EXTENDED: You've got another week to add your travel & holiday deals questions for expert MSE Oli as part of the latest Ask An Expert event.
Adidas World Cup Shirts Don't fit Advertised Size
in Consumer rights
69 replies 2.2K views
Latest MSE News and Guides
Energy Price Cap change
Martin Lewis on what it means for youMSE News
Best £1 you've ever spent?
Share your most impressive bargainsMSE Forum
New MSE Forum avatars available
Try 'em out nowMSE Forum
Of course, if anyone were actually stupid enough to opt for "de Bruyne" on the back of a NL shirt that would be a non-standard option and couldn't be cancelled...
While an item with a players name on the back in theory can be resold it's not as easy to sell as one without.
You can argue the opposite if you want but the law isn't tested and since it says clearly when you buy something with a name on it that it is not returnable its going to be a big ask to get someone to accept a return on the item.
The issue here is maybe disguised by the fact it's a Messi shirt - could they be expected to resell a kids Messi shirt? Probably - but if you apply that principle generally could they be expected to resell a size XXL shirt with Palacios on the back? They might otherwise sell 0 of those shirts in a year so hard to argue that's not been made to someone's personal specifications.
There's also a huge element of risk to manufacturer's from the specific nature of football - should everyone who bought a Man Utd shirt with Ronaldo on the back in November now be able to return it for a refund (provided they are in the window to do so)?
Loads of kids will get Xmas presents on the 25th of December with footballers names on them who could well change clubs on Jan 1st. Should all those shirts be returnable if the customer doesn't want them anymore?
Of course you could take the approach of some posters and try to suggest that none of this matters but good luck with that argument in court.
Manufacturers have nothing to do with consumer rights in this regard.
When I said they have nothing to do with consumer rights you said but no they do with the right to change your mind and return, given the right to cancel is consumer rights this highlights your knowledge the subject and IMO you fall into the trap which is often seen here of giving an opinion which you think is "right" from a moral viewpoint rather than having understanding or consideration of the legislation.
And yes if a company sells a Man Utd shirt with Ronaldo on the back in November (that hasn't been personalised, lets say even without the dropdown menu issue i.e there was no choice that's just how it's sold) then it can be returned, exactly the same as if you buy Christmas decorations online a week before Christmas you can return them after Christmas. You could even use them on your tree and be entitled to cancel (although not necessarily obtain a full refund if the trader could distinguish that you diminished the value by doing so).
The only thing that matters is whether the goods were:
the supply of goods that are made to the consumer’s specifications or are clearly personalised;
So the manufacturers agreement with the trader is irrelevant. But the customer ordering a size XL with an obscure player may be making a unique item that the trader is unable to resell, nothing to do with the manufacturer.
The guidance say the clause should be interrupted narrowly which means exactly as written rather than debated perhaps on spirit of the law or similar.
I do understand a dropdown menu set up may result in you purchasing something no one else does that would then be unique but this hypothetical scenario wouldn't be a narrow interruption. It's also impossible to show either way (without either trust of the trader's word or a full audit of their sales and either way with consideration for what might be ordered it the future) so the balance of probability angle IMHO is dropdown menus aren't creating unique products.