Refund denied for a returned tent as deemed 'used' by removing it from box

shiraz99

VohnnyJegas said:

shiraz99 said:

macman said:

But it's clearly opened and used as defined by the t and c's. What consumer legislation are you relying on?
Look at this the other way around. Would you be happy if they had sold you a tent, described as new, and at full price, that had the packaging opened and had been assembled? They also have no way of knowing if it's been used: for all they know you used it for a week's holiday and then returned it. So they cannot honestly resell it as new.
I doubt that S75 or chargeback would be successful here, but you have nothing to lose by trying.

And??

It's an online purchase and under the terms of the CCRs the OP is entitled to open the packaging to do "what is necessary to establish the nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods,", also who said anything about being "used", it was put up once that's all.

That doesn't include pitching it up.

Who says? If pitching the tent is the only way to establish the "nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods" , which for a tent I'd say that's exactly what it does, then it's allowed. You go into most camping shops and there'll be tents already set up and displayed, this is no different.

Pollycat

shiraz99 said:

VohnnyJegas said:

shiraz99 said:

macman said:

But it's clearly opened and used as defined by the t and c's. What consumer legislation are you relying on?
Look at this the other way around. Would you be happy if they had sold you a tent, described as new, and at full price, that had the packaging opened and had been assembled? They also have no way of knowing if it's been used: for all they know you used it for a week's holiday and then returned it. So they cannot honestly resell it as new.
I doubt that S75 or chargeback would be successful here, but you have nothing to lose by trying.

And??

It's an online purchase and under the terms of the CCRs the OP is entitled to open the packaging to do "what is necessary to establish the nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods,", also who said anything about being "used", it was put up once that's all.

That doesn't include pitching it up.

Who says? If pitching the tent is the only way to establish the "nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods" , which for a tent I'd say that's exactly what it does, then it's allowed. You go into most camping shops and there'll be tents already set up and displayed, this is no different.

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

Ergates

Pollycat said:

shiraz99 said:

VohnnyJegas said:

shiraz99 said:

macman said:

But it's clearly opened and used as defined by the t and c's. What consumer legislation are you relying on?
Look at this the other way around. Would you be happy if they had sold you a tent, described as new, and at full price, that had the packaging opened and had been assembled? They also have no way of knowing if it's been used: for all they know you used it for a week's holiday and then returned it. So they cannot honestly resell it as new.
I doubt that S75 or chargeback would be successful here, but you have nothing to lose by trying.

And??

It's an online purchase and under the terms of the CCRs the OP is entitled to open the packaging to do "what is necessary to establish the nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods,", also who said anything about being "used", it was put up once that's all.

That doesn't include pitching it up.

Who says? If pitching the tent is the only way to establish the "nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods" , which for a tent I'd say that's exactly what it does, then it's allowed. You go into most camping shops and there'll be tents already set up and displayed, this is no different.

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

It's the exact same principle as clothes.   If you buy a shirt from an online retailer,  it is entirely reasonable and allowed to take it out of the packaging and try it on.  If it doesn't fit and you return it, then the retailer will probably sell it as new.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

As highlighted by P_R, if the company didn't provide the required information then the handling is a moot point as the company can't reduce the refund for diminished value.

Guidance below could probably cause more debate than getting to a definitive answer but personally opening and pitching a tent is similar to trying on a T-shirt, assuming it's done indoors, as you could argue you'd expect to see display tents in camping stores and pitching one at home is the same as interacting with a display model. 

https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/distance-sales/consumer-contracts-distance-sales#Effectsofwithdrawalorcancellation

This [diminished value/excessive handling] is likely to be a controversial area of the Regulations for both consumers and traders and will ultimately be a matter for a court to decide. However, the following examples will attempt to illustrate this concept:

• a consumer returns a shirt that comes in a presentation box, which they had opened and removed all the pins and packaging to try it on. It is reasonable to expect a consumer to remove packaging to try on or examine an item, so you should make no deduction for this
• a consumer returns a shirt, which you can see has clearly been worn. The consumer has not acted reasonably and you can make a deduction for diminishing the value
• a consumer returns flat pack furniture, which they have clearly attempted to assemble by opening packs of screws and trying to put parts together. The consumer has not acted reasonably and you can make a deduction for diminishing the value

You are not able to make any deduction for diminishing the value of the goods if you have not provided consumers with the information about their right to cancel (information item 'l' above).

