Retail online website threatens to remove customers

user1977

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

user1977 said:

That's fair enough where there's a continuing contract of some sort, but I assumed we were talking about a succession of discrete contracts, and the retailer at some point refuses to enter into new ones.

We are but the OP didn't say they'd been banned from buying at this retailer, they said they got a letter saying they return too much stuff implying they can keep buying as long as they stop returning too much stuff.

If I've misunderstood and OP is stating they've actually been banned as a customer and can the retailer do that, then yes of course they can decline any offer. 

I did query that with the OP with no clarification, but I expect it's the OP who has misunderstood - the big retailer will know they don't have a "distance selling but no returns" option to offer.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

user1977 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

user1977 said:

That's fair enough where there's a continuing contract of some sort, but I assumed we were talking about a succession of discrete contracts, and the retailer at some point refuses to enter into new ones.

We are but the OP didn't say they'd been banned from buying at this retailer, they said they got a letter saying they return too much stuff implying they can keep buying as long as they stop returning too much stuff.

If I've misunderstood and OP is stating they've actually been banned as a customer and can the retailer do that, then yes of course they can decline any offer. 

I did query that with the OP with no clarification, but I expect it's the OP who has misunderstood - the big retailer will know they don't have a "distance selling but no returns" option to offer.

Maybe they hope the customer doesn't know that, or perhaps they just know no one is going to do anything about it. 

If @Hudson8949 comes back, clarification on whether they have been banned or it was just "threatened" as per the title would be useful (for general discussion rather than doing anything about the matter really as it's not something worth fighting). 

user1977

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

user1977 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

user1977 said:

That's fair enough where there's a continuing contract of some sort, but I assumed we were talking about a succession of discrete contracts, and the retailer at some point refuses to enter into new ones.

We are but the OP didn't say they'd been banned from buying at this retailer, they said they got a letter saying they return too much stuff implying they can keep buying as long as they stop returning too much stuff.

If I've misunderstood and OP is stating they've actually been banned as a customer and can the retailer do that, then yes of course they can decline any offer. 

I did query that with the OP with no clarification, but I expect it's the OP who has misunderstood - the big retailer will know they don't have a "distance selling but no returns" option to offer.

Maybe they hope the customer doesn't know that, or perhaps they just know no one is going to do anything about it. 

Or maybe it was merely an initial warning that if they carry on returning too much stuff they'll later be barred.

Hoenir

The real issue is the amount of returns that simply end up in landfill. We live in a disposable society. 

RefluentBeans

I still don’t see how terminating an account is against the CRA? Their rights haven’t been eroded, simply just stopped doing business with that person. 

I guess it’s the fine line to walk of asking customers to think before they shop so they don’t return as much, and threatening in order to limit their rights. 

When I used to work in retail there was a couple of people that would buy something and exchange it every week for something else. At some point you have ti assume something weird is going on and politely offer a refund and that you no longer feel comfortable serving them. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

user1977 said:

Or maybe it was merely an initial warning that if they carry on returning too much stuff they'll later be barred.

That's what I thought they meant, which would be the bit I don't agree with  

Hoenir said:

The real issue is the amount of returns that simply end up in landfill. We live in a disposable society. 

If you want to reach the pinnacle of moral superiority I would have thought the real issue is the slave labour in developing countries manufacturing all this stuff, cobalt for batteries, the tech itself, cocoa and coffee beans, palm oil, cotton, clothing sweatshops, solar panels and on it goes, that's without the environmental devastation and loss of biodiversity that has been outsourced to a part of world we don't see, very easy to say junk ends up in landfill, much harder not to consume it in the first place when billions are spent convincing you to do so. 

That cause of all these problems comes from very large companies seeking profit and (not directed at anyone in particular) for some reason some seem to hold these companies in a treasured place and instead have a pop at the individual. Sad times.

born_again

Hudson8949 said:

Received letter from a popular retail company, online shopping.
I have been with the online company for 20 years now with a very good credit rating at all times.
The last few years, I ordered more than one footwear item to try them on. With the intention of keeping one pair.  Shoes are tricky, especially trainers and special events.
This has bumped up my Returns statistics.  I return items within days and never hold on to them for more than a week at the most.
And yet, they still threaten me that I made too many returns.  What is the point of online retail if you cannot try before you buy?
Can they do this?

YES.

Like any business they are free to deal with who they want.

Want to try before you buy. Keep the high street alive & shop there 👍

HillStreetBlues

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

user1977 said:

Or maybe it was merely an initial warning that if they carry on returning too much stuff they'll later be barred.

That's what I thought they meant, which would be the bit I don't agree with  

I disagree with your view point as well.
No rights have been eroded, as the person can return the items. All the letter is saying is that if you do return what they consider too much then they might not engage in further contracts. You don't have any rights for a contract that hasn't been made.

Undervalued

HillStreetBlues said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

user1977 said:

Or maybe it was merely an initial warning that if they carry on returning too much stuff they'll later be barred.

That's what I thought they meant, which would be the bit I don't agree with  

I disagree with your view point as well.
No rights have been eroded, as the person can return the items. All the letter is saying is that if you do return what they consider too much then they might not engage in further contracts. You don't have any rights for a contract that hasn't been made.

That is my take on this too.

TELLIT01

Online retailers must accept returns which are not faulty within certain timeframes, unlike physical shops which only have to refund in the event of an item being faulty.  The only option opent to online retailers who don't like the buying pattern of a customer is to refuse to do business with them.  That is perfectly legal, and sensible from a business perspective.