Faulty dress

KLS70

Looking for some advice on what to do next. My daughter bought 3 dresses online from White Fox UK which I paid for on my credit card. She wore one of the dresses the day after delivery(2wks ago today) to a formal function and even before she sat down for dinner the dress started to come away at the stitching and split in numerous places. Luckily it has a lining which remains intact but she had to leave early. She contacted the company the following day asking for a returns label and a refund as the dress is clearly faulty and of poor quality. Fast forward 2 weeks and the company is refusing to return the item as it has been worn and does not have the label attached. She has sent further emails quoting the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and stating it is not of satisfactory quality and durability and therefore is not fit for purpose but White Fox are saying that as she wore it, it was not faulty at delivery and will only give her store credit. I have also seen online others then having issues using store credits. I believe I can go through my credit card company if still no joy but not sure if I should do chargeback or section 75 as the total of 3 dresses were over £100 but the individual dress is £60? Any advice on how to proceed would be greatly appreciated.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Hello OP

Sorry to say they appear to be registered in Australia and S75 cover won't apply (it applies to the items in an order over £100 and below £30k rather than the whole order value).

Chargeback would require return, AFAIK it also only covers goods which are "faulty" when you get them rather than a fault that occurs later. 

In the politest way possible (not sure how old she is but) sit down with daughter and show her how to find the T&C section on a website and check for information such as a company having a UK address and a valid privacy policy.

In this case they appear to be a legit company just outside the UK, there are also lots of websites where the "company" is based in China and these sites tend to be devoid of any address information and the contact form tends to be a generic webform. 

Also show/advise daughter to save the image and do a Google image search, many sites are reselling tat from AliExpress or such with a high mark up (and that includes Amazon, other day my wife showed me something on Amazon for £30, found the exact same thing 30 seconds later on Ali for a tenner). 

A lot of these companies advertise on social media, people just click through and buy without checking the finer details which leaves you a bit stuck when the stuff turns out to rubbish  

I would take the store credit in this instance.  

KLS70

I have looked at the terms and conditions which state they will provide free returns and refunds for items that are faulty. The company is predominantly an Australian company, but they do have a UK registered business and are trading from a warehouse in Burton on Trent. I believe therefore they are subject to Consumer Rights Act 2015? This also states that items should be of satisfactory quality and durable which is definitely not the case here. The lining of the dress is fully intact so shows there was no issue with fit or misuse but feel they are just trying to fob her off with store credit. She is happy to return it she just needs them to provide the returns label in order to do so. 

sheramber

I don’t think they are trading from the warehouse. It is a distribution centre. 

Orders will be processed by the offices in  Australia.

She did not buy from the warehouse entity. she bought from the Australian entity. 

DullGreyGuy

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Chargeback would require return, AFAIK it also only covers goods which are "faulty" when you get them rather than a fault that occurs later. 

@born_again will probably be best place to comment on items that develop a fault shortly after delivery but certainly from a personal experience I've simply told the bank the item was faulty and there was no discussion on if it was as delivered or broke on first use etc. 

As said though it does need to be returned for the chargeback process to start. 

KLS70

sheramber said:

I don’t think they are trading from the warehouse. It is a distribution centre. 

Orders will be processed by the offices in  Australia.

She did not buy from the warehouse entity. she bought from the Australian entity. 

Does this not mean that they are subject to Uk trading laws though? 

powerful_Rogue

KLS70 said:

sheramber said:

I don’t think they are trading from the warehouse. It is a distribution centre. 

Orders will be processed by the offices in  Australia.

She did not buy from the warehouse entity. she bought from the Australian entity. 

Does this not mean that they are subject to Uk trading laws though? 

No. If purchased from an Australian company, you'll be relying on the Australian consumer rights.

Governing law and jurisdiction: These Terms of Purchase, each Contract and any dispute or claim arising out of, or in connection with these Terms of Purchase, any Contract or the subject matter or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims) of the same will be governed by, and interpreted in accordance with, the laws of New South Wales, Australia and the parties agree that that courts of New South Wales, Australia will have exclusive jurisdiction to settle such disputes or claims.

born_again

DullGreyGuy said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Chargeback would require return, AFAIK it also only covers goods which are "faulty" when you get them rather than a fault that occurs later. 

@born_again will probably be best place to comment on items that develop a fault shortly after delivery but certainly from a personal experience I've simply told the bank the item was faulty and there was no discussion on if it was as delivered or broke on first use etc. 

As said though it does need to be returned for the chargeback process to start. 

Developing faults are not covered. As above that is bad questing by rep, as it is a question we have to ask, failure would be a kick up backside from manager🤣
As it was worn. I can see company simply rejecting a chargeback. If they will let you start process. 

 I believe I can go through my credit card company if still no joy but not sure if I should do chargeback or section 75 as the total of 3 dresses were over £100 but the individual dress is £60? Any advice on how to proceed would be greatly appreciated.

No S75 as item value is under £100.


If this is the site used,

https://whitefoxboutique.co.uk/

then as per another poster. They are not a UK company.

1. Governing law and jurisdiction: These Terms of Purchase, each Contract and any dispute or claim arising out of, or in connection with these Terms of Purchase, any Contract or the subject matter or formation (including non-contractual disputes or claims) of the same will be governed by, and interpreted in accordance with, the laws of New South Wales, Australia and the parties agree that that courts of New South Wales, Australia will have exclusive jurisdiction to settle such disputes or claims.

So no UK consumer rights.

KLS70

Yes this the site she ordered from. The returns policy on this site does state “ After 30 days, we will repair or replace the Product in accordance with the terms of the Consumer Rights Act 
2015.” Does this not mean that as such they should adhere to all sections of the act in particular sections 9 & 10? 

Alderbank

KLS70 said:

Yes this the site she ordered from. The returns policy on this site does state “ After 30 days, we will repair or replace the Product in accordance with the terms of the Consumer Rights Act 
2015.” Does this not mean that as such they should adhere to all sections of the act in particular sections 9 & 10? 

No it doesn't.

It means they are voluntarily offering to repair or replace the Product.

Since the seams are falling apart, repair is not going to be practicable. However they have offered store credit which is in practical terms the same as replacement (slightly better in my opinion).

sheramber

There would be no way to enforce  the Consumer Rights Act in Australia.