UK online seller did not refund original postage costs for incorrect size item

Belenus

My wife ordered an item of clothing online from La Redoute in a size medium. They delivered an item with a size small label. Unsurprisingly it does not fit her.

She raised a refund request, clearly stating that she wanted a full refund including the £3.99 original postage cost as the fault lay with La Redoute. 

La Redoute provided a return label at their cost, the item was returned and they have credited my wife's credit card with the £34 item cost but not the £3.99 original postage cost.

What legislation, if any, entitles my wife to a refund of that money?

Is it the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and, if so, which section? Or is there other legislation covering this?

We know that £3.99 is a trivial amount but she is determined to force La Redoute to abide by their legal obligations. House of Bruar did similar to her last year but she let that one go.

Thanks

born_again

Is £3.99 the standard delivery cost?

eskbanker

Belenus said:

She raised a refund request, clearly stating that she wanted a full refund including the £3.99 original postage cost as the fault lay with La Redoute.

Did she make it clear that she was exercising her rights under the Consumer Rights Act, or was it just processed under their standard returns policy (under which delivery postage isn't refunded)?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Chargeback for the difference should be possible given it was not as described

As as aside, I don't think consumers have any obligation to say they are exercising their rights under the CRA (unlike the CCRs which require such), "I ordered medium and have been sent small" should be perfectly clear from the context and the request for a refund (rather than a replacement) clear it's case of exercising the short term right to reject.  

eskbanker

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

As as aside, I don't think consumers have any obligation to say they are exercising their rights under the CRA (unlike the CCRs which require such), "I ordered medium and have been sent small" should be perfectly clear from the context and the request for a refund (rather than a replacement) clear it's case of exercising the short term right to reject.  

Agreed, but where there is a returns policy that's broader in scope (than being solely for faulty goods) but less generous than the statutory rights (applicable specifically for faulty goods) then specifying which is being used should help, even if not strictly necessary, but OP didn't mention using similar wording to what you suggested and just referred to 'raising a refund request'.

Undervalued

Belenus said:

My wife ordered an item of clothing online from La Redoute in a size medium. They delivered an item with a size small label. Unsurprisingly it does not fit her.

She raised a refund request, clearly stating that she wanted a full refund including the £3.99 original postage cost as the fault lay with La Redoute. 

La Redoute provided a return label at their cost, the item was returned and they have credited my wife's credit card with the £34 item cost but not the £3.99 original postage cost.

What legislation, if any, entitles my wife to a refund of that money?

Is it the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and, if so, which section? Or is there other legislation covering this?

We know that £3.99 is a trivial amount but she is determined to force La Redoute to abide by their legal obligations. House of Bruar did similar to her last year but she let that one go.

Thanks

I don't doubt that she is entitled to the £3.99 and if a chargeback is possible (and she has the time and inclination battle through the bank's call centre who are not always the sharpest knives in the drawer) then great. That of course depends on the banking rules and doesn't make any judgement on the rights and wrongs of the dispute.

Otherwise, surely she is not going to sue for less that a fiver!

Ergates

eskbanker said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

As as aside, I don't think consumers have any obligation to say they are exercising their rights under the CRA (unlike the CCRs which require such), "I ordered medium and have been sent small" should be perfectly clear from the context and the request for a refund (rather than a replacement) clear it's case of exercising the short term right to reject.  

Agreed, but where there is a returns policy that's broader in scope (than being solely for faulty goods) but less generous than the statutory rights (applicable specifically for faulty goods) then specifying which is being used should help, even if not strictly necessary, but OP didn't mention using similar wording to what you suggested and just referred to 'raising a refund request'.

They don't have an obligation, but there is no cost to being clear and it reduces the risk (though doesn't eliminate it) of the return being handled under the incorrect set of conditions.

sheramber

Customer service & complaints

We’re committed to providing a high standard of service to all our customers and treating them fairly. There may be times when you feel we’ve not lived up to this. If this happens, we’d like to hear from you. Letting us know when you’re unhappy with the service you experience gives us the opportunity to put things right and to improve our service in future for all. We’re committed to working with you on your complaint to try to resolve it to your satisfaction:

• Post: Customer Services
  La Redoute
  2 Holdsworth Street
  Bradford
  BD1 4AH
• Telephone: 033 0303 0199 (lines open Monday to Friday 9am – 5pm & Saturday 9am -12:30pm)
• Email: helpline@redoute.co.uk

For complaints about retail goods and services (e.g. product quality, delivery), under the Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Disputes (Competent Authorities and Information) Regulations 2015, if we can’t resolve your complaint using our internal complaints procedure, we must inform you: (i) that the matter cannot be settled, (ii) the name and website address of a relevant provider of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) services, and (iii) whether we (La Redoute) are obliged to or prepared to make use of the relevant ADR provider. We’re not obliged to use an ADR provider and, as we receive few complaints that aren’t resolved, we have decided not to pay to subscribe to an ADR scheme at this stage.

We do, however, have a Primary Authority arrangement with West Yorkshire Trading Standards and you can find advice and information about your rights here:www.citizensadvice.org.uk

https://www.laredoute.co.uk/terms.aspx#7c

Okell

Belenus said:

... What legislation, if any, entitles my wife to a refund of that money?

Is it the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and, if so, which section? Or is there other legislation covering this?...

Go back to them and quote s20(10) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 to them:

"To the extent that the consumer paid money under the contract, the consumer is entitled to receive back the same amount of money."

If your wife paid a postage inclusive price, then that is what she is entitled to be refunded - an inclusive amount.

Emphasise to the seller that your wife is exercising her statutory rights under the CRA s11(1) - goods not as described - and that she is not relying on the seller's own returns policy.

Also... 

sheramber said:

... We do, however, have a Primary Authority arrangement with West Yorkshire Trading Standards and you can find advice and information about your rights here:www.citizensadvice.org.uk

https://www.laredoute.co.uk/terms.aspx#7c

... ask CAB to make a referral to West Yorkshire Trading standards complaining that the seller is not complying with the law by not refunding original postage costs.

It won't help you but might help others in future

Belenus

Thanks everyone.

We sent a sternly worded email and they responded by apologising and refunding the £3.99.

They also offered my wife 10% off her next order.

Murphybear

goled said:

It's good they decided to refund and apologize. They might worry about their customers and future sales.

It’s amazing what a few words on social media can do