We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Damaged coat
Mummy_Shopper
Posts: 2 Newbie
Recently I visited a local store and my coat got caught on a metal rod hanging from a sweet display. The coat has torn and I have raised a complaint with the store. They've watched the CCTV footage, have the photographs I took and have my proof of purchase. They've agreed to reimburse me the cost of the coat but are now asking for the coat to be sent to them before they send payment. I have questioned why they need the coat as well and they have stated for 'auditing purposes'.
I just want to know if this is right as I feel they are inconveniencing me further...
0
Comments
-
Do you want them to reimburse you or not? If you do then if they want to see a damaged coat to inspect it properly that is their prerogative.Mummy_Shopper said:Recently I visited a local store and my coat got caught on a metal rod hanging from a sweet display. The coat has torn and I have raised a complaint with the store. They've watched the CCTV footage, have the photographs I took and have my proof of purchase. They've agreed to reimburse me the cost of the coat but are now asking for the coat to be sent to them before they send payment. I have questioned why they need the coat as well and they have stated for 'auditing purposes'.I just want to know if this is right as I feel they are inconveniencing me further...
They are probably wanting to make sure there isn’t any deliberate damage.
If it’s a local store it’s not going be a huge inconvenience to drop it in in passing is it?
All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well.
Pedant alert - it's could have, not could of.1 -
Seems ok to me. They might be obliged to check for fraud.
Evri do parcels for £3.20 if it's inconvenient to visit.0 -
They've offered you a brand new coat. Why the objection? Did you plan to mend and keep the old one ?5
-
Would do RM Tracked 48 (if less than £150) with free collection/PO drop off for the extra 19 pencelisyloo said:
Evri do parcels for £3.20 if it's inconvenient to visit.
https://send.royalmail.com/send/youritem?country=GBR&format&weight=&weightUnit=G
Yes OP I guess if they are paying for the coat they can ask to have it
In the game of chess you can never let your adversary see your pieces1 -
They can see from the cctv footage what happened, and have asked for it to be posted to an office, not handed in at the store. Would have been easier to do it that way! Thanks for sharing your thoughts, it's good to hear others opinions
0 -
They are reimbursing you for the coat, so therefore it now belongs to them.Unless the coat was purchased brand new that day, you’re not even entitled to the full cost of it back.I’d do what they ask before they change their mind.2
-
I think they are. It's the cost of replacing it, not it's second hand value. Otherwsie you'd have to try and find the same coat of the same age in the same condition on sale somewhere; the research into which would cost more than the coat unless it's a Prada Versace Ultra Gold Rare Editionscreech_78 said:Unless the coat was purchased brand new that day, you’re not even entitled to the full cost of it back.
0 -
Unfortunately, people do try it on shops In any number of different ways so the retailers do tend to want to doublecheck everything when it comes to paying out, for obvious reasons.
All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well.
Pedant alert - it's could have, not could of.2 -
It would never occur to me to even try and get recompense for this, I would have just assumed its my fault and suck it up!"You've been reading SOS when it's just your clock reading 5:05 "7
-
That would be betterment which isn't "allowed"ButterCheese said:
I think they are. It's the cost of replacing it, not it's second hand value. Otherwsie you'd have to try and find the same coat of the same age in the same condition on sale somewhere; the research into which would cost more than the coat unless it's a Prada Versace Ultra Gold Rare Editionscreech_78 said:Unless the coat was purchased brand new that day, you’re not even entitled to the full cost of it back.
Unless you have a policy that specifies new for old0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards


