📨 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!

Sports Direct Returns - they want it both ways

2»

Comments

  • andygb
    andygb Posts: 14,651 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    bigisi wrote: »
    Correct - way to make yourself look a fool before you've even started.

    First thing, as a "newbie", which you are, we are told to be nice and polite to you, but as far as I am concerned mate, politeness is a two way street, so wind your ignorant neck in and stop insulting people - OK?
    Secondly they didn't know about it in the shop, and I wasn't aware that the sale of goods act had changed into the consumer rights act.

    So, rather than being pedantic, a bit of useful advice would be appreciated - thank you.;)
  • macman
    macman Posts: 53,129 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Can you not exchange them for a smaller size that does fit you?
    CRA makes no difference; if bought in store, you have no automatic right to a refund unless the goods are faulty. I'm not convinced that buying something of the wrong size, however inadvertently, makes the product 'faulty'. The issue here is the absence of a sensible store returns policy.
    No free lunch, and no free laptop ;)
  • bris
    bris Posts: 10,548 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Oh no, first rule when demanding your rights is to actually know them.

    The Sales of Goods Act was replaced by the Consumer Rights Act.
    bigisi wrote: »
    Correct - way to make yourself look a fool before you've even started.
    Well actually the Sale of Goods act is still alive and well, only the old consumer section formerly know as the Distance Selling Regulations were replaced.


    And it just so happens the Sale of goods act will still cover breach of contract, so who's the fools now?
  • bris wrote: »
    Well actually the Sale of Goods act is still alive and well, only the old consumer section formerly know as the Distance Selling Regulations were replaced.

    And it just so happens the Sale of goods act will still cover breach of contract, so who's the fools now?

    If you are going to correct someone, it helps if you get it right.

    For a start, the Distance selling regulations were not part of the Sale of goods act.
    The DSR's were an entirely separate piece of legislation and has now been replaced by the "Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations".

    As for the Sale of goods act covering breach of contract.
    Yes, but only for business to business contracts.
    No sections of the SOGA still apply to consumer contracts as this is now covered by the Consumer rights act.
  • If you are going to correct someone, it helps if you get it right.

    For a start, the Distance selling regulations were not part of the Sale of goods act.

    I don't think bris was saying that?

    I read it that the DSR was replaced by the CCR, but that the SOGA is still in operation (there are items which are still covered under SOGA) and so the SOGA hasn't been replaced completely just yet.
    As for the Sale of goods act covering breach of contract.
    Yes, but only for business to business contracts.
    No sections of the SOGA still apply to consumer contracts as this is now covered by the Consumer rights act.

    ... Except for items which were bought under the SOGA when it was in operation? My 5 year old cooker would qualify, for example.

    That being said, if bris is making that point then they may have missed the word "yesterday" in OP's post....
  • But regarding consumer contracts, there are no parts of the SOGA that apply to any sales since October 2015 so there was no point mentioning the SOGA and breach of contract in a thread that is relating to a very recent purchase.

    bris was wrong as he/she clearly stated that the DSR's were a section of the Sale of goods act.
    bris wrote: »
    Well actually the Sale of Goods act is still alive and well, only the old consumer section formerly know as the Distance Selling Regulations were replaced.

    and if they are going to refer to other posters as "fools", they should really make sure that what they post is factually correct.
  • But regarding consumer contracts, there are no parts of the SOGA that apply to any sales since October 2015 so there was no point mentioning the SOGA and breach of contract in a thread that is relating to a very recent purchase.

    I agree, the word "yesterday" seemed to have been missed... But aside from that, everything looked fine to me...
    bris was wrong as he/she clearly stated that the DSR's were a section of the Sale of goods act.

    Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but it isn't clear to me.

    Seems like bris was saying that SOGA is still in operation (in some respect), but DSR had been replaced completely and is now defunct.

    and if they are going to refer to other posters as "fools", they should really make sure that what they post is factually correct.

    Yea well, the OP is a "fool" for referring to the Sale of Goods Act for an item bought "yesterday". But it is a bit harsh to use "fool" and would prefer to use "misinformed" instead.
  • LadyDee
    LadyDee Posts: 4,293 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    I wonder if socks (unless they are clearly packaged as new and unworn) are classed as underwear and SD won't accept returns for hygiene reasons?
  • bris wrote: »
    Well actually the Sale of Goods act is still alive and well, only the old consumer section formerly know as the Distance Selling Regulations were replaced.


    And it just so happens the Sale of goods act will still cover breach of contract, so who's the fools now?


    Apology accepted :)
  • andygb
    andygb Posts: 14,651 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    macman wrote: »
    Can you not exchange them for a smaller size that does fit you?
    CRA makes no difference; if bought in store, you have no automatic right to a refund unless the goods are faulty. I'm not convinced that buying something of the wrong size, however inadvertently, makes the product 'faulty'. The issue here is the absence of a sensible store returns policy.


    Thanks Macman and all the others who have added RELEVANT advice.
    Yesterday, the manager said that I should have asked for the sock packaging to be opened before I purchased the socks - which I doubt they would have let me do originally, because it potentially leaves them with a pair of socks which they cannot sell if I then refuse to buy them.
    I shall, following your advice, go back to the shop and ask them to open (as many as possible) socks until I find the correct size.
    I should also advise other people thinking of buying socks at SportsDirect to follow the same procedure - open as many packets as you can until you find the correct size.;)
    Do not trust the sizes shown on the packaging.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 252.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.5K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.7K Life & Family
  • 256.7K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.