Sainsbury's Bagless Deliveries - REFUND

DCFC79

Whyndont you inform Watchdog of your success.

Takmon

OnlineShopper wrote: »

Thank you for all of the replies - to confirm, I agree it's a first world problem, and that the continued use and recycling of plastic bags is unpopular and bad for the environment. I've also worked on the shop floor of various supermarkets, and you make a valid point that a dirty crate is probably not the worst part of the overall supply chain.

The reason I posted, is because I like money, and I dislike being fobbed off by large corporates. My point is that if a company makes changes its service, and you do not wish to continue your contract with them, you're within your rights to demand a refund, no matter what their standard terms and conditions. That should be the case regardless of how trivial or unpopular your complaint might be. In this case I received a refund of 7 months delivery charges.

From the comments on here I don't think Sainsbury's has anything to worry about in terms of lost revenue.

If you could simply cancel any contract due to any trivial complaint it would basically make all contracts meaningless. They have not broken the contract just because they no longer supply carrier bags and put the shopping directly into crates. If you think this is the case then show me in the contract where it says they will deliver in bags?.
So you were not entitled to any refund in your case but obviously they chose to offer you good customer service by refunding this.

But you still haven't answered why you actually need your shopping to be delivered in bags?

esuhl

Honestly, this entire website is devoted to "first world issues"! Although I'm sure the Cold War ended some time ago.

Takmon wrote: »

They have not broken the contract just because they no longer supply carrier bags and put the shopping directly into crates.

Are you sure of that?

Many consumer contracts have a "get out" clause -- the supplier can change anything at any time and you can just leave with a pro-rata refund if you don't accept the new terms.

I always find it strange how eager people are to stick up for money-saving corporations instead of Money Saving Experts!:money:

Takmon

esuhl wrote: »

Are you sure of that?

Many consumer contracts have a "get out" clause -- the supplier can change anything at any time and you can just leave with a pro-rata refund if you don't accept the new terms.

Well if you are able to show me in the contract where it says they will deliver in carrier bags then I will change my response. This isn't a fundamental change to the contract because they are still delivering the food.

Companies make changes all the time to the way they do things but it doesn't mean they have made a change to their contract and they have to give them the option to leave.
For example sainsbury's change the products they offer to customers fairly often by adding new lines and removing lines that were not selling as well. Do you think everytime they make this change people like the OP would be legally entitled to a refund?.

esuhl wrote: »

I always find it strange how eager people are to stick up for money-saving corporations instead of Money Saving Experts! :money:

That's because a lot of people on here are realistic and reasonable when they consider how companies act. Sainsbury's are making a positive change by reducing unnecessary plastic waste so why would people slate them for it. If people like the OP can't understand why providing carrier bags to move shopping from the front door to the kitchen isn't a massive waste then it's good companies are stepping in and making these kinds of changes.

I've noticed a common trend in life where the people who are against anything "big corporations" do are generally worse off financially than people who can understand what they are actually doing.

shortcrust

OnlineShopper wrote: »

Sainsbury's recently changed their online delivery service to bagless deliveries only.

I was unhappy with my first bagless delivery, which arrived in (what were in my opinion filthy) crates. I immediately signed up to Ocado who still offer a bagged delivery service.

My problem was that I was 5 months into an annual Sainsburys delivery pass, which means I'm not entitled to any refund under their standard terms and conditions. I asked for a pro rata refund for the remaining 7 months, on the grounds that Sainsburys had made a fundamental change to their service, and I no longer wanted to use it.

My request was denied on the phone, and on email, but after the threat of arbitration they agreed and refunded the balance.
If anyone is in a similar position I suggest you keep pushing for a refund as not unreasonable given the change to their service.

I’m pretty sure it’s just you.

esuhl

Takmon wrote: »

Well if you are able to show me in the contract where it says they will deliver in carrier bags then I will change my response. This isn't a fundamental change to the contract because they are still delivering the food.

The ability to have goods delivered in plastic bags has always been a feature of the web shop, arguably forming part of the advertised contractual terms.

Besides, terms can be established by convention alone -- if a party has "always" done X, and not doing X would constitute a material change to the agreement to the detriment of the other party, then doing X becomes an implied contractual term.

Takmon wrote: »

That's because a lot of people on here are realistic and reasonable when they consider how companies act. Sainsbury's are making a positive change by reducing unnecessary plastic waste so why would people slate them for it.

Who is slating them for it? The question is as to whether the crates are clean enough for the contract not to have been breached.

Takmon wrote: »

If people like the OP can't understand why providing carrier bags to move shopping from the front door to the kitchen isn't a massive waste then it's good companies are stepping in and making these kinds of changes.

Where in the contract does it require customers to understand why plastic bags are wasteful?

Where does it say that having your food in direct contact with "filthy" crates is a "positive change", rather than something to the customer's detriment?

In my unqualified opinion (stop laughing! ), I think the OP had a decent chance at winning a legal case, which is why Sainsbury's backed down. And I think it's great that they reported their success for others to learn from.

---

At the end of the day, reducing plastic waste is something many customers will support, so it's not doing Sainsbury's any harm.

That's why I don't really understand why anyone would be upset if a single customer has a legitimate problem with the change. Why stick up for a big corporation that (allegedly) delivers produce in "filthy" crates?

It seems like a serious enough issue for people here to take it seriously... and it's potentially Money Saving, which is what this site is about.

MSE requests you give new posters a chance! Please be especially nice.