Samsung Cashback at Carphone Warehouse (Currys)

arthurfowler

MattMattMattUK said:

erehwon said:

If not, I need to know who to go after. 

There is not anyone to "go after", as Born Again pointed out cashback promotions are paid entirely at the discretion of the promoter. 

This is not true. The offer was promoted directly on the CPW page of the item.

Misleading actions

5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).

(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—

(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and

(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1277/regulation/5/made

This seems nailed on in this example. 

CPW seem to have an ADR scheme you can complain to if their decision seemed final.

https://selfhelp.carphonewarehouse.com/SelfHelp/request.do?view()=c{1f0bb8a0-926c-11e0-4223-f20203001e3d}


OP: Did you buy both in the same transaction or at different times?

Jumblebumble

erehwon said:

SM-G780G.  I find it strange that Samsung sells both models here, and only offers the cashback on one of them.

Dell do the same
Cashback on  some servers bought via distribution but not on same server if purchased from Dell website

erehwon

arthurfowler said:

OP: Did you buy both in the same transaction or at different times?

I bought them at the same time.  It was a very straightforward transaction and (what I thought) a very straightforward offer.

And thank you for that link to their ADR scheme.  I was wondering if they had something like that.

I do have some (reasonably) good news now.  On my last call with them I asked to speak to a supervisor and was promised that one would call within 24 hours, though "it wouldn't make any difference".  Of course, I didn't get a call back so I rang them back yesterday and managed to speak to a supervisor.  They were helpful and once I sent them the screenshots of their website, they said they would refund the £250.  Not received it yet but I'll keep checking my bank account.

They said it was very helpful to get the screenshots as they don't know about all the promotions, and this can support anyone else that has the same problem.  This makes me very nervous as if I hadn't taken the screenshots they would have just ignored my complaint.  Surely they must be able to track what deals have been offered to their customers?

arthurfowler

erehwon said:

arthurfowler said:

OP: Did you buy both in the same transaction or at different times?

I bought them at the same time.  It was a very straightforward transaction and (what I thought) a very straightforward offer.

And thank you for that link to their ADR scheme.  I was wondering if they had something like that.

I do have some (reasonably) good news now.  On my last call with them I asked to speak to a supervisor and was promised that one would call within 24 hours, though "it wouldn't make any difference".  Of course, I didn't get a call back so I rang them back yesterday and managed to speak to a supervisor.  They were helpful and once I sent them the screenshots of their website, they said they would refund the £250.  Not received it yet but I'll keep checking my bank account.

They said it was very helpful to get the screenshots as they don't know about all the promotions, and this can support anyone else that has the same problem.  This makes me very nervous as if I hadn't taken the screenshots they would have just ignored my complaint.  Surely they must be able to track what deals have been offered to their customers?

Great news! I very much doubt they will use those screenshots to help anyone else though lol!

y3sitsm3

arthurfowler said:

MattMattMattUK said:

erehwon said:

If not, I need to know who to go after. 

There is not anyone to "go after", as Born Again pointed out cashback promotions are paid entirely at the discretion of the promoter. 

This is not true. The offer was promoted directly on the CPW page of the item.

Misleading actions

5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).

(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—

(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and

(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1277/regulation/5/made

This seems nailed on in this example. 

CPW seem to have an ADR scheme you can complain to if their decision seemed final.

https://selfhelp.carphonewarehouse.com/SelfHelp/request.do?view()=c{1f0bb8a0-926c-11e0-4223-f20203001e3d}


OP: Did you buy both in the same transaction or at different times?

Why do you think the OP would not have made the transaction if the cashback wasn't on offer?  Or the "average consumer"?

Do you think average people buy £600 phones just because there's a £100 off offer?  I suspect most do not.

erehwon

arthurfowler said:

Great news! I very much doubt they will use those screenshots to help anyone else though lol!

I think you're right.  But hopefully someone with this problem will find this thread and get their cashback.

erehwon

y3sitsm3 said:

Do you think average people buy £600 phones just because there's a £100 off offer?  I suspect most do not.

The phones were on offer for £400, which was a good price.  (They are currently £500)  With the cashback, they come down to £300, which is great.  With the extra cashback this reduces to £275, which is amazing for the 'lite' version of the Galaxy S20.  When I bought the phone, I bought it for the calculated price of £275. The list price was 45% more than this.

CPW were honestly expecting people to pay this price, but made a mistake,  If they admitted this straight away then I would think they were a good company and would be happy to buy from them again.  Now I'd be nervous the same thing would happen again.

Lesson learned - take screenshots of the offer when you buy something.

arthurfowler

y3sitsm3 said:

arthurfowler said:

MattMattMattUK said:

erehwon said:

If not, I need to know who to go after. 

There is not anyone to "go after", as Born Again pointed out cashback promotions are paid entirely at the discretion of the promoter. 

This is not true. The offer was promoted directly on the CPW page of the item.

Misleading actions

5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).

(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—

(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and

(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1277/regulation/5/made

This seems nailed on in this example. 

