Return advice

liamsteven

Hi
I purchased some face cream from an online retailer which is designed for specific face conditions. It is not a medicine.

The cream was pretty expensive and so when it arrived I did a sample, which showed no side effect. When I applied it to a large surface area of my face it has left what I’d describe as sunburn.

I contacted the company who agreed to refund the cost of the item but not the delivery or my return postage costs. Including delivery and return postage it’s about £10 but this has now become a point of principle for me because in my opinion it has not done what it described and is therefore ‘faulty’.

The distance selling regulations say that buyers do not have to cover return postage costs on faulty return items, and the Consumer Rights say this:

“What is a faulty product?
Under the Consumer Rights Act, all products - including electrical goods - must be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described”

AND

“The goods should be fit for the purpose they are supplied for, as well as any specific purpose you made known to the retailer before you agreed to buy the goods.
As described The goods supplied must match any description given to you, or any models or samples shown to you at the time of purchase”.

The company are refusing to refund postage/delivery costs and say their product is not faulty just because I had a reaction to it.

They claim I can speak to their legal team if I want.

Who’s in the right here? I am happy to be proven wrong but their attitude has annoyed me. I don’t need the money but I am curious as to whether they are going against consumer rights or I just need to cut my losses.

boo_star

You need to provide a link to this product. Your description of it is way too vague for anyone to give you reasonable advice.

Fosterdog

It sounds more like you've had some sort of allergic reaction than there actually being a fault with the cream, can you get any friend or family to try it out as an experiment? If they all react then there is obviously something wrong with the cream but if only some or none of them react then there is nothing wrong with it.

I get reactions to a lot of things like this so have to be careful what I buy and I often buy something new to try that I react to so I just give it away and know not to buy that particular product again.

If it is the case that the reaction is because of your skin rather than because of the cream then they are in the right, as it is likely classed as a hygiene risk product they don't have to refund you at all and are being quite generous offering to refund the product but not delivery.

Takmon

liamsteven wrote: »

Hi
I purchased some face cream from an online retailer which is designed for specific face conditions. It is not a medicine.

The cream was pretty expensive and so when it arrived I did a sample, which showed no side effect. When I applied it to a large surface area of my face it has left what I’d describe as sunburn.

I contacted the company who agreed to refund the cost of the item but not the delivery or my return postage costs. Including delivery and return postage it’s about £10 but this has now become a point of principle for me because in my opinion it has not done what it described and is therefore ‘faulty’.

The distance selling regulations say that buyers do not have to cover return postage costs on faulty return items, and the Consumer Rights say this:

“What is a faulty product?
Under the Consumer Rights Act, all products - including electrical goods - must be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described”

AND

“The goods should be fit for the purpose they are supplied for, as well as any specific purpose you made known to the retailer before you agreed to buy the goods.
As described The goods supplied must match any description given to you, or any models or samples shown to you at the time of purchase”.

The company are refusing to refund postage/delivery costs and say their product is not faulty just because I had a reaction to it.

They claim I can speak to their legal team if I want.

Who’s in the right here? I am happy to be proven wrong but their attitude has annoyed me. I don’t need the money but I am curious as to whether they are going against consumer rights or I just need to cut my losses.

So the company have fully refunded you for a partially used product?. You should be praising the company for good customer service and not complaining!

Using a similar example; some people have a reaction to jewelry with Nickel in it. So if we apply your logic then all jewelry with Nickel in it is faulty, does that sound right to you?

mattyprice4004

So if I’m allergic to nuts and I eat them, I can get a refund?

Excellent news!

I think you know the answer.

liamsteven

mattyprice4004 wrote: »

So if I’m allergic to nuts and I eat them, I can get a refund?

Excellent news!

I think you know the answer.

If one is stupid enough to consume nuts knowing full well one has an allergy to them... jury is still out on whether you’ll get that refund...

If you get a moment away from the MSE forums I must hear more of your wise teachings...

mattyprice4004

Well in either example, it’s not the company’s fault that the customer has an allergy to their product - the outcome is the same regardless of if you knew you’re allergic or not.

Take the wise teachings you’ve had from myself and other posters - be happy with the offer they’ve given you. You’re not even entitled to that.

This isn’t a forum where people tell you what you want to hear.

Fosterdog

liamsteven wrote: »

If one is stupid enough to consume nuts knowing full well one has an allergy to them... jury is still out on whether you’ll get that refund...

If you get a moment away from the MSE forums I must hear more of your wise teachings...

And what if one didn't know they were allergic to nuts before eating them? Or closer to your case they ate one to try it and were fine so decided to consume several more and only then they had a reaction?

soolin

Fosterdog wrote: »

And what if one didn't know they were allergic to nuts before eating them? Or closer to your case they ate one to try it and were fine so decided to consume several more and only then they had a reaction?

A retailer still would not be responsible for any harm as long as all usual warnings were included on the packaging.

There is nothing that makes a retailer responsible, assuming their packaging is clear on any allergens and nothing has been added to product that has not been declared.

liamsteven

After taking them up on their offer, they agreed it was deemed ‘faulty’ and therefore Consumer Rights Act and Distant Selling Regulations came into play. So I got what I wanted in the end. Happy days.

They’d have been nuts not to agree with me...

Fosterdog

Of course they did, and they also sent you a huge hamper as an apology and and extra £100 compensation