30 days return policy when company is closed for 9 days over Christmas period

RefluentBeans

maman said:

Sorry to butt in but may I ask for clarification on a couple of posts stating that a returns policy can be whatever the retailer chooses. 

I appreciate it doesn't apply in this case, as OP is happy with the locket but her DH didn't apply the personalisation option. 

Surely a retailer can't hide behind a returns policy when, for example, a product isn't as described on their website?🤔 So, Consumer Rights could override the policy in certain circumstances ?🤔

If the retailer offers a customisation option but the customer doesn’t choose that option, I’m unsure how that isn’t as described? 

Football shirts often have the option to include your name on them, but they sell them without as well. If you forget to put your name in the order box then that is your fault, not the fault of the companies. 

To clarify the ‘retailers can’t put whatever they want in their returns policy’ - as long as it doesn’t restrict your rights then that is true (to an extent). The rights in case of online sales is under the consumer contracts regulations; which say you have 14 days to tell the retailer your cancelling your order (this can be for any reason), and then a further 14 days to get it back to the retailer. The goods should only be handled as necessary (typically the bar is what you would be able to do in a brick and mortar store). On top of that all consumer sales are covered by the consumer rights act (but not sure how the item can be faulty with the information provided here). 

This is where the 30 days is ‘above your legal rights’ and ‘can have whatever rules they want’. For example - the product must be in its packaging, undamaged, unworn, unused, free from any signs of use. This restricts your rights - you haven’t got to meet this threshold if you cancel your contract - but you also have no right to a refund past 14 days so you get more rights than you are legally entitled to. 

There are caveats to everything I’ve just said, but this post is already long. 

Okell

l.c.elliott said:

Okell said:

l.c.elliott said:

... My husband ordered this on 5th Dec...clearly if I wait til 3rd Jan that does not give us enough time to wait for a response and then send it so that it can be received within 30 days...

When was the locket actually delivered to your husband?

Under The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 he has up to 14 days from delivery in which to clearly inform the seller that he is exercising his statutory right to cancel the contract and he then has a further 14 days to send the locket back - although depending on the seller's T&Cs he may have to pay for return carriage.  If you can still do it this way it doesn't matter when the seller receives it back - your husband just needs proof that he sent it back in time.*

If the seller has not provided certain information required by the above regulations, then the statutory cancellation period is extended by up to a year and the seller must pay the return costs.  To check whether this is the case you need to compare the seller's T&Cs with the information requirements contained in paras 31 and 35(5)(b) of the above regulations.  Or give us a link to the seller's T&Cs.

But if 14 days has already expired and the seller has provided all the information required by the above regulations, you'll have to rely on the seller's own returns policy.  If that says that the locket has to be returned within 30 days of purchase, then that is what it says.  However, I'd argue that "purchase" is on the day your husband received the locket, and not when he ordered it.  Does that give you more leeway?



*The statutory right to cancel does not apply to "personalised" items, but as I understand it the problem is that your husband didn't "personalise" it when he ordered it, so the right should still apply...

Sadly that doesn't apply to us as the locket arrived 9th December so that's 16 days ago... so what's our best course of action here? Email them to say he is returning it and post anyway so that when they reopen 3rd Jan they'll have received it? Or email to say returning it, but don't post until I get confirmation from them on 3rd Jan that we can return it and hope the 30 days started from 9th December and not the 5th December so the locket has a chance to reach them? 🙈

 First, I think you need to read my post again...

Okell said:

l.c.elliott said:

... My husband ordered this on 5th Dec...clearly if I wait til 3rd Jan that does not give us enough time to wait for a response and then send it so that it can be received within 30 days...

... If the seller has not provided certain information required by the above regulations, then the statutory cancellation period is extended by up to a year and the seller must pay the return costs.  To check whether this is the case you need to compare the seller's T&Cs with the information requirements contained in paras 31 and 35(5)(b) of the above regulations.  Or give us a link to the seller's T&Cs....

If the seller hasn't provided certain information required by law, the 14 day cancellation period is extended by up to a year, and the seller must pay the return costs.  The information they need to have provided is referenced at paras 31 and 35(5)(b) of the regulations. 

Before anyone can suggest the best course of action, you either need to check yourself whether the seller's T&Cs provided the required information, or you need to give us a link to them so we can read them.  

Okell

maman said:

Sorry to butt in but may I ask for clarification on a couple of posts stating that a returns policy can be whatever the retailer chooses. 

I appreciate it doesn't apply in this case, as OP is happy with the locket but her DH didn't apply the personalisation option. 

Surely a retailer can't hide behind a returns policy when, for example, a product isn't as described on their website?🤔 So, Consumer Rights could override the policy in certain circumstances ?🤔

Not sure I follow you as I don't think your point is relevant here?  There's no suggestion that the locket was not as described and the question of personalisation seems to be a red herring.

If you are simply asking for clarification of a general comment, then "Yes" - a retailer can incorporate pretty much whatever they like in their own returns policy, but to the extent that anything in that returns policy limits or restricts a consumer's legal rights, it is unenforceable against a consumer.  Some seller's explicitly state this by including some wording to the effect that "Nothing in these T&Cs affects your statutory consumer rights".

So if you buy something online or by telephone or by mail-order(!) and the goods do not conform to contrcat under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, restrictions in a seller's own returns policy cannot prevent you from exercising your statutory consumer rights.  (eg restrictions like goods must be returned unopened; in the original packaging; unused etc).

The problem with a seller's own returns policy  - as compared with a consumer's statutory right to cancel under The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013  - is that while the seller's own returns policy may offer a longer returns period (eg 30 days) than the statutory cancellation period (14 days), it also makes it easier for the seller to deny a return altogether than the regulations allow a seller to deny a cancellation.

Under the regulations it is almost impossible for a seller to refuse a consumer's statutory right to cancel, but under their own returns policy a seller can incorporate all manner of reasons to legitmately refuse a return.

This is why - when an online seller offers their own returns policy in addition to the statutory right to cancel - it is vital for the consumer to understand what they are doing when they return goods.  Are they simply returning goods under the seller's own non-statutory scheme, or are they exercising their statutory right to cancel a distance contract under the regulations?  Which a consumer decides depends on how they weigh up the pros and cons of the two.  A seller's own returns policy may offer a longer returns period, but may be too restrictive in other ways compared to the right to cancel.

If a consumer decides to exercise their statutory right to cancel, para 32 of the regulations says:

" 32(2) To cancel a contract under regulation 29(1), the consumer must inform the trader of the decision to cancel it.

(3) To inform the trader under paragraph (2) the consumer may either—

(a) use a form following the model cancellation form in part B of Schedule 3, or

(b) make any other clear statement setting out the decision to cancel the contract"

So if a consumer wants to exercise their statutory right to cancel under the regs they must tell the seller that they are cancelling.  If a consumer simply returns stuff to the seller, it's open to the seller to argue that the consumer has simply returned the goods under the seller's own returns policy, and they haven't cancelled the contrcat.

Grumpy_chap

maman said:

Sorry to butt in but may I ask for clarification on a couple of posts stating that a returns policy can be whatever the retailer chooses. 

Apologies if my post was unclear or caused confusion.

There are consumer rights and these are for everyone and cannot be taken away, restricted or reduced by the retailer.  For change of mind, which is what the OP appears to have in this this case, the usual period for remote purchases is that the consumer can return "for any reason or none"  up to 14 days from date of receipt.  (As others have mentioned, there are cases when that period is extended.)

For a retailer's own returns policy, which is in addition to your consumer rights (often the terms will expressly state that but they don't have to), the retailer can have any policy they choose. 
If the retailer says there is a life-time guarantee and specifies the terms that to make a claim you must kiss the Blarney stone while wearing a pair of Union Jack boxer shorts on your head, then so be it.  The customer can weigh up the benefit of claiming under the warranty against getting the refund or whatever the warranty would offer as redress.