John Lewis Financial Services and Section 75 problem - IKEA goods.

max...

I'm currently chasing IKEA for a refund for a returned item that we considered not of merchantable quality  - they are digging their heels in and refusing to refund.  The item was left in store with IKEA and logged with them at the time but not refunded pending escalation to someone other than the ***** on the IKEA returns desk.

Following many emails and exchanges I have logged a 'Resolver' claim with IKEA and this is in the early stages.

I have in the meantime also written to the credit card company (John Lewis - the older card provider that has just ended 31 Oct) and their latest letter states "...we are unable to submit a claim, this is because we have no dispute rights for face to face transactions.".

I am unsure what they are trying to say here and whether they are simple trying to pass the buck - I have written back to continue the claim.  

Can anyone offer any advice please?

DullGreyGuy

Do you have evidence that you returned the item? If so, what?

Would really need to see your communication to JLFS and their response but on the surface it sounds like someone has gotten the wrong end of the stick... the "submit a claim" sounds like they are talking about a chargeback rather than S75 but not aware of any scheme rules about face to face transactions. 

k3lvc

max... said:

 The item was left in store with IKEA and logged with them at the time but not refunded pending escalation to someone other than the ***** on the IKEA returns desk.

Can anyone offer any advice please?

Yes - maybe stop referring to staff in derogatory terms - not sure what your word was but any insults to staff/in your complaints aren't likely to get you far (an neither to be fair is Resolver when you could easily make a valid complaint yourself)

max...

No receipt from the day as such but I have photographic evidence of the return taken as the time plus the admittance in email responses from IKEA that it was returned to store. 

born_again

max... said:

I'm currently chasing IKEA for a refund for a returned item that we considered not of merchantable quality  - they are digging their heels in and refusing to refund.  The item was left in store with IKEA and logged with them at the time but not refunded pending escalation to someone other than the ***** on the IKEA returns desk.

Following many emails and exchanges I have logged a 'Resolver' claim with IKEA and this is in the early stages.

I have in the meantime also written to the credit card company (John Lewis - the older card provider that has just ended 31 Oct) and their latest letter states "...we are unable to submit a claim, this is because we have no dispute rights for face to face transactions.".

I am unsure what they are trying to say here and whether they are simple trying to pass the buck - I have written back to continue the claim.  

Can anyone offer any advice please?

If this is a purchase you made in person, then there are no dispute rights via your card provider. As you have chance to resolve any problems at that point. So that is a covers a contactless or chip/pin transaction.

If it was a online purchase, but you returned in person. Then that is different. But as IKEA are still dealing with this, John Lewis will most likely not start process, as once started can not be stopped.

S75 will only come into play if item is over £100 & under £30K.
But you will have to prove Breach of contract on that. Given process is still ongoing with IKEA, it will get anywhere.

Add in any thing like "merchantable quality" is a very subjective case. So can be very hard to prove.

max...

Thanks - value was £200 odd.  Yes, it was originally an instore purchase, not online.

'k3lvc' - FYI I do know the basics at least, the ***** (IDIOT to spell it out) was a personal opinion posted on this forum and was of course not referred to in any correspondence.  For the record the ***** has form and is mentioned in reviews on TripAdvisor as it happens.  If you had been there that day and witnessed the IKEA representative's behaviour and language to us then believe me you would have a lot stronger words to describe them.

eskbanker

born_again said:

If this is a purchase you made in person, then there are no dispute rights via your card provider. As you have chance to resolve any problems at that point. So that is a covers a contactless or chip/pin transaction.

I'm not sure if there's some sort of terminology issue here and that not everyone is on the same page, but surely 'not as described' or quality issues can legitimately arise from a face-to-face transaction, and in particular something such as a flat-packed box from IKEA, where the customer has no meaningful ability to inspect the goods prior to leaving the premises?

jon81uk

eskbanker said:

born_again said:

If this is a purchase you made in person, then there are no dispute rights via your card provider. As you have chance to resolve any problems at that point. So that is a covers a contactless or chip/pin transaction.

I'm not sure if there's some sort of terminology issue here and that not everyone is on the same page, but surely 'not as described' or quality issues can legitimately arise from a face-to-face transaction, and in particular something such as a flat-packed box from IKEA, where the customer has no meaningful ability to inspect the goods prior to leaving the premises?

I would say not as described is harder as you are able to inspect the display model, so you would be arguing instead that the one you picked up is faulty.
Similar with the OPs claim of "merchantable quality", it can be inspected in the display showroom, so either you are happy with the general quality of the item and therefore no right to a return or it is faulty and not to standard in which case it should be easy to show what the manufacturuing fault is (not enough screws, the wood isn't as thick as it should be etc)

eskbanker

jon81uk said:

eskbanker said:

born_again said:

If this is a purchase you made in person, then there are no dispute rights via your card provider. As you have chance to resolve any problems at that point. So that is a covers a contactless or chip/pin transaction.

I'm not sure if there's some sort of terminology issue here and that not everyone is on the same page, but surely 'not as described' or quality issues can legitimately arise from a face-to-face transaction, and in particular something such as a flat-packed box from IKEA, where the customer has no meaningful ability to inspect the goods prior to leaving the premises?

I would say not as described is harder as you are able to inspect the display model, so you would be arguing instead that the one you picked up is faulty.
Similar with the OPs claim of "merchantable quality", it can be inspected in the display showroom, so either you are happy with the general quality of the item and therefore no right to a return or it is faulty and not to standard in which case it should be easy to show what the manufacturuing fault is (not enough screws, the wood isn't as thick as it should be etc)

Yes, I'm not saying that any claim relating to something like flatpack furniture will be justifiable, but was simply questioning the apparent assertion that a card dispute would automatically be rejected if it related to an in-person purchase.

DullGreyGuy

jon81uk said:

eskbanker said:

born_again said:

If this is a purchase you made in person, then there are no dispute rights via your card provider. As you have chance to resolve any problems at that point. So that is a covers a contactless or chip/pin transaction.

I'm not sure if there's some sort of terminology issue here and that not everyone is on the same page, but surely 'not as described' or quality issues can legitimately arise from a face-to-face transaction, and in particular something such as a flat-packed box from IKEA, where the customer has no meaningful ability to inspect the goods prior to leaving the premises?

I would say not as described is harder as you are able to inspect the display model, so you would be arguing instead that the one you picked up is faulty.
Similar with the OPs claim of "merchantable quality", it can be inspected in the display showroom, so either you are happy with the general quality of the item and therefore no right to a return or it is faulty and not to standard in which case it should be easy to show what the manufacturuing fault is (not enough screws, the wood isn't as thick as it should be etc)

The obvious thing is where the display and the purchasable version are not identical... we've all seen the photos of burgers in McDs and then what you really get. In a different shop I bought something and turned out the display model was the older version and the new one had different style of brackets which was annoying because I bought it to steal the brackets not for the rest of it. 

Obviously however here we are talking about a chargeback which isnt about rights or legislation but schemes drawn up by some large multinational companies. They are free to make the as supportive or restrictive as they want. Your rights against the merchant arent impacted. 

born_again

eskbanker said:

born_again said:

If this is a purchase you made in person, then there are no dispute rights via your card provider. As you have chance to resolve any problems at that point. So that is a covers a contactless or chip/pin transaction.

I'm not sure if there's some sort of terminology issue here and that not everyone is on the same page, but surely 'not as described' or quality issues can legitimately arise from a face-to-face transaction, and in particular something such as a flat-packed box from IKEA, where the customer has no meaningful ability to inspect the goods prior to leaving the premises?

As card regulations are over & above your consumer rights. Card co's exclude in person purchases from their chargeback regulations.