Pollycat said:

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

The legislation doesn't really note the trader's ability to resell the goods or whether they will achieve a certain price.

You can certainly argue a tent that's been opened and pitched might have had it's value diminished but the point to focus on is whether the handling was excessive

shiraz99

Pollycat said:

shiraz99 said:

VohnnyJegas said:

shiraz99 said:

macman said:

But it's clearly opened and used as defined by the t and c's. What consumer legislation are you relying on?
Look at this the other way around. Would you be happy if they had sold you a tent, described as new, and at full price, that had the packaging opened and had been assembled? They also have no way of knowing if it's been used: for all they know you used it for a week's holiday and then returned it. So they cannot honestly resell it as new.
I doubt that S75 or chargeback would be successful here, but you have nothing to lose by trying.

And??

It's an online purchase and under the terms of the CCRs the OP is entitled to open the packaging to do "what is necessary to establish the nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods,", also who said anything about being "used", it was put up once that's all.

That doesn't include pitching it up.

Who says? If pitching the tent is the only way to establish the "nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods" , which for a tent I'd say that's exactly what it does, then it's allowed. You go into most camping shops and there'll be tents already set up and displayed, this is no different.

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

That has absolutely no relevance.

Pollycat

shiraz99 said:

Pollycat said:

shiraz99 said:

VohnnyJegas said:

shiraz99 said:

macman said:

But it's clearly opened and used as defined by the t and c's. What consumer legislation are you relying on?
Look at this the other way around. Would you be happy if they had sold you a tent, described as new, and at full price, that had the packaging opened and had been assembled? They also have no way of knowing if it's been used: for all they know you used it for a week's holiday and then returned it. So they cannot honestly resell it as new.
I doubt that S75 or chargeback would be successful here, but you have nothing to lose by trying.

And??

It's an online purchase and under the terms of the CCRs the OP is entitled to open the packaging to do "what is necessary to establish the nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods,", also who said anything about being "used", it was put up once that's all.

That doesn't include pitching it up.

Who says? If pitching the tent is the only way to establish the "nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods" , which for a tent I'd say that's exactly what it does, then it's allowed. You go into most camping shops and there'll be tents already set up and displayed, this is no different.

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

That has absolutely no relevance.

I thought it did.
Hence why I asked the question.

macman

Ergates said:

Pollycat said:

shiraz99 said:

VohnnyJegas said:

shiraz99 said:

macman said:

But it's clearly opened and used as defined by the t and c's. What consumer legislation are you relying on?
Look at this the other way around. Would you be happy if they had sold you a tent, described as new, and at full price, that had the packaging opened and had been assembled? They also have no way of knowing if it's been used: for all they know you used it for a week's holiday and then returned it. So they cannot honestly resell it as new.
I doubt that S75 or chargeback would be successful here, but you have nothing to lose by trying.

And??

It's an online purchase and under the terms of the CCRs the OP is entitled to open the packaging to do "what is necessary to establish the nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods,", also who said anything about being "used", it was put up once that's all.

That doesn't include pitching it up.

Who says? If pitching the tent is the only way to establish the "nature, characteristics and functioning of the goods" , which for a tent I'd say that's exactly what it does, then it's allowed. You go into most camping shops and there'll be tents already set up and displayed, this is no different.

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

It's the exact same principle as clothes.   If you buy a shirt from an online retailer,  it is entirely reasonable and allowed to take it out of the packaging and try it on.  If it doesn't fit and you return it, then the retailer will probably sell it as new.

I don't think it is the same principle. Clothing can only be assessed for fit by trying it on, albeit briefly.
The OP bought a tent that was entirely the wrong size. You don't need to 'try a tent on', or even assemble it, to gauge it's size. The dimensions were presumably stated on the retailer's site, and probably on the packaging upon delivery, but he failed to check that they matched his requirements, which were apparently the same as the older tent he was replacing. He ordered the wrong model, but unpacked it and assembled it. It's both opened and used, however briefly for.

