Sent tracked return, delivered and they still won’t refund

born_again

Talk to you bank about a chargeback. Simply say you have proof of return, but no refund.

cx6

If you had used their returns label, on arrival it would have been scanned and they would know what return it was and who sent it by the barcode.

If you didn't use that label, there would have been nothing to scan so they would not know you had returned the item.

Manxman_in_exile

born_again said:

Talk to you bank about a chargeback. Simply say you have proof of return, but no refund.

But couldn't the trader challenge that if - for example - the OP was outside the 14 day "change of mind" return window and was relying on eg Converse's own returns policy?  If their policy says you must return using the label, she hasn't done so.  If I were Converse I'd be unhappy about being hit with a chargeback if the consumer had used our return policy but in doing so had ignored our return instructions.

But as I said earlier, the OP hasn't explained why the shoes needed returning and how long after purchase they were returned, so we don't know the circumstances.

Herbie73

Hi - well the shoes needed returning because my daughter changed her mind. They were sent back within a couple of days or receipt and well within the 14 days. Converse have said that the parcel went to a parcel hub depot and as such they cannot help at all. I have asked for contact details of this depot in the hope someone there may be able to locate the parcel for me. Converse simply stick to the fact that as I didn’t use their label they will not refund or assist. I doubt I will be able to locate the parcel if I’m honest, all I have is their returns address and they don’t help. It was paid by debit card so the bank are very unlikely to assist. I understand now that the label should have been used but having returned so many items over the years I always read the instructions that are on the labels sent rather than digging deeper into terms and conditions; I know now that is a mistake. I feel quite upset at this if I’m honest; I think it’s the total lack of attempts to help and same standard response that I’m getting that’s most upsetting for a large company like this. Just ‘no refund’ .. I say this only as I’ve worked in customer service management for years and would never handle things this way, but there you go. I don’t suppose there’s anything I can do now is there? 

jon81uk

Under the consumer contracts regulations you have 14 days to tell a retailer you wish to cancel and then a further 14 days to return them to the address specified. As you haven't informed them you wish to cancel and haven't followed their returns policy of using their label either then you are sort of inbetween.
If you had informed you wish to cancel and then have something to prove you returned the goods you are definitly due a return, as per the consumer contracts regulations and Converse's terms. Becuase you didn't inform first it seems less clear.
As you have proof you returned then letter before action and small claims court would be next, but I'm not sure if the fact you didn't cancel would be an issue.

Converse terms (Privacy and Terms of Use - Converse GB) do state
"Converse will process any refund due to you within the deadlines below:

if you have received the Product and Converse has not offered to collect it from you: 14 days after the day on which Converse receives the Product back from you or, if earlier, the day on which you provide us with evidence that you have sent the Product back to us;"

So they should refund upon evidence you sent the product back to them but its not clear if the fact you did not exercise your right to cancel has made a difference.

Someone else with more knowledge on the CCR might be able to help better.

born_again

Manxman_in_exile said:

born_again said:

Talk to you bank about a chargeback. Simply say you have proof of return, but no refund.

But couldn't the trader challenge that if - for example - the OP was outside the 14 day "change of mind" return window and was relying on eg Converse's own returns policy?  If their policy says you must return using the label, she hasn't done so.  If I were Converse I'd be unhappy about being hit with a chargeback if the consumer had used our return policy but in doing so had ignored our return instructions.

But as I said earlier, the OP hasn't explained why the shoes needed returning and how long after purchase they were returned, so we don't know the circumstances.

They could, but might just not realise. 
Remember card regulations do not mirror consumer regulations,

As far as it would go OP has proof of return to required address. Converse could try arguing on the points you raised. But at the end of the day. I think just like the non receipt chargeback. OP has the trump card with proof of delivery.
Certainly if they did come back, I would be telling bank to go back on the point that proof of delivery is all that is required.

Then just hope Converse do not then take the route they could do & go to court for the funds. But again would a judge rule in their favour? Or say well OP has proof of delivery to the address given. Go find the goods.?

sheramber

A parcel hub is probably a warehouse where parcels for several companies are held for onward delivery to  the company concerned.  Converse is based in Netherlands and their warehouse is in Germany.

As such the returns label will be coded in some way for the onward address.

Your own label probably did not have that code on it so the parcel hub do not know where to send it.

Manxman_in_exile

sheramber said:

A parcel hub is probably a warehouse where parcels for several companies are held for onward delivery to  the company concerned.  Converse is based in Netherlands and their warehouse is in Germany.

As such the returns label will be coded in some way for the onward address.

Your own label probably did not have that code on it so the parcel hub do not know where to send it.

In which case Converse can arguably refuse to refund on the grounds that the consumer did not use the return address that the trader had supplied - as the legislation requires the consumer to do.

(That's assuming of course that any return code on the address supplied by Converse is deemed to be part of the address and the OP didn't transcribe the code onto their return package.)

jon81uk

Manxman_in_exile said:

sheramber said:

A parcel hub is probably a warehouse where parcels for several companies are held for onward delivery to  the company concerned.  Converse is based in Netherlands and their warehouse is in Germany.

As such the returns label will be coded in some way for the onward address.

Your own label probably did not have that code on it so the parcel hub do not know where to send it.

In which case Converse can arguably refuse to refund on the grounds that the consumer did not use the return address that the trader had supplied - as the legislation requires the consumer to do.

(That's assuming of course that any return code on the address supplied by Converse is deemed to be part of the address and the OP didn't transcribe the code onto their return package.)

Surely the address supplied by Converse does count in terms of the legislation, as it is "any address specified by the trader". Could it be said that an address on a label is an address specified by the trader for sending the goods back?
However I think this is still reliant on notifying them first that you wish to cancel.

 The address to which goods must be sent under paragraph (2)(a) is—

(a)any address specified by the trader for sending the goods back;

(b)if no address is specified for that purpose, any address specified by the trader for the consumer to contact the trader;

(c)if no address is specified for either of those purposes, any place of business of the trader.

Herbie73

Gosh that’s a lot of info thanks; so basically as we didn’t email to say we were returning them then we are not covered but possibly the bank may do a chargeback? If I’m reading that correctly?