Returning goods purchased online - return delivery costs

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

I'm still of the logic that if you pay for the return postage and the item is lost, then you claim from the courier.

Although it states that they must refund within 14 days of supplying evidence of returning goods, if no goods have been received then the diminished value will be a 100% reduction from the refund.

Otherwise people could claim a refund from the courier and also the retailer.

Can only reference the above guidence again

Although Article 14(2) entitles the trader to hold the consumer liable for any diminished value of the goods caused by mishandling during the right of withdrawal period, under Article 13(3) the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

If the lost in transit issue was considered handling then there wouldn't be mention of a refund being due in either the guidance or the legislation, equally delivery not occurring within 14 days doesn't mean the goods have been lost in transit either. 

Well we'll only find out if it goes to court. We have differing opinions on this, as evidenced by the same discussion before.

If the customer is paying for the return and the goods are lost, it will be for the customer to claim from the courier. I can't see any court allowing the customer a refund from the courier and the retailer, when the retailer never received the goods back.

Also what is evidence, a could buy a 1KG block of gold and then return a 1KG brick.

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

I'm still of the logic that if you pay for the return postage and the item is lost, then you claim from the courier.

Although it states that they must refund within 14 days of supplying evidence of returning goods, if no goods have been received then the diminished value will be a 100% reduction from the refund.

Otherwise people could claim a refund from the courier and also the retailer.

Can only reference the above guidence again

Although Article 14(2) entitles the trader to hold the consumer liable for any diminished value of the goods caused by mishandling during the right of withdrawal period, under Article 13(3) the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

If the lost in transit issue was considered handling then there wouldn't be mention of a refund being due in either the guidance or the legislation, equally delivery not occurring within 14 days doesn't mean the goods have been lost in transit either. 

I just googled the quote you made, a very interesting point was revealed. So the trader can wait until the goods have been received back.

For sales contracts, under Article 13(3), the trader can only withhold the reimbursement beyond this deadline until he
has either received the goods or at least evidence has been supplied by the consumer that the goods have been sent back. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021XC1229(04)&from=EN

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

I'm still of the logic that if you pay for the return postage and the item is lost, then you claim from the courier.

Although it states that they must refund within 14 days of supplying evidence of returning goods, if no goods have been received then the diminished value will be a 100% reduction from the refund.

Otherwise people could claim a refund from the courier and also the retailer.

Can only reference the above guidence again

Although Article 14(2) entitles the trader to hold the consumer liable for any diminished value of the goods caused by mishandling during the right of withdrawal period, under Article 13(3) the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

If the lost in transit issue was considered handling then there wouldn't be mention of a refund being due in either the guidance or the legislation, equally delivery not occurring within 14 days doesn't mean the goods have been lost in transit either. 

I just googled the quote you made, a very interesting point was revealed. So the trader can wait until the goods have been received back.

For sales contracts, under Article 13(3), the trader can only withhold the reimbursement beyond this deadline until he
has either received the goods or at least evidence has been supplied by the consumer that the goods have been sent back. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021XC1229(04)&from=EN

If you've come to that conclusion what do you think words after "or" mean then?

powerful_Rogue said:

Also what is evidence, a could buy a 1KG block of gold and then return a 1KG brick.

The concept of ‘evidence of having sent back the goods’ is important for the application of Article 13(3). In principle, this ‘evidence’ should be understood as a written statement from an established transport or postal service provider specifying the sender and the recipient.

In principle, this evidence should not necessarily have to involve third party guarantees that the goods in question have been inspected and verified. Such extra services are likely to be expensive and could discourage the consumer from exercising the right of withdrawal, which is specifically precluded by the Directive (see Recital 47: ‘[…] The obligations of the consumer in the event of withdrawal should not discourage the consumer from exercising his right of withdrawal’).

I also think a block of gold is exempt from the right to cancel. 

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

I'm still of the logic that if you pay for the return postage and the item is lost, then you claim from the courier.

Although it states that they must refund within 14 days of supplying evidence of returning goods, if no goods have been received then the diminished value will be a 100% reduction from the refund.

Otherwise people could claim a refund from the courier and also the retailer.

Can only reference the above guidence again

Although Article 14(2) entitles the trader to hold the consumer liable for any diminished value of the goods caused by mishandling during the right of withdrawal period, under Article 13(3) the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

If the lost in transit issue was considered handling then there wouldn't be mention of a refund being due in either the guidance or the legislation, equally delivery not occurring within 14 days doesn't mean the goods have been lost in transit either. 

I just googled the quote you made, a very interesting point was revealed. So the trader can wait until the goods have been received back.

For sales contracts, under Article 13(3), the trader can only withhold the reimbursement beyond this deadline until he
has either received the goods or at least evidence has been supplied by the consumer that the goods have been sent back. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021XC1229(04)&from=EN

If you've come to that conclusion what do you think words after "or" mean then?

powerful_Rogue said:

Also what is evidence, a could buy a 1KG block of gold and then return a 1KG brick.

The concept of ‘evidence of having sent back the goods’ is important for the application of Article 13(3). In principle, this ‘evidence’ should be understood as a written statement from an established transport or postal service provider specifying the sender and the recipient.

In principle, this evidence should not necessarily have to involve third party guarantees that the goods in question have been inspected and verified. Such extra services are likely to be expensive and could discourage the consumer from exercising the right of withdrawal, which is specifically precluded by the Directive (see Recital 47: ‘[…] The obligations of the consumer in the event of withdrawal should not discourage the consumer from exercising his right of withdrawal’).

