Overcharged / Incorrect Item Received

Comms69

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

The OP cannot do that. They have been offered their money back. The case would be thrown out immediately. - I'm just curious, do you actually read what's been written? The case will most likely not be successful (unless via default judgment). The point is that the cost to the company, in sending a representative to the OPs local county court would be greater than the £56 requested. Companies aren't in the habit of wasting more money than necessary. Cases don't get thrown out immediately; you clearly have no knowledge of the small claims court.

I am totally on the side of the OP, her course of action is the most sensible and I think the Body Shop are either confused or being policy led, but many shops do this. I ordered some stuff in a sale. When it then dropped to another 20% off I reordered and simply asked them to refund the more expensive order and not send out the second order, saving them 2 lots of postage (outward, and free return) They wouldnt do it and said I had to return one order and they would still send out the other, so it 'cost' them two extra postage charges. Im sure thats not a lot with contracts etc, but it still seemed silly.

But unfortunately it is the Body Shops choice, and whilst the OP's option is extremely sensible and clearly the best idea, they are in their rights to refuse to do that, however silly it may be.

A letter before action, is a pre court process anyway, and like I said, would likely result in them simply paying to avoid the added costs

KatrinaWaves

Comms69 wrote: »

A letter before action, is a pre court process anyway, and like I said, would likely result in them simply paying to avoid the added costs

LBA are not to be used to 'get your own way'

Interesting that you chose to accuse me of not reading. TBS have offered a full refund. They do not have to offer anything more legally. Why do you feel that means I have not read what has been posted?

The OP would like to keep the calendar, and I agree that is the best course of action, but it is not up to me, or the OP, and its certainly not up to a court! If it did magically get to court, and the TBS rep turned up and said 'yeah we offered a refund, she wouldnt have it' she would have wasted the court fee. Utterly pointless course of action to recommend. Just because you think someone wouldnt bother to go to court doesnt mean you should advocate people wasting everybodies time. Other people have given far better advice than to simply send a toothless LBA.

Comms69

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

LBA are not to be used to 'get your own way' - whether you agree or disagree on a moral standpoint is largely irrelevant. The OP believes this company owes her the difference in price between the two items. That seems like a legitimate complaint which a court could address

Interesting that you chose to accuse me of not reading. TBS have offered a full refund. They do not have to offer anything more legally. Why do you feel that means I have not read what has been posted? - The OP does not want a full refund.

The OP would like to keep the calendar, and I agree that is the best course of action, but it is not up to me, or the OP, and its certainly not up to a court! - well actually ultimately it would be. If it did magically get to court - not magically, it would very likely get to court , and the TBS rep turned up and said 'yeah we offered a refund, she wouldnt have it' she would have wasted the court fee. - yes. But again, would TBS spend even an employees time (and the cost associated) to turn up. Yet alone in theory hire a solicitor, or pay for a reasonably senior employee to travel and potentially pay for accommodation Utterly pointless course of action to recommend. Just because you think someone wouldnt bother to go to court doesnt mean you should advocate people wasting everybodies time. Other people have given far better advice than to simply send a toothless LBA.

I think it's very likely they wouldn't bother taking it that far and this would result in no-on having lost out.

KatrinaWaves

Again, a LBA is not to get your own way.

The OP does not want a full refund, but that is all she is legally entitled to at the moment.

If TBS want to cut their note off to spite their face then nobody can stop them.Other posters have posted fairly sensible reasons why TBS don't want to just refund the difference.

michiko19

Update:

I was exhausted trying to solve this so my husband gave them a call instead. He seemed to have more success, they've asked me to prove that I have the wrong advent calendar which is fair, I wouldn't expect them to refund me without that. I have emailed them pictures of the advent calendar and hopefully they'd be willing to refund the difference after this. Otherwise my only option is to refund the one I have, so then I'd have no advent calendar and TBS have a product they cannot sell. Thank you all very much for your advice, it was very reassuring

KatrinaWaves

Great! Hopefully they’ve now seen some sense in your plan!

agrinnall

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

Again, a LBA is not to get your own way.

I'm curious, how did you get your position in the LBA Police, did you have to apply or were you head-hunted?

KatrinaWaves

So you’re suggesting every time someone is offered a replacement instead of a refund, they issue a LBA? Because that’s the equivalent of issuing a LBA because you’re not happy with a full refund

There is no point offering ridiculous resolutions to issues. I’m not acting as the LBA police, no more than I would be ridiculous to tell someone they can demand a resolution they are not legally entitled to.

Clearly the OP has managed to get her point across without the need for court threats, unless her partner did that...:beer:

unholyangel

(3)If the goods do not conform to the contract because of a breach of any of the terms described in sections 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14, or if they do not conform to the contract under section 16, the consumer’s rights (and the provisions about them and when they are available) are—
(a)the short-term right to reject (sections 20 and 22);
(b)the right to repair or replacement (section 23); and
(c)the right to a price reduction or the final right to reject (sections 20 and 24).

24Right to price reduction or final right to reject
(1)The right to a price reduction is the right—
(a)to require the trader to reduce by an appropriate amount the price the consumer is required to pay under the contract, or anything else the consumer is required to transfer under the contract, and
(b)to receive a refund from the trader for anything already paid or otherwise transferred by the consumer above the reduced amount.

(5)A consumer who has the right to a price reduction and the final right to reject may only exercise one (not both), and may only do so in one of these situations—
(a)after one repair or one replacement, the goods do not conform to the contract;
(b)because of section 23(3) the consumer can require neither repair nor replacement of the goods; or
(c)the consumer has required the trader to repair or replace the goods, but the trader is in breach of the requirement of section 23(2)(a) to do so within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience to the consumer.

The circumstances that it might be appropriate for a price reduction (people usually want what they ordered) dont come up often and I think that causes people to forget about it.