The Great ‘Store Returns Policy’ Hunt. Who, what, where and when?

Jada

Store/Chain Name: La SENZA

Can you return goods without a problem? Ie you bought it and changed your mind... is this allowed ? Yes, you have 21 days from the date of purchase for a full refund with the receipt. Without the receipt there's no time limit for an exchange, although it must be in unused.

Does it offer a full refund or credit note? Refund with receipt (21 days), vouchers/gift note/exchange otherwise.

Did you need to have your receipt/a copy of the credit-card statement? Refund with receipt. I never gave a refund if only provided with a statement because that doesn't detail the actual item being returned or how much you paid for it, the statement amount could be for anything. If you find yourself in that kind of situation I'd suggest calling the store as it's at the discretion of the manager.

Is there any time limit? Is it seasonal? 21 days for a refund, this is extended over Christmas, although some store won't admit it! Exchanges/vouchers, no time limit.

Are you a customer or employee/former employee? Former employee, for nearly a decade.

Anything else people should know... If you return something without a receipt, you'll only get an exchange/vouchers to the amount that the item is currently for sale at.

:staradmin Jada :staradmin

hollydays

Jada this type of thinking by Managers is ridiculous.What type of deception could you possibly be preventing by refusing to accept the amount on the bank statement..Whatever happened to common sense!!

Jada

hollydays wrote: »

Jada this type of thinking by Managers is ridiculous.What type of deception could you possibly be preventing by refusing to accept the amount on the bank statement..Whatever happened to common sense!!This IS proof of purchase!!

Well, we're all entitled to our opinion hollydays, but there are many logical reasons not to accept a statement. A statement doesn't detail what item it refers to or how much you actually paid for that single product so it only proves that you've shopped at the retailer on that date.

1. You buy something from the shop for £30, are happy with it and the transaction shows up on your statement. You then buy something from ebay for £5, which is new with tags and is currently selling in the shop for £30. You could easily take that ebay item and your statement (with the transaction for the previous item) in to a store and try to claim a refund to gain £25.

2. You get your hands on a box of items that has 'fallen off the back of a lorry'. Simply buy something from the shop, and using that transaction on the statement you could repeatedly request refunds for the items.

3. You buy two items that are half price, spending £30. You then take one back, with your statement, and say you paid £30 for the one item. The customer can't prove they did, the employee, if dopey, might action the refund so the shop loses out, but would hopefully know how much the item was last week, and will say no. This in turn could result in an unpleasent scene.

4. If everyday customers can do the above, employees should be able to aswell, but that would open up a whole can of worms as it'd make it very easy for an employee to steal and get a refund for an item.

Unfortunately these things happen and a company has to try to impliment ways to minimise deceit. Thus it's always good to have clear guidelines but the ability to use your discretion.

Furthermore, whoever is undertaking the transaction is responsible for the audit trail and proof that the refund was legitimate (not for yourself or a friend). If you've only provided me with a statement I'd have to keep that as proof (which I'm sure not a lot of people would like) in place of a reciept at the VERY least (and no, I shouldn't be expected to find a photocopy machine). Even then I'm not covering my back regarding auditors as they might think it's dodgy and believe I'm involved in something underhand.

It really depends how strict the company is that you work for, and if you're happy to keep to policies. I suppose it is worth adding though, each customer is different and if I remember the purchase and the customer is exceptionally polite, that would make a slight difference.

Yup, it probably sounds a bit over the top and analytical, but people can lose their job for things like this. Issuing refunds when you shouldn't is a disciplinary offence, and I would never put my job at risk for a customer.

Common sense has nothing to do with it, if it did then one should surely keep their receipt?

:staradmin Jada :staradmin

hollydays

1.your first point- would never be a concern to the company-They have got a piece of perfect stock back worth £30-there is no loss involved.

2.falling off the back of a lorry scenario-staff would notice the same item repeatedly refunded so risky-also highly improbable-the effort and cost of taking it back to different stores not worth it-people dont do this-not only that-they would be showing you their name and address on the statement-criminals would NOT do this!
3. you could only use the statement for a single item-that is the only way you could return goods with a statement-one item only-so no confusion there.
4.Staff-hardly going to take their own stock back with a statement-thats a bit silly.They would just nick it -end of
Audit trail-that IS ridiculous-because even with a receipt,which had other items on,you would simply cross off the refunded item and give it back to the customer,wouldnt you, there is no compunction to keep a receipt.

In all stores-simply asking the Manager to sign to confirm they have seen the statement would be enough-yet i have never known a store to be so pedantic.
As you can see,i feel quite strongly about this-Many major stores would accept a statement-why do you think this is,if it was so problematic?

Jada

hollydays wrote: »

1.your first point- would never be a concern to the company-They have got a piece of perfect stock back worth £30-there is no loss involved.

2.falling off the back of a lorry scenario-staff would notice the same item repeatedly refunded so risky-also highly improbable-the effort and cost of taking it back to different stores not worth it-people dont do this-not only that-they would be showing you their name and address on the statement-criminals would NOT do this!
3. you could only use the statement for a single item-that is the only way you could return goods with a statement-one item only-so no confusion there.
4.Staff-hardly going to take their own stock back with a statement-thats a bit silly.They would just nick it -end of
Audit trail-that IS ridiculous-because even with a receipt,which had other items on,you would simply cross off the refunded item and give it back to the customer,wouldnt you, there is no compunction to keep a receipt.

In all stores-simply asking the Manager to sign to confirm they have seen the statement would be enough-yet i have never known a store to be so pedantic.
As you can see,i feel quite strongly about this-Many major stores would accept a statement-why do you think this is,if it was so problematic?

I obviously don't know if you've ever worked in retail, but I've had good experience of the things that go on, be it dodgy customers or underhand staff (most are lovely though ).

I can sense we're going to have to agree to disagree on this, but do you see my point that a statement doesn't show what the item is, nor how much was actually paid for it? It just allows for too much ambiguity which would be avoided if people (and most do) took more care with their reciept.

1. It is a concern as a company wants to get rid of stock, why should it issue a refund for an item that person didn't buy from there? It could be a stolen item for al anyone knows.

2. Lol, but they would do it and do try. And a box from a delivery doesn't always (in my experience, hardly ever) have the same items anyway, it's not that organised, simply packed with the quantities of stock a store is running short of. In my experience it was the school of thought with the security team and I could see their point that this was all possible. And if anyone did try to do it, no one can prove that they're being dishonest so I'm sure they wouldn't be that bothered about their address on the statement.

3. I agree, a statement is only slightly more reliable if a single item is bought, but how does the shop stop people buying two items and then claiming the figure on their statement is for one?

4. If customers are allowed to do it, why can't staff? But why would they steal it to sell on for a tenner when they can return it to a store to get £30?

If an item is returned with a receipt, that original receipt number is recorded if you give it back to the customer. Thus, that's your audit trail. Everytime a receipt is printed, a copy is also printed and stored away, in my experience, the stockroom. That's how the audit trail is kept in that respect, with refund slips and the original receipt numbers compared against the store's copies during an audit/security check, so that's not an issue.

Unfortunately your pedantic is my organised and making sure my paperwork's in perfect order. I just think I'm happier keeping to the policies if it means my life is easier, especially if the policies aren't that hard or unreasonable to adhere to in the first place.

:staradmin Jada :staradmin

Jada

Ok, the last bit of your post you've edited before I submitted mine so I haven't addressed it above.

To be honest, I have no idea why large stores accept it, maybe because they have more than one member of management to witness that the refund is genuine?

Maybe because it's such a large store (like Debenhams) that it has it's own instore security team that monitors both staff and shoppers throughout the day which in itself minimises the possibility of anything underhand going on.

Possibly larger stores are more secure with their deliveries. I really have no idea, but my point is, I was allowed to use my discretion, and my discreation always told me to follow that proceedure as the security team suggested.

:staradmin Jada :staradmin

hollydays

Jada wrote: »

Ok, the last bit of your post you've edited before I submitted mine so I haven't addressed it above.

To be honest, I have no idea why large stores accept it, maybe because they have more than one member of management to witness that the refund is genuine?

Maybe because it's such a large store (like Debenhams) that it has it's own instore security team that monitors both staff and shoppers throughout the day which in itself minimises the possibility of anything underhand going on.

Possibly larger stores are more secure with their deliveries. I really have no idea, but my point is, I was allowed to use my discretion, and my discreation always told me to follow that proceedure as the security team suggested.

:staradmin Jada :staradmin

You have a lot of very strange perceptions about why you shouldnt do things which are not logical.-this has nothing to do with security teams or not.Its nothing to do with deliveries.I am sorry ,but i do not accept your regional security has point blank told you not to accept statements-I think you have just come to that conclusion yourself-and never checked with your head office.-because its such a tiny risk-loss wise-when you think how many stores do things like dont make sure there is always someone on their fitting rooms-or dont train staff to seperate out garments before letting customers into fitting rooms-it is a tiny risk.
Point 3 is nonsensicle-why would someone do this?You are tying yourself up in hyperthetical situations.

Of course a statement shows the amount that was paid.

You say "it was a school of thought that you and the security team came up with"-well its an illogical school of thought-and yes i am speaking from much experience in these area.You are talking a lot of claptrap.Its not as though dozens of people each week attempt to show their statement-so why the paranoia?

Jada

hollydays wrote: »

You have a lot of very strange perceptions about why you shouldnt do things which are not logical.-this has nothing to do with security teams or not.Its nothing to do with deliveries.I am sorry ,but i do not accept your regional security has point blank told you not to accept statements-I think you have just come to that conclusion yourself-and never checked with your head office.-because its such a tiny risk-loss wise-when you think how many stores do things like dont make sure there is always someone on their fitting rooms-or dont train staff to seperate out garments before letting customers into fitting rooms-it is a tiny risk.
Point 3 is nonsensicle-why would someone do this?You are tying yourself up in hyperthetical situations.

Of course a statement shows the amount that was paid.