One or the other, traders discretion. Trader provides return label, they then have a claim if the goods are lost. Customer returns goods, the retailer can wait until the goods have been received back.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

One or the other, traders discretion. Trader provides return label, they then have a claim if the goods are lost. Customer returns goods, the retailer can wait until the goods have been received back.

No is not their choice, at the risk of repeating myself

(5) If the contract is a sales contract and the trader has not offered to collect the goods, the time is the end of 14 days after—

(a)the day on which the trader receives the goods back, or

(b)if earlier, the day on which the consumer supplies evidence of having sent the goods back.

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

One or the other, traders discretion. Trader provides return label, they then have a claim if the goods are lost. Customer returns goods, the retailer can wait until the goods have been received back.

No is not their choice, at the risk of repeating myself

(5) If the contract is a sales contract and the trader has not offered to collect the goods, the time is the end of 14 days after—

(a)the day on which the trader receives the goods back, or

(b)if earlier, the day on which the consumer supplies evidence of having sent the goods back.

You seem to be jumping between the EU regs and UK law.

As i've said previously to some of your wild claims, support an OP through the small claims process and let's see what happens.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

One or the other, traders discretion. Trader provides return label, they then have a claim if the goods are lost. Customer returns goods, the retailer can wait until the goods have been received back.

No is not their choice, at the risk of repeating myself

(5) If the contract is a sales contract and the trader has not offered to collect the goods, the time is the end of 14 days after—

(a)the day on which the trader receives the goods back, or

(b)if earlier, the day on which the consumer supplies evidence of having sent the goods back.

You seem to be jumping between the EU regs and UK law.

As i've said previously to some of your wild claims, support an OP through the small claims process and let's see what happens.

I've quoted the UK legislation and used the EU guidance as it's comprehensive (guidance notes aren't available on the UK legislation site for the CCR).

Have a good evening  

tightauldgit

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

I'm still of the logic that if you pay for the return postage and the item is lost, then you claim from the courier.

Although it states that they must refund within 14 days of supplying evidence of returning goods, if no goods have been received then the diminished value will be a 100% reduction from the refund.

Otherwise people could claim a refund from the courier and also the retailer.

Can only reference the above guidence again

Although Article 14(2) entitles the trader to hold the consumer liable for any diminished value of the goods caused by mishandling during the right of withdrawal period, under Article 13(3) the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

If the lost in transit issue was considered handling then there wouldn't be mention of a refund being due in either the guidance or the legislation, equally delivery not occurring within 14 days doesn't mean the goods have been lost in transit either. 

Even if that is the case, at best there would still be an outstanding issue for the consumer that they have not fulfilled the contract on the return - they have received a refund but not returned the item. So there would still be a claim by the seller against the consumer, all that's happened is the legal can is kicked down the road.

Not to mention that the goods value to the supplier have been diminished 100% by the fact that they don't own them or have them in their possession.

If your interpretation was correct I could see a real booming market in 'guaranteed 15 day delivery' courier services - buy diamonds from a retailer and return carpet sweepings in 15 days for a refund.  

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

One or the other, traders discretion. Trader provides return label, they then have a claim if the goods are lost. Customer returns goods, the retailer can wait until the goods have been received back.

No is not their choice, at the risk of repeating myself

(5) If the contract is a sales contract and the trader has not offered to collect the goods, the time is the end of 14 days after—

(a)the day on which the trader receives the goods back, or

(b)if earlier, the day on which the consumer supplies evidence of having sent the goods back.

You seem to be jumping between the EU regs and UK law.

As i've said previously to some of your wild claims, support an OP through the small claims process and let's see what happens.

I've quoted the UK legislation and used the EU guidance as it's comprehensive (guidance notes aren't available on the UK legislation site for the CCR).

Have a good evening  

And you

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

tightauldgit said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

powerful_Rogue said:

I'm still of the logic that if you pay for the return postage and the item is lost, then you claim from the courier.

Although it states that they must refund within 14 days of supplying evidence of returning goods, if no goods have been received then the diminished value will be a 100% reduction from the refund.

Otherwise people could claim a refund from the courier and also the retailer.

Can only reference the above guidence again

Although Article 14(2) entitles the trader to hold the consumer liable for any diminished value of the goods caused by mishandling during the right of withdrawal period, under Article 13(3) the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

If the lost in transit issue was considered handling then there wouldn't be mention of a refund being due in either the guidance or the legislation, equally delivery not occurring within 14 days doesn't mean the goods have been lost in transit either. 

Even if that is the case, at best there would still be an outstanding issue for the consumer that they have not fulfilled the contract on the return - they have received a refund but not returned the item. So there would still be a claim by the seller against the consumer, all that's happened is the legal can is kicked down the road.

Not to mention that the goods value to the supplier have been diminished 100% by the fact that they don't own them or have them in their possession.

If your interpretation was correct I could see a real booming market in 'guaranteed 15 day delivery' courier services - buy diamonds from a retailer and return carpet sweepings in 15 days for a refund.  

Use of language is important, the consumer has indeed returned the goods, or more accurately sent them back as the regs state the consumer must, they however haven't been delivered.

Again 

Although Article 14(2) entitles the trader to hold the consumer liable for any diminished value of the goods caused by mishandling during the right of withdrawal period, under Article 13(3) the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

If lost or delayed in transit was classed as diminished value it wouldn't say the trader must reimburse the consumer after having received evidence that the goods have been sent back.

As I presented before "the legal can is kicked down the road" is indeed a valid reasoning, placing the burden of that can upon the trader instead of the consumer, which in this country means for low value goods the trader's legal can is empty if the amount is too small to go via small claims without being dismissed as de minus.