If a company delivers, are they obliged to collect?

unholyangel

No idea why some people are taking the hump over this.

OP says the gravel was larger than it looked in the pictures. Had the retailer given an approximate dimension of the gravel or a photo which accurately portrayed the size of it then OP probably wouldn't have been looking to return.

The whole point of distance selling protection is so the consumer gets the same opportunity that they would if buying in a store - to see the goods in person and not be committed to buy something which might not live up to its advertising (even if factually correct). For everything except clothes perhaps, the retailer can reduce the risk of returns by providing more information at the point of sale. The more accurately they portray it, the less chance of consumers returning it.

You're on the consumer rights board berating OP for enforcing their consumer rights. Remember, OP didn't come on here asking for a way to return the goods and make the retailer pay it. Just that ended up being the ace up their sleeve so to speak.

Supersonos

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Well to be fair neither of you are without blame.

The odd thing is that if you read over this thread, you'll notice that I admitted I could have better researched the product (asked for a sample) which I didn't, so I was happy to bear the cost of returning the goods.

What got me annoyed was that the ad just said that I'd pay return postage. As they had delivered it, I assumed they'd also collect it and would tell me that they'd refund my £160 minus (say) a £40 collection charge.

I was more than happy to take the hit. And if they'd been more helpful, I'd have probably thought no more about it. But they were as awkward as possible, essentially telling me to find some way of returning 2 tonnes of aggregate, all whilst they had a lorry and a driver able to make the collection.

As one person on here put it - how many people have been met with their response and decided to not bother returning the goods? What's the point in having consumer laws and various protections if the trader can find ways to mitigate that?

NCC-1707

Supersonos wrote: »

The odd thing is that if you read over this thread, you'll notice that I admitted I could have better researched the product (asked for a sample) which I didn't, so I was happy to bear the cost of returning the goods.

What got me annoyed was that the ad just said that I'd pay return postage. As they had delivered it, I assumed they'd also collect it and would tell me that they'd refund my £160 minus (say) a £40 collection charge.

I was more than happy to take the hit. And if they'd been more helpful, I'd have probably thought no more about it. But they were as awkward as possible, essentially telling me to find some way of returning 2 tonnes of aggregate, all whilst they had a lorry and a driver able to make the collection.

As one person on here put it - how many people have been met with their response and decided to not bother returning the goods? What's the point in having consumer laws and various protections if the trader can find ways to mitigate that?

Have you tried to meet them 'half way' given you both screwed up? They drop off a suitable replacement and pick up your erroneous order?

NCC-1707

unholyangel wrote: »

No idea why some people are taking the hump over this.

OP says the gravel was larger than it looked in the pictures. Had the retailer given an approximate dimension of the gravel or a photo which accurately portrayed the size of it then OP probably wouldn't have been looking to return.

The whole point of distance selling protection is so the consumer gets the same opportunity that they would if buying in a store - to see the goods in person and not be committed to buy something which might not live up to its advertising (even if factually correct). For everything except clothes perhaps, the retailer can reduce the risk of returns by providing more information at the point of sale. The more accurately they portray it, the less chance of consumers returning it.

You're on the consumer rights board berating OP for enforcing their consumer rights. Remember, OP didn't come on here asking for a way to return the goods and make the retailer pay it. Just that ended up being the ace up their sleeve so to speak.

Common sense/diligence? When you order two tonnes of anything you make damn sure what you order is what you want if you are told you are liable for return costs.

Supersonos

NCC-1707 wrote: »

Common sense/diligence? When you order two tonnes of anything you make damn sure what you order is what you want if you are told you are liable for return costs.

When you deliver two tonnes of anything you should make damn sure you have fully adhered to the law so that the consumer isn't able to tell you you are liable for the collection costs.

NCC-1707

Supersonos wrote: »

When you deliver two tonnes of anything you should make damn sure you have fully adhered to the law so that the consumer isn't able to tell you you are liable for the collection costs.

You were told you were liable for postage costs to return your order...what did you think that meant?

NCC-1707

BTW can you please stop giving out wrong advice in other threads.

Supersonos

NCC-1707 wrote: »

You were told you were liable for postage costs to return your order...what did you think that meant?

I thought it meant I'd be liable for postage costs. I also thought it'd cost less than £160, considering £160 was the cost of the gravel and the delivery.

I didn't expect them to refuse to collect it and expect me to pay £700 to get it back to them.

This is all moot anyway. They didn't pay attention to their legal obligations and they're paying the price. If you're going to trade in the UK, there are rules to abide by. If you don't, there are consequences.