer services,he gave us the contact number for customer services written down with his name. (which I later found out not to be his real name).

I contacted customer services by phone who asked me to reply to an email they sent me while on the phone with all the details of my complaint, to cut a long story short I got an email from customer services saying that the store would be reaching out to me. I eventually had to contact the store myself who eventually offered to refund me for one top as he said there were "grey areas".

During this call, I was told we wouldn't have been told we could return the tops for the original reason we asked for, although we definitely were,my wife even stressed the fact they had been worn and eaten in.
I was informed that no one in the store has the name given to me on our second visit - and refused the name of assistant who served us even though he admitted he knew who it was.
He also said that from his notes that I was only complaining of one top with thread pulls on it, this is not the case and my very first email and every email after states both tops.

After this call I checked this site and sent the template letter in the "how to complain" section of the main site refusing the goods under the sales of goods act.
I sent this by email to the store and customer services stating to hear back a full response within 7 days or I would be seeking legal advice to take the matter further.

Now.... the 7 days is up without reply,

Thanks for reading this I know its a long story but if anyone can offer advice it would be greatly appreciated as I think my only option is the small courts or take a £50 loss for the price of the tops

As the items were bought in store, and they are not faulty, I am afraid you are at the goodwill of the retailer. As they were worn, used, then you will be up against the brick wall.

visidigi

Yipeekaiyah wrote: »

Hello folks, first post here and looking for some advice.

My wife and I had bought 2 football tops for the kids from the nike factory outlet, we realised they were not the teams current top and in fact an older version, when we realised this the kids had only worn them about 1 hour as the football was on while they were eating their evening meal.

We called the store explained our situation and that the kids had worn them and eaten in them, this was not a problem and they said as long as we have a receipt then they can be returned for a refund, the same night my wife returned the tops only to rudely met by someone different who refused a refund as the tops were "dirty" and had thread pulls in the material, the dirty marks were due to my 3 year old daughter eating her meal wearing the top and had dropped a small amount on hers. After a bit of a heated exchange it was pointed out that if the threads are falling apart after only an hours wear then they should be returned as faulty goods it was refused point blank.

She returned home and washed the tops and we tried to return them the next day, the customer assistant who served us agreed that the tops were defective and should be refunded but said he "was over a barrel" as he was under instruction from the assistant manager who served my wife the night before not to accept these tops back. He said our only option was to contact customer services,he gave us the contact number for customer services written down with his name. (which I later found out not to be his real name).

I contacted customer services by phone who asked me to reply to an email they sent me while on the phone with all the details of my complaint, to cut a long story short I got an email from customer services saying that the store would be reaching out to me. I eventually had to contact the store myself who eventually offered to refund me for one top as he said there were "grey areas".

During this call, I was told we wouldn't have been told we could return the tops for the original reason we asked for, although we definitely were,my wife even stressed the fact they had been worn and eaten in.
I was informed that no one in the store has the name given to me on our second visit - and refused the name of assistant who served us even though he admitted he knew who it was.
He also said that from his notes that I was only complaining of one top with thread pulls on it, this is not the case and my very first email and every email after states both tops.

After this call I checked this site and sent the template letter in the "how to complain" section of the main site refusing the goods under the sales of goods act.
I sent this by email to the store and customer services stating to hear back a full response within 7 days or I would be seeking legal advice to take the matter further.

Now.... the 7 days is up without reply,

Thanks for reading this I know its a long story but if anyone can offer advice it would be greatly appreciated as I think my only option is the small courts or take a £50 loss for the price of the tops

No Refund entitlement. I wouldn't waste your time on Small Courts...

Yipeekaiyah

The thing is, they are faulty, the material is separating after only one hour of wear, which I think is covered by satisfactory quality and last a reasonable length of time under the sale of goods act.

SuperHan

I call troll.

Surely the purpose of an 'outlet' store is to sell last season's football shirts?

A change of mind policy is at the discretion of the store, and if they say worn tops are non refundable, then they are. Your wife was misinformed on the phone, and it would be good practice to refund you for the wasted petrol cost of travelling there... But that's not worth wasting your time at court for.

~Beanie~

I doubt a 3 year old will care whether its the current top or not. And I'm surprised that you think an outlet store will sell the up to date tops, surely that is the purpose of an outlet, to get rid of unwanted or old/leftover stock?

Thread pulls could happen easily, it doesn't mean they are faulty. I myself have managed to pull clothes before within 10 mins of putting them on, it was my own fault and I didn't take them back for a refund as they weren't actually faulty.

I'm just a bit surprised that you admit yourself that the kids wore the tops, even spilling food down them, yet you expect a refund because you didn't realise they were the old kit?

visidigi

Yipeekaiyah wrote: »

The thing is, they are faulty, the material is separating after only one hour of wear, which I think is covered by satisfactory quality and last a reasonable length of time under the sale of goods act.

Are both separating in the same way?

Why on earth after having the discussion with the store did you...

She returned home and washed the tops and we tried to return them the next day

I can't say im surprised the manager advised the staff to refuse a return. You made an ill-informed decision and then tried to make out the product was faulty when you didn't get a refund for buying a previous seasons product.

Yipeekaiyah

Ok thanks for replys.

1. Yeah I now know the purpose of an outlet - I agree my mistake.
2. I never tried to make out they were faulty, the store done this themselves, an employee at the store agreed although he lied about his name!!!

Yes they are both separating in the same way.

daytona0

Yipeekaiyah wrote: »

Ok thanks for replys.

1. Yeah I now know the purpose of an outlet - I agree my mistake.
2. I never tried to make out they were faulty, the store done this themselves, an employee at the store agreed although he lied about his name!!!

Yes they are both separating in the same way.

1. I'm a newcastle supporter and i know that i a top doesn't have wonga printed on it then it's likely an older season one. You don't seem to be overly bothered about the team you support as you've just picked up an older kit without knowing..... Why are you otherwise bothered when you eventually ind out that it is an old kit? Doesn't make sense to me.... Unless your kid threw a wobbler over it

2. You were talking about pulled string or something as being a ault.... Also, the employee may have been humouring you, or maybe they were being nice with you by seeming to indicate that it may be a ault (customers would certainly twist their words and say that the employee ADVISED them it was a ault) or maybe the employee was new and didn't know as much as the assistant manager etc Doesn't mean you're entitled to anything unless it is ACTUALLY aulty... Also, employees may not want you to know their name. I've gave a ake name working in retail in the past.... Can't be assed with the hassle or possible stalking etc. Don't take the name thing too seriously to be honest, they get paid 6.40 an hour to sort out the hassle created by you picking the wrong kit in the 1st place and you can understand why someone may not want you to know their name... Some people, not necessarily you, can turn such an issue into a saga and make it personal against the employee involved

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Yipeekaiyah wrote: »

Ok thanks for replys.

1. Yeah I now know the purpose of an outlet - I agree my mistake.
2. I never tried to make out they were faulty, the store done this themselves, an employee at the store agreed although he lied about his name!!!

Yes they are both separating in the same way.

And.
So they are faulty or not

Yarn, yarn, yarn, yarn!

SuperHan

Can you upload pictures of the 'faults'?

I suppose as said above the employee could have been trying to diffuse the situation to say well maybe we can sort you if we say it's faulty?

There's also a potential argument that you could have 'made' them faulty now you can't get a refund your way. And these cases do work on balance of probabilities. It does seem overly convenient from a third party perspective (I'm not suggesting you've done this, just supposing how it may be construed!)