CPW seem to have an ADR scheme you can complain to if their decision seemed final.

https://selfhelp.carphonewarehouse.com/SelfHelp/request.do?view()=c{1f0bb8a0-926c-11e0-4223-f20203001e3d}


OP: Did you buy both in the same transaction or at different times?

Why do you think the OP would not have made the transaction if the cashback wasn't on offer?  Or the "average consumer"?

Do you think average people buy £600 phones just because there's a £100 off offer?  I suspect most do not.

I don't know if you are serious, but the answer is a resounding yes. If I saw a £600 phone with £100 cashback at retailer X and £0 cashback at retailer Y, then I suspect 99% of consumers would base a transactional decision on the cashback offer. 

y3sitsm3

arthurfowler said:

y3sitsm3 said:

arthurfowler said:

MattMattMattUK said:

erehwon said:

If not, I need to know who to go after. 

There is not anyone to "go after", as Born Again pointed out cashback promotions are paid entirely at the discretion of the promoter. 

This is not true. The offer was promoted directly on the CPW page of the item.

Misleading actions

5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).

(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—

(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and

(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1277/regulation/5/made

This seems nailed on in this example. 

CPW seem to have an ADR scheme you can complain to if their decision seemed final.

https://selfhelp.carphonewarehouse.com/SelfHelp/request.do?view()=c{1f0bb8a0-926c-11e0-4223-f20203001e3d}


OP: Did you buy both in the same transaction or at different times?

Why do you think the OP would not have made the transaction if the cashback wasn't on offer?  Or the "average consumer"?

Do you think average people buy £600 phones just because there's a £100 off offer?  I suspect most do not.

I don't know if you are serious, but the answer is a resounding yes. If I saw a £600 phone with £100 cashback at retailer X and £0 cashback at retailer Y, then I suspect 99% of consumers would base a transactional decision on the cashback offer. 

So you'd have just not bought the phones if they weren't on offer?

You're assuming that the transactional decision means buying it from a certain retailer.  I don't see it that way because the reality is that the OP would have bought the phones regardless of where they came from, but thought they'd save £200 if they bought it from CPW.  The discount didn't influence their decision to buy, it influenced their decisions of whom they wanted to buy from, but they were going to buy the phones anyway, so the law doesn't apply here.

It didn't encourage them to purchase a product they wouldn't have purchased if it wasn't for the discount.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

y3sitsm3 said:

arthurfowler said:

y3sitsm3 said:

arthurfowler said:

MattMattMattUK said:

erehwon said:

If not, I need to know who to go after. 

There is not anyone to "go after", as Born Again pointed out cashback promotions are paid entirely at the discretion of the promoter. 

This is not true. The offer was promoted directly on the CPW page of the item.

Misleading actions

5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).

(2) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph—

(a)if it contains false information and is therefore untruthful in relation to any of the matters in paragraph (4) or if it or its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer in relation to any of the matters in that paragraph, even if the information is factually correct; and

(b)it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1277/regulation/5/made

This seems nailed on in this example. 

CPW seem to have an ADR scheme you can complain to if their decision seemed final.

https://selfhelp.carphonewarehouse.com/SelfHelp/request.do?view()=c{1f0bb8a0-926c-11e0-4223-f20203001e3d}


OP: Did you buy both in the same transaction or at different times?

Why do you think the OP would not have made the transaction if the cashback wasn't on offer?  Or the "average consumer"?

Do you think average people buy £600 phones just because there's a £100 off offer?  I suspect most do not.

I don't know if you are serious, but the answer is a resounding yes. If I saw a £600 phone with £100 cashback at retailer X and £0 cashback at retailer Y, then I suspect 99% of consumers would base a transactional decision on the cashback offer. 

So you'd have just not bought the phones if they weren't on offer?

You're assuming that the transactional decision means buying it from a certain retailer.  I don't see it that way because the reality is that the OP would have bought the phones regardless of where they came from, but thought they'd save £200 if they bought it from CPW.  The discount didn't influence their decision to buy, it influenced their decisions of whom they wanted to buy from, but they were going to buy the phones anyway, so the law doesn't apply here.

It didn't encourage them to purchase a product they wouldn't have purchased if it wasn't for the discount.

The cashback is marketing, if it isn't influencing purchasing decisions then it isn't performing it's function. 

Not everybody will walk into a store and know what they wish to buy, £100 is a sizable incentive to pick one product over another. Even with a product such as a phone which retains high brand loyalty it may persuade the purchaser to pick a certain model or buy new over refurbished. 

The cashback offer may be advertised elsewhere which may plant the seed it's time to buy a new phone or send them to a store to begin with. Even if they didn't take the offer an advert on TV stating the Carphone Warehouse offers this deal may have sent them to that store rather than another. 

The test isn't what the OP did or would have done, it's the average consumer, with so many variables I think it would be extremely difficult for a trader to defend £100 cashback that didn't apply as not being misleading.

Even if it was a mistake the regs would likely apply but in such an instance appear to limit the consumer's right to redress specifically with regards to damages.