Argos refund issue

Wolfman_2

Hi, I recently paid Argos £160 for a dining table and £340 for chairs. Total £500 paid £460 on card and £40 in gift vouchers. The table was replaced and then the replacement returned as faulty. The refund has been processed as £120 to card and £40 in gift vouchers. I asked Argos to refund the full £160 to card and leave the £40 gift vouchers against the tables but this has been refused. I used the vouchers to bring down the cost of this purchase and now I have to buy a table elsewhere and the £160 would have been used for this.
I am left with £40 Argos vouchers that I have no need for at present. Are Argos behaving correctly in insisting gift cards are refunded first before any cash?

unforeseen

Yes it is the norm with a lot of shops that when there is a part refund and gift vouchers are used for the initial purchase then gift vouchers are used first for the refund.

POPPYOSCAR

Yes they are.

Whenever I buy like this I always split the purchase so that only part of the order is paid for with the gift card.

unholyangel

Personally I would just tell argos i'm rejecting the whole lot (if you have the right to reject some of the goods, you have the right to reject them all), get the refund of £460 to my card & £40 to vouchers, use the vouchers either to repurchase chairs or (more likely) something small then never shop at argos (at least using vouchers) again.

ETA: As for whether argos are behaving correctly. The consumer rights act doesn't cover this scenario. It states anything paid under the contract must be given back by the original method of payment but doesn't cover scenarios where part is voucher & part is cash.

However, it is also open to you to claim damages. So technically, no....they're not behaving correctly.

unforeseen

Do tell. On what grounds op can claim damages. And why aren't they behaving correctly

unholyangel

unforeseen wrote: »

Do tell. On what grounds op can claim damages. And why aren't they behaving correctly

Because the Consumer Rights Act specifically states that it may be open for the consumer to claim damages because of the limits of the entitlement to a refund or instead of it, in addition to stating that nothing in the act prohibits the consumer from seeking other remedies that may be open to them - such as damages, specific performance etc.

unforeseen

All I can say is good luck if they want to follow that route.

unholyangel

unforeseen wrote: »

All I can say is good luck if they want to follow that route.

Why would they need luck? As I said in my first post, if they have the right to reject some of the goods then they have the right to reject all of the goods. Even if that wasn't the case then what in my previous response to you would stand - it may be open to them to claim damages due to the limits of the entitlement of a refund or instead of a refund.

Its also the goal even at common law that a party should not be in a worse off position due to a breach by the other party.

POPPYOSCAR

unforeseen wrote: »

All I can say is good luck if they want to follow that route.

I was just about to post the same thing.