Next charging for swapped out parcel goods scam and fee on top - CONSUMER 2 NEXT 0!!

Proseccogal

I have found other instances of Evri couriers swapping out Nike trainers online.

The box was in a single Next plastic bag and the orange Nike box can be felt inside quite easily if you know what a Nike box feels like with its connected orange over lid.  A courier could also tear the bag slightly to check.

This was 3 weeks before Xmas, the Nike trainers were substituted for a very well-worn Adidas pair in a different size.  Next are totally to be believed as they returned this shoddy Adidas pair to me with their original letter of explanation.
It's just they have not investigated with Evri the handling of the parcel once it was collected from me by Xmas temp staff and inferring I have stolen them by keeping them and tried to pass off the rubbish used pair as the return.

Proseccogal

I am sure they made a very nice Xmas gift or were resold to bump up an Evri wage!

sheramber

Undervalued said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

Undervalued said:

tightauldgit said:

Undervalued said:

Proseccogal said:

Have since found a news article on an Evri courier tampering with parcels and taking Nike trainers being caught so there is a precedent set.

But basically Next’s attitude is inferring that I am responsible for the return parcels contents collected from my doorstep until they reach them which of course I can't be. Neither can I prove what I put in the box to start with!

Morally maybe, legally no I'm afraid.

A news article about one particular dishonest courier employee, even assuming that was proved in court, doesn't in any way prove the same thing happened to your parcel. They would no doubt point to the vast majority of parcels where this doesn't happen.

Ultimately if it goes to court and in the absence of any hard evidence the judge would have to decide, on the balance of probabilities, who he believes.

It wouldn't just be as simple as that though. It's not just a case of whether the judge believes one party or another. They also would look at the actions of both sides and determine if they were reasonable and/or negligent. 

Next hired a courier to act as their agent to collect the items - what steps did they take to ensure the correct items were received?
Next claim to have carried out an investigation - what was the outcome of that investigation, is there a report? What have EVRI said? How have they determined the customer is to blame?
Are Next's policies and processes fit for purpose in handling returns?

If it went to court it's going to cost Next a load more than £80 to defend the action and depending on the outcome could be pretty embarassing for them. 

... So, there are only four possibilities....

Next are not telling the truth.

Next have made an innocent but incompetent mistake.

The OP is not telling the truth.

The courier swapped the contents of the parcel.

I would assume that Next have CCTV over the area where returns are opened. If so, providing it is clear enough quality to identify the particular parcel and show what was in it then that would "prove" that Next were not at fault.

If so, that means that either the courier or the OP is at fault but doesn't help in identifying which.

I agree with you that they may well choose not to fight a claim but they would most likely close the OP's account.

Whilst I think I agree with your four possibilities, if it got to court I don't think a judge would find it necessary to decide what had actually happened to the shoes, and I also don't think they'd need to find any fault on Next's part

I think all a judge would need to decide would be whether the OP was a credible witness or not.  If they couldn't say the OP wasn't telling the truth, I think the OP would win - if it got to court.

It's not for the OP to explain what might have happened after she'd entrusted the shoes to EVRI.  (Although I'm sure it wouldn't do her any harm to try to point out that it appears to be common knowledge that some couriers seem to have somewhat "dodgy" reputations in this respect... )

But however it's sorted out, I agree that it's a possibility that Next might decide decide to close the account.

(I'm assuming for the above purposes that Next paid for the return and that EVRI is their chosen courier)

I agree it is not technically her responsibility but the more I think about this the more incredible it all becomes....

This is not the classic expensive item stolen and something worthless of similar weight substituted. If Next are to be believed they got the right type (or very similar) trainers but in a poor second-hand condition! So if somebody in the Evri chain is to blame it seems amazing that they knew the parcel contained the trainers they wanted and they substituted them with their old ones! Presumably the parcel didn't say what was in it on the outside?  

To me that is stretching credibility to breaking point?

This is not the classic expensive item stolen and something worthless of similar weight substituted. If Next are to be believed they got the right type (or very similar) trainers but in a poor second-hand condition


really?

