Clinique, misrepresenting Christmas gift sets, and illiterate customer service

MarkyMarkD

I don't agree with your approach here at all, dmg.

dmg24 wrote: »

If you intend to keep any of the 'gift' items, that were sent to you in goodwill and as an apology, then I think that you would have a cheek to then go to Trading Standards.

Clinique made a mistake. They have apologised for it, in a way that is far beyond what most companies would do. Accept their apology, or reject it in its entirety.

The apology and compensation are fine, as regards the OP's individual circumstances. But Clinique's obligations to all other customers have not been addressed - they are still advertising these goods misleadingly.

That is why the OP owes it to everyone else to go to Trading Standards.

If everyone who bothers to raise a valid concern with a company accepts being bought off, companies would continue to advertise misleadingly and would get away with it.

Anetares

Proof of what's on the eye shadow isn't really that important... For the same hygiene reasons that would make me return something I'd purchased if it arrived like that, I can't accept something free which has been tested by someone else either.. It's up to them if they send anything in place - someone else has had their brush/finger in it so I wouldn't like using it. So there isn't really any burden on me to prove anything... I don't fancy having someone else's conjunctivitis.

I'm still not impressed on principal with sending tested products as compensation, just because it's free doesn't mean you have to accept something sub-standard. Clinique seem to be making more mistakes than average when it comes to dealing with me

Anyway, obviously the internet would be a much better place if you could use the same inflection in words typed as in words spoken, and apparently I sounded a bit more serious than I actually was in my previous post.

I don't think there would be any 'cheek' in accepting compensation in this case and going to Trading Standards. When I emailed Clinique I never asked for compensation. In fact, I asked how they were going to resolve the situation with mis-selling it, not for personal compensation. It was not given for misrepresentation of the product alone, there was a very complicated personal circumstance involved, for which they wanted to compensate me.

I would have gone to Trading Standards with absolutely no shame at all, compensation or otherwise, because they did not act to rectify the situation with misrepresenting what they were selling. That is, until today - the advert for this product is gone. It appears to have been removed from sale on the website. So cheers for saving me the job

MarkyMarkD

They've probably sold all the special ones they got in for this Christmas. Then next Christmas they'll revive the same misleading advertising and con everyone again. :rolleyes:

katiekittykat

I think saying that they are a con is a bit harsh.

You complained - they sent you a free gift and the offending item has been removed.

melancholly

i think going to trading standards is a bit harsh as well! they changed the website after their mistake and have tried to apologise (is the mark really a brush mark, or is it an attempt at a 'design' on the top?!). although i think their original mistake was rubbish and i would have been annoyed too!

i guess i don't understand why you didn't send it back to them immediately for a refund? then also contact customer services about the misleading page. their t&cs say you have 14 working days from delivery to return an item for a full refund, so perhaps you could see if you can still do that, even though it's a little late? then you get your money back and get rid of an item you don't want.

http://www.clinique.co.uk/customerservice/cservice_ship_return.tmpl#section4