ExcaliburHealth.co.uk Testing refuse to refund for purchased but now defunct Test To Release kit.. 31 January 2022 at 4:04PM in Coronavirus travel help & info 4 replies 141 views

PS78

...due to their product being designated 'Medical', as detailed in their terms... but is this a term that can't be challenged as:

1/ it isn't bespoke

2/ it isn't a prescription item

3/ no seal has been broken, as i would assume to be the main reason why medical goods understandably shouldn't be returnable

4/ the use by date is 6months away

5/ plenty of other Test providers DO offer return for refund policies, eg:
"If the testing kit you return is complete, unused, undamaged and includes your name, address and order number then we will give you a refund minus a £10 administration fee. If the returned kit is incomplete, used or damaged in any way, you may incur an additional cancellation charge to cover the cost of the kit. This charge will be deducted from the total amount refunded to you.

This cancellation right does not apply if:

• you have already sent your sample to the laboratory for analysis;
• the 14-day cancellation period has expired; or
• your test is a Day 2 and/or 8 International arrival (see policy below).

Your legal right to cancel a Contract starts from the date you receive the acceptance confirmation (the date on which we e-mail you to confirm our acceptance of your order). Your 14-day deadline for cancelling the Contract in relation to any testing kit ordered starts from when you receive the confirmation email that the testing kit has been ordered.

To cancel a Contract, please send us an email..."


Can (or has) this 'Medical' label, given by Excalibur and a few other Test Companies to enable themselves to avoid refund requests, be defeated?

eskbanker

The fact that some other companies choose not to invoke the medical exemption is unfortunately irrelevant, so I suspect that the only way to find out would be to take Excalibur to court, as their terms clearly prohibit refunds (in most circumstances) and therefore your only line of attack would be to challenge their legitimacy via the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  Is the principle worth fighting for, in terms of the value of the purchase?

onashoestring

Can (or has) this 'Medical' label, given by Excalibur and a few other Test Companies to enable themselves to avoid refund requests ? 

A Covid test is a product for making a medical diagnosis. It has no other function. 

The U.K. Government require all Covid test suppliers to provide approved Covid tests that are approved medical devices in accordance with part 4 of the Medical Devices Regulations 2002.

The device must also have a safety marking that is placed on an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical device to show that it conforms to the requirements of the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Directive 98/79/EC.

eskbanker

onashoestring said:

Can (or has) this 'Medical' label, given by Excalibur and a few other Test Companies to enable themselves to avoid refund requests ? 

A Covid test is a product for making a medical diagnosis. It has no other function. 

The U.K. Government require all Covid test suppliers to provide approved Covid tests that are approved medical devices in accordance with part 4 of the Medical Devices Regulations 2002.

The device must also have a safety marking that is placed on an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) medical device to show that it conforms to the requirements of the In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Directive 98/79/EC.

I don't believe that OP is disputing the fact that such tests are fundamentally medical in nature!

I understand OP's question to be whether or not that status is sufficient to exempt them from the cancellation provisions within The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, and specifically section 28.  Some companies have specifically cited the likes of 28.1.c, 28.3.a and 28.3.b when claiming exemption from refund obligations in their Ts & Cs, but Excalibur just simply make a blanket assertion ("Due to the medical nature of our products, once dispatched we are unable to accept returns by law"), which may indeed be worth challenging, even if to do so might be a pyrrhic victory in terms of time and (maybe) money spent on recovering what's presumably a relatively trivial sum....

PS78

eskbanker said:

The fact that some other companies choose not to invoke the medical exemption is unfortunately irrelevant, so I suspect that the only way to find out would be to take Excalibur to court, as their terms clearly prohibit refunds (in most circumstances) and therefore your only line of attack would be to challenge their legitimacy via the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  Is the principle worth fighting for, in terms of the value of the purchase?

"Is the principle worth fighting for, in terms of the value of the purchase?"

No.. 
Thank you All, for your responses so far.
My OP was to verify what i understood so far &/ adjust if i'd got it wrong. I just get bit annoyed that they seem to be defending against refund requests by wrongly using the Medical description status/exemption of the product in question. I'd approve if it was a product engineered specifically for me, eg dosage capsules or medication strength, and it had been opened, perhaps... but not when it's a generic packet 'off the shelf', with only an address label on the mailing packaging, that could easily be sent out to any other customer after being returned. 
In light of other companies providing the same Testing products and having unused product return options, it adds fuel to my curiosity that it is possible and Excalibur are using the Medication non-return exemption as a fob off.