We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Argos returns policy is a con - just sue them in County Court for a refund
Comments
-
Seems to be lot of Shills paid to lurk on these threads, laughably posing as "ex Argos employees" who "never had any problems with transaction and everything was 100% rosey". pull the other one.
Total rubbish!
It's already been established that we're all employees of John Lewis :rotfl:0 -
It's not mis leading, a returns policy is over and above your statutory rights, you don't seem to know this. Their returns policy clearly states that they wont take back opened laptops so nothing misleading about it.
You fail to reference where it says that in their returns policy, but its irrelevant because if that was the case they had every opportunity to state that in a Defence - they failed to do it, so lost.
The Argos receipt says:
"CHANGED YOUR MIND? NEVER MIND
Our hassle free returns guarantee means you can return or exchange your item in store within 30 days....
There are just a few things that we'll need from you:
Proof of Purchase
Product needs to be returned unused, in its original packaging and re-saleable condition."
As I said from the outset, this is totally misleading claim by Argos. How do you know if you like a product without opening it - so obviously it has to be opened. Then, If a product is faulty from outset, it cannot be used so it was "unused". In any event, beyond their devious return policy, I am protected by statutory law due to the goods being faulty.0 -
-
I don't understand why people are continuing to post to this thread....0
-
Couple of points...
1. For some types of products, this kind of money-back guarantee is of limited practical value. How can you know whether a TV or a Computer is what you want/matches the wallpaper/etc. until it is removed from the box? That's especially true with companies like Argos where the amount of information supplied about products is minimal and sometimes incorrect.
2. Returns without a reason and returns of faulty goods are legally and practically two different things.
3. The requirement that goods should be sold in perfect condition, fit for purpose is being undermined by the modern preference by manufacturers to require a software update immediately the product is used (and as a pre-requisite to use). It's awaiting a test case, that I suspect will determine that it is acceptable to sell products in that way, subject to ease/cost of the upgrade.
4. Many companies will choose not to defend small claims, as the cost to them of a defence is likely more than the cost of the claim itself. Therefore I would not assume that any small claim win necessarily indicates a case with merit.
5. There is a practical problem with technically complex, high value products in terms of returns. Stores like Argos are simply not equipped to validate claims in regards to those types of products: either claims of faulty goods, or to validate that a returned item is unmolested and can be re-merchandised. I can see how these practical issues can undermine both returns policy and consumer rights, but I do not see an immediate solution (other than deferring a refund until such times as claims/returns are validated by a suitably qualified person).0 -
POPPYOSCAR wrote: »How about a copy of the judgement.
I dont need to prove anything to you. As I have repeatedly said, my post is for the benefit of other victims of Argos returns policy and attempt to evade responsibility for faulty goods.0 -
Cornucopia wrote: »Couple of points...
1. For some types of products, this kind of money-back guarantee is of limited practical value. How can you know whether a TV or a Computer is what you want/matches the wallpaper/etc. until it is removed from the box? That's especially true with companies like Argos where the amount of information supplied about products is minimal and sometimes incorrect.
2. Returns without a reason and returns of faulty goods are legally and practically two different things.
3. The requirement that goods should be sold in perfect condition, fit for purpose is being undermined by the modern preference by manufacturers to require a software update immediately the product is used (and as a pre-requisite to use). It's awaiting a test case, that I suspect will determine that it is acceptable to sell products in that way, subject to ease/cost of the upgrade.
4. Many companies will choose not to defend small claims, as the cost to them of a defence is likely more than the cost of the claim itself. Therefore I would not assume that any small claim win necessarily indicates a case with merit.
Agree with most of that, but on point 4 the way to deal with a small claim is not by ignoring it - but by professional conduct in contacting the claimant and settling the matter.
If its Argos policy to ignore it, then thats a clear solution for anyone with a complaint about their returns process who has been denied resolution by them .0 -
Agree with most of that, but on point 4 the way to deal with a small claim is not by ignoring it - but by professional conduct in contacting the claimant and settling the matter.
If its Argos policy to ignore it, then thats a clear solution for anyone with a complaint about their returns process who has been denied resolution by them .
It's their choice to ignore it, and I think you'll find many large organisations do the same.
If that gives consumers an advantage to balance out some of these Returns issues, then I think that's probably fair.0 -
Cornucopia wrote: »It's their choice to ignore it, and I think you'll find many large organisations do the same.
If that gives consumers an advantage to balance out some of these issues, then I think that's probably fair.
which is exactly the point of my post! If Argos refuse to refund you, take them to small claims court, they will ignore it (as is my experience or be too incompetent to file a defence in time) (or as you claim is a practice by large organisations - which I refuse to believe), and then you will get your money by enforcement.
Furthering that, if they intentionally chose to ignore it as you and other person has suggested, why bother to write a letter to acknowledge receipt of the Claim Form and why file an Acknowledgement of Service ticking intention to defend? Thats why I prefer to believe its incompetence or failure to produce a Defence, rather than any intentional act.0 -
1. No one else on this thread is an Argos "shill" - they're just telling you relevant things that you don't like or want to hear.Typical shill behaviour, try to divert the focus to irrelevance. I wont waste my time.
For the benefit of other victims of Argos misleading returns policy and attempt to evade dealin with faulty goods, I will post update on ccj in due course.
2. I've reported you to the Forum Team, so I'll leave any final "judgement" to them.
3. I hope Argos defend and you're the one who lands up with a CCJ, maybe even a trip to a higher court.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 349.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453K Spending & Discounts
- 242.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 619.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.4K Life & Family
- 255.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards