Aldi no receipt

porkisnotmeat

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

Yes, but a bank statement with Aldi -£56.76 won't prove that they bought a table lamp for £9.99.

I'm not entirely sure how a court would view it, perhaps they'd take the view that someone pursuing it all the way to court is probably telling the truth, but I don't think it's at all clear cut that a bank statement is sufficient proof when you bought multiple products.

lammy82

Yes, but a bank statement with Aldi -£56.76 won't prove that they bought a table lamp for £9.99.

Yes it could, if they look up transactions that totaled 56.76 on that day in that store in their database and bring up the full details. That's what people are saying.

user1977

porkisnotmeat said:

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

Yes, but a bank statement with Aldi -£56.76 won't prove that they bought a table lamp for £9.99.

I'm not entirely sure how a court would view it, perhaps they'd take the view that someone pursuing it all the way to court is probably telling the truth, but I don't think it's at all clear cut that a bank statement is sufficient proof when you bought multiple products.

There's nothing in the Consumer Rights Act stating that any particular form or standard of evidence needs to be produced - ultimately it's down to the normal rules of evidence, and decided on the balance of probabilities, so the parties can argue it any way they want. Is the table lamp sold anywhere other than Aldi, for example? Would a court think it more likely than not that the claimant in the witness box is in fact a shoplifter? Even a vague bank transaction would corroborate their claim to have shopped in Aldi on the date they claimed to.

Obviously having a receipt makes it easier in practice when you stomp into the shop, but it's wrong to say that the retailer has a "right" to demand a till receipt if you're exercising your statutory rights (different though for any additional return options they might offer).

DB1904

user1977 said:

porkisnotmeat said:

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

Yes, but a bank statement with Aldi -£56.76 won't prove that they bought a table lamp for £9.99.

I'm not entirely sure how a court would view it, perhaps they'd take the view that someone pursuing it all the way to court is probably telling the truth, but I don't think it's at all clear cut that a bank statement is sufficient proof when you bought multiple products.

There's nothing in the Consumer Rights Act stating that any particular form or standard of evidence needs to be produced - ultimately it's down to the normal rules of evidence, and decided on the balance of probabilities, so the parties can argue it any way they want. Is the table lamp sold anywhere other than Aldi, for example? Would a court think it more likely than not that the claimant in the witness box is in fact a shoplifter? Even a vague bank transaction would corroborate their claim to have shopped in Aldi on the date they claimed to.

Obviously having a receipt makes it easier in practice when you stomp into the shop, but it's wrong to say that the retailer has a "right" to demand a till receipt if you're exercising your statutory rights (different though for any additional return options they might offer).

But they can ask for proof of purchase, why would you expect Aldi to go through their records of past purchases when they don't even allow you to bag your shopping at the till?

porkisnotmeat

user1977 said:

porkisnotmeat said:

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

Yes, but a bank statement with Aldi -£56.76 won't prove that they bought a table lamp for £9.99.

I'm not entirely sure how a court would view it, perhaps they'd take the view that someone pursuing it all the way to court is probably telling the truth, but I don't think it's at all clear cut that a bank statement is sufficient proof when you bought multiple products.

There's nothing in the Consumer Rights Act stating that any particular form or standard of evidence needs to be produced - ultimately it's down to the normal rules of evidence, and decided on the balance of probabilities, so the parties can argue it any way they want. Is the table lamp sold anywhere other than Aldi, for example? Would a court think it more likely than not that the claimant in the witness box is in fact a shoplifter? Even a vague bank transaction would corroborate their claim to have shopped in Aldi on the date they claimed to.

Obviously having a receipt makes it easier in practice when you stomp into the shop, but it's wrong to say that the retailer has a "right" to demand a till receipt if you're exercising your statutory rights (different though for any additional return options they might offer).

None of that changes how a retailer would view a bank statement showing the person purchased stuff from ALDI as  opposed to them purchasing a specific item from ALDI.

I don't believe a bank statement is valid evidence unless the product has a very unique price and it is that alone which has been charged to their card.

The burden of proof is on the accuser.

diinozzo

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

The packaging is in no way proof of purchase.

kobe84

DB1904 said:

But they can ask for proof of purchase, why would you expect Aldi to go through their records of past purchases when they don't even allow you to bag your shopping at the till?

Every Aldi store I've been to I've always been allowed to bag my shopping at the till.

user1977

porkisnotmeat said:

user1977 said:

porkisnotmeat said:

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

Yes, but a bank statement with Aldi -£56.76 won't prove that they bought a table lamp for £9.99.

I'm not entirely sure how a court would view it, perhaps they'd take the view that someone pursuing it all the way to court is probably telling the truth, but I don't think it's at all clear cut that a bank statement is sufficient proof when you bought multiple products.

There's nothing in the Consumer Rights Act stating that any particular form or standard of evidence needs to be produced - ultimately it's down to the normal rules of evidence, and decided on the balance of probabilities, so the parties can argue it any way they want. Is the table lamp sold anywhere other than Aldi, for example? Would a court think it more likely than not that the claimant in the witness box is in fact a shoplifter? Even a vague bank transaction would corroborate their claim to have shopped in Aldi on the date they claimed to.

Obviously having a receipt makes it easier in practice when you stomp into the shop, but it's wrong to say that the retailer has a "right" to demand a till receipt if you're exercising your statutory rights (different though for any additional return options they might offer).

The burden of proof is on the accuser.

Yes, but only on the balance of probabilities. Why would the court come to the view that the claimant is lying about having bought the item at Aldi, unless Aldi actually have some evidence to the contrary?

MarvinDay

diinozzo said:

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

The packaging is in no way proof of purchase.

In some in instances, the packaging can be a proof of purchase.
If the packaging shows a serial number of the item it contains (as is often the case with electronic items), this serial number may be recorded when the sale takes place and thus the packaging can be used to trace that sale.
Also, when you do a click and collect, the packaging may have details of the sale on it. 

Amazon often send goods out in their manufacturer supplied boxes and when they do this, the boxes are festooned with stickers that could be used as proof of purchase.

It's as User1977 rightly stated. The requirement for proof of purchase isn't like that in a criminal trial when it must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. All you are required to show is that on the balance of probability, you purchased the goods.

cajef

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

porkisnotmeat said:

MarvinDay said:

DB1904 said:

user1977 said:

DB1904 said:

mattyprice4004 said:

Bank statement should be enough by law - but if you paid cash you're out of luck. 
How do they know you didn't nick it with no proof of purchase? 

How is a bank statement for a weeks shopping proof of purchase for an individual item?

What in law makes you think anything further is required?

It proof you made a purchase but not proof it f purchase for the item.

It would enable the retailer to find out the time and date of the purchase/purchases and from that they would then be able to see exactly what goods were bought.
It's not just posters on here who think a bank statement will be sufficient. The UK government think the same:
https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

Proof of purchase

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

Yes, but a bank statement with Aldi -£56.76 won't prove that they bought a table lamp for £9.99.

I'm not entirely sure how a court would view it, perhaps they'd take the view that someone pursuing it all the way to court is probably telling the truth, but I don't think it's at all clear cut that a bank statement is sufficient proof when you bought multiple products.

There's nothing in the Consumer Rights Act stating that any particular form or standard of evidence needs to be produced - ultimately it's down to the normal rules of evidence, and decided on the balance of probabilities, so the parties can argue it any way they want. Is the table lamp sold anywhere other than Aldi, for example? Would a court think it more likely than not that the claimant in the witness box is in fact a shoplifter? Even a vague bank transaction would corroborate their claim to have shopped in Aldi on the date they claimed to.

Obviously having a receipt makes it easier in practice when you stomp into the shop, but it's wrong to say that the retailer has a "right" to demand a till receipt if you're exercising your statutory rights (different though for any additional return options they might offer).

But they can ask for proof of purchase, why would you expect Aldi to go through their records of past purchases when they don't even allow you to bag your shopping at the till?

We have always bagged our shopping at the till at both our local Aldi stores.