You say "it was a school of thought that you and the security team came up with"-well its an illogical school of thought-and yes i am speaking from much experience in these area.You are talking a lot of claptrap.Its not as though dozens of people each week attempt to do this-so why the paranoia?

I think you're missing my point, a statement only shows the total amount you've spent, not how much each item cost. Does that make my point clearer?

Also, just because a shop isn't security tight in some areas, it doesn't mean it lacks in all areas. Are you telling me it isn't the shop's right to insist on a reciept? And for what it's worth, my team were always very good with separating out garments at the changing room and staying there when it was in use, so no, not all shops have to suffer much loss there, and if they do, why can't they minimise this wherever possible, an example of which is to not accept ambiguous statements?

And please, if you wish to quote me, show me the courtesy of doing so with the extact words I used; "In my experience it was the school of thought with the security team and I could see their point that this was all possible." NOT, ""it was a school of thought that you and the security team came up with". It's not something I huddled together with the security team about to get one up on consumers, it was something that was in place whilst I was a sales consultant and as I progressed to manager I maintained what I'd always known to be the way to work correctly. There's no moral issue here, it's simply operations.

Again, this is all subjective. You call practising the policies as a being paranoid; I simply see it as running a tight ship, eliminating ambiguity and having a good relationship with my team and customers whist keeping my admin in order. No more, no less.

And I'm not quite sure why you're taking this all so personally! If the shop lists its returns policy and the statement option isn't included, why not shop elsewhere? It wasn't listed on our returns policy so we were perfectly entitled to not accept it.

I don't work in retail anymore so don't feel the need to get quite as emotional as you over it. I was happy and successful at my job, and never had a complaint so don't see why it's such a problem.

Now, I feel I've answered many of your questions, but you don't seem to have answered mine; why is it so hard to keep a receipt? BTW, I just want to clarify, this whole statement issue only refers to refunds, obviously an exchange or gift vouchers would be fine as you could get that without a receipt. Maybe you've misuderstood that point because I don't get why you're so distressed about this issue.

Additionally, would you get this irrational if someone came on here and described Karen Millen's policy? No refunds unless the item is faulty, exchange only in 14 days with a receipt, seven if it's a sale item. Do you not think that's less generous?

:staradmin Jada :staradmin

YAZZA_3

Jada wrote: »

I obviously don't know if you've ever worked in retail, but I've had good experience of the things that go on, be it dodgy customers or underhand staff (most are lovely though ).

I can sense we're going to have to agree to disagree on this, but do you see my point that a statement doesn't show what the item is, nor how much was actually paid for it? It just allows for too much ambiguity which would be avoided if people (and most do) took more care with their reciept.

1. It is a concern as a company wants to get rid of stock, why should it issue a refund for an item that person didn't buy from there? It could be a stolen item for al anyone knows.

2. Lol, but they would do it and do try. And a box from a delivery doesn't always (in my experience, hardly ever) have the same items anyway, it's not that organised, simply packed with the quantities of stock a store is running short of. In my experience it was the school of thought with the security team and I could see their point that this was all possible. And if anyone did try to do it, no one can prove that they're being dishonest so I'm sure they wouldn't be that bothered about their address on the statement.

3. I agree, a statement is only slightly more reliable if a single item is bought, but how does the shop stop people buying two items and then claiming the figure on their statement is for one?

4. If customers are allowed to do it, why can't staff? But why would they steal it to sell on for a tenner when they can return it to a store to get £30?

If an item is returned with a receipt, that original receipt number is recorded if you give it back to the customer. Thus, that's your audit trail. Everytime a receipt is printed, a copy is also printed and stored away, in my experience, the stockroom. That's how the audit trail is kept in that respect, with refund slips and the original receipt numbers compared against the store's copies during an audit/security check, so that's not an issue.

Unfortunately your pedantic is my organised and making sure my paperwork's in perfect order. I just think I'm happier keeping to the policies if it means my life is easier, especially if the policies aren't that hard or unreasonable to adhere to in the first place.

:staradmin Jada :staradmin

I work in retail and the refund procedure is not that simple. A credit card statement only shows that a customer has brought one or more item for that amount but it doesn't show what. So I think that statements shouldn't be used as a proof of purchase as some customers take advantage of the system.

Why should retailers accept statement just because customers have lost their receipts?? (for non-faulty goods).

MJD9

Just returned from a trip to CW.

I had a bluetooth headset that was 11 months old and had stopped holding the charge.
The assistant looked at the receipt and commented that it was 'nearly' 12 months old as if that was an excuse. Then he told me that headsets don't have 12 months warranty. I asked him to show me where it said that - which he couldn't. He then said that it couldn't be repaired at which point I quoted the Sale of Goods act which says that goods should last a reasonable amount of time and if they can't be repaired then it should be replaced.

At this point he went off to discuss this with his manager, who came out and didn't even apologise just gave me a new one off the shelf. I asked him to make sure his staff were aware of the law and he just said 'i'm giving you a new one aren't I'.

My advice if know your rights and keep pushing otherwise they get away with it time after time.