DanDare999

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

As highlighted by P_F, if the company didn't provide the required information then the handling is a moot point as the company can't reduce the refund for diminished value.

Guidance below could probably cause more debate than getting to a definitive answer but personally opening and pitching a tent is similar to trying on a T-shirt, assuming it's done indoors, as you could argue you'd expect to see display tents in camping stores and pitching one at home is the same as interacting with a display model. 

https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/distance-sales/consumer-contracts-distance-sales#Effectsofwithdrawalorcancellation

This [diminished value/excessive handling] is likely to be a controversial area of the Regulations for both consumers and traders and will ultimately be a matter for a court to decide. However, the following examples will attempt to illustrate this concept:

• a consumer returns a shirt that comes in a presentation box, which they had opened and removed all the pins and packaging to try it on. It is reasonable to expect a consumer to remove packaging to try on or examine an item, so you should make no deduction for this
• a consumer returns a shirt, which you can see has clearly been worn. The consumer has not acted reasonably and you can make a deduction for diminishing the value
• a consumer returns flat pack furniture, which they have clearly attempted to assemble by opening packs of screws and trying to put parts together. The consumer has not acted reasonably and you can make a deduction for diminishing the value

You are not able to make any deduction for diminishing the value of the goods if you have not provided consumers with the information about their right to cancel (information item 'l' above).

Pollycat said:

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

The legislation doesn't really note the trader's ability to resell the goods or whether they will achieve a certain price.

You can certainly argue a tent that's been opened and pitched might have had it's value diminished but the point to focus on is whether the handling was excessive

So if they don't provide cancellation details, can you buy the tent, try it out for a week on holiday and then return it?

biscan25

Just asking on the off chance, was the CC used Amex? If so, the solution is much more straightforward.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

DanDare999 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

As highlighted by P_F, if the company didn't provide the required information then the handling is a moot point as the company can't reduce the refund for diminished value.

Guidance below could probably cause more debate than getting to a definitive answer but personally opening and pitching a tent is similar to trying on a T-shirt, assuming it's done indoors, as you could argue you'd expect to see display tents in camping stores and pitching one at home is the same as interacting with a display model. 

https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/distance-sales/consumer-contracts-distance-sales#Effectsofwithdrawalorcancellation

This [diminished value/excessive handling] is likely to be a controversial area of the Regulations for both consumers and traders and will ultimately be a matter for a court to decide. However, the following examples will attempt to illustrate this concept:

• a consumer returns a shirt that comes in a presentation box, which they had opened and removed all the pins and packaging to try it on. It is reasonable to expect a consumer to remove packaging to try on or examine an item, so you should make no deduction for this
• a consumer returns a shirt, which you can see has clearly been worn. The consumer has not acted reasonably and you can make a deduction for diminishing the value
• a consumer returns flat pack furniture, which they have clearly attempted to assemble by opening packs of screws and trying to put parts together. The consumer has not acted reasonably and you can make a deduction for diminishing the value

You are not able to make any deduction for diminishing the value of the goods if you have not provided consumers with the information about their right to cancel (information item 'l' above).

Pollycat said:

But will those tents be sold at full price or marked down as 'display models'?

The legislation doesn't really note the trader's ability to resell the goods or whether they will achieve a certain price.

You can certainly argue a tent that's been opened and pitched might have had it's value diminished but the point to focus on is whether the handling was excessive

So if they don't provide cancellation details, can you buy the tent, try it out for a week on holiday and then return it?

You can buy a tent (at a distance or off-premises), try it out for a week on holiday and then return it anyway. The right to cancel is not linked to the condition of the goods (except for things such as software, DVDs, etc if unsealed after delivery or the hygiene thing).

However where the trader provides the correct information on the right to cancel they can reduce the refund under diminished value rules.

If they fail to give the correct information they must issue a full refund as the regs specifically state no reduction permitted for diminished value without the correct info and there is no other allowance for the trader to make deductions. Equally the cancellation period is extended so you could buy the tent, live in it for a year and 14 days and then cancel the contract for a full refund, this is why I find it surprising so many traders fail to get the info correct as it's pretty basic stuff and they would be in a much better position by following the requirements.