I ordered a pair of Nike trainers on 24th November 2022 and returned them on December 7th via Evri collection which was identified on my Next statement.
Yesterday I receive an old worn unrecognisable pair of Adidas trainers in random size 

Proseccogal

Just to clarify I am telling the truth - as is Next. 

I returned the unworn Nike trainers in good faith via Evri collection service.

Next received a rubbish worn Adidas pair that had been substituted by someone en route.

They have raised this almost 5 months later making investigation very difficult. I wish I had my ring doorbell info going back to then!

Manxman_in_exile

I don't think anybody is suggesting you are not telling the truth.

It's more a case of people speculating along the lines of "How does the OP prove that she sent back Nikes and not Adidas?" and of course that's pretty much impossible for you to prove without direct evidence of what was in the package you sent back.

Hence this presents as a 50:50 "he said/she said" situation

But as I've explained, my own personal view (and it's only my view - I'm not saying it's a legal certainty) is that if this ever got to court then a judge would be more likely to find in favour of an outwardly truthful and credible consumer rather than Next, even if the judge was satisfied that Next had had the wrong shoes delivered to them*.

The only way I think this would come out differently is if the judge formed the opinion that you were clearly lying about what you sent back.

But as I say, that's not legal advice or a legal opinion, it's just my own view on what would be likely to happen, based partly on my own feeling that - in the absence of direct evidence that the consumer is lying - courts have a tendancy to favour consumers.

But I might be completely wrong...

[Edit: of course your best bet is still to try to reach an acceptable resolution with Next if you can, and stay out of court]


*Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting Next are lying either.  All I'm saying is that I think all a judge needs to decide is whether you are telling the truth about sending back Nikes and not Adidas.  And unless you come across as shifty, unreliable and untrustworthy, I think a judge would accept your story.  I'm sure Next did receive worn out Adidas shoes and not Nikes.

Proseccogal

Just to update.
Next are investigating my complaint, listening to my calls etc which will take up to 8 weeks for them to do so.
Meanwhile, the charge is on my account, so I won't buy anything else.

Proseccogal

To further update:  Next have concluded their investigations and still adamant that a customer of 30 plus years, spending thousands of pounds a year, has swapped a return and sent a fit for the bin pair of used Adidas trainers rather than the Nike pair they sent.   They claim business confidentiality and that they have checked with Evri - god knows what they checked - yes a box weighing the same would have been collected and returned to Next but obviously there is no checking of the goods en route.

If a customer is liable for the safe delivery of their returns to Next returns department then this needs to be made very clear that the items are returned with no liability on Evri's behalf.  This is a much bigger problem than just my returns as it means all their customers are exposed to this risk.

cymruchris

Proseccogal said:

To further update:  Next have concluded their investigations and still adamant that a customer of 30 plus years, spending thousands of pounds a year, has swapped a return and sent a fit for the bin pair of used Adidas trainers rather than the Nike pair they sent.   They claim business confidentiality and that they have checked with Evri - god knows what they checked - yes a box weighing the same would have been collected and returned to Next but obviously there is no checking of the goods en route.

If a customer is liable for the safe delivery of their returns to Next returns department then this needs to be made very clear that the items are returned with no liability on Evri's behalf.  This is a much bigger problem than just my returns as it means all their customers are exposed to this risk.

Very poor on their part - have you considered your next steps?

Proseccogal

I am writing to the chairman of Next, awaiting Ombudsman details as well as reported to Police for Crime Reference Number.  I will also write to Alice Beer and thisismoney for their help.  The whole returns parcels procedure is at risk for all customers if the onus is on them to ensure the contents reach the retailer back safely and intact!  But that really shouldn't be the case Evri have the contract with Next not me!  Interestingly Next arent doing free returns with Evri as part of their NextUnlimited delivery subscription anymore and I wonder why!!   To say I am totally disappointed in Next is an understatement - customer longevity and loyalty don't count for anything if you heard the conversations I have had - how to be called a thief without actually being called a thief!!!

Proseccogal

The payment for the trainers and investigation charge is due June 13 and they have warned I will get a bad credit rating if I don't pay.  If I paid on credit card can I claim back from the credit card that I don't have the goods and shouldn't be charged an investigation charge?  I have a Crime ref no now so now have logged with Ombudsman/Next Chief Exec/Police.