SHEIN AND DISTANCE SELLING

susiepops100

As many will be aware Shein have a policy with regard ro returns and refunds but more recently have introduced limitations. 
1. In some instances it is stated that a sale item cannot be returned  for a refund. Does this exonerate them from the rules on distance selling?
2. Where orders have been paid for with a mix of cash and vouchers earned on previous purchases can they refuse to reinstate the voucher part of the transaction to use at a later date? 
I am not sure whether this is a legal practice or simply a matter of poor customer relations?

marcia_

susiepops100 said:

As many will be aware Shein have a policy with regard ro returns and refunds but more recently have introduced limitations. 
1. In some instances it is stated that a sale item cannot be returned  for a refund. Does this exonerate them from the rules on distance selling?
2. Where orders have been paid for with a mix of cash and vouchers earned on previous purchases can they refuse to reinstate the voucher part of the transaction to use at a later date? 
I am not sure whether this is a legal practice or simply a matter of poor customer relations?

 Only British companies are covered by the distance selling regulations. 

A_Geordie

marcia_ said:

 Only British companies are covered by the distance selling regulations. 

Just wanted to point out, this is not true, otherwise it would be impossible to sue companies like eBay, Amazon, Facebook (Meta) etc. The general rule is that if the trader is directing their activities to consumers the UK even if there is no physical presence, then they are almost always going to be bound by consumer rights laws.

Shein is no exception. 

user1977

marcia_ said:

susiepops100 said:

As many will be aware Shein have a policy with regard ro returns and refunds but more recently have introduced limitations. 
1. In some instances it is stated that a sale item cannot be returned  for a refund. Does this exonerate them from the rules on distance selling?
2. Where orders have been paid for with a mix of cash and vouchers earned on previous purchases can they refuse to reinstate the voucher part of the transaction to use at a later date? 
I am not sure whether this is a legal practice or simply a matter of poor customer relations?

 Only British companies are covered by the distance selling regulations. 

As Shein operates as a “marketplace” it depends who the seller is of the item in question - but on their UK website their own stuff appears to be sold by one of their UK companies. And the site itself is operated by a UK company.

marcia_

A_Geordie said:

marcia_ said:

 Only British companies are covered by the distance selling regulations. 

Just wanted to point out, this is not true, otherwise it would be impossible to sue companies like eBay, Amazon, Facebook (Meta) etc. The general rule is that if the trader is directing their activities to consumers the UK even if there is no physical presence, then they are almost always going to be bound by consumer rights laws.

Shein is no exception. 

 What rubbish. Your rights lie with the legal jurisdiction the company is based . Try enforcing your uk rights in a UK Court against an overseas company 🙄

user1977

marcia_ said:

user1977 said:

marcia_ said:

susiepops100 said:

As many will be aware Shein have a policy with regard ro returns and refunds but more recently have introduced limitations. 
1. In some instances it is stated that a sale item cannot be returned  for a refund. Does this exonerate them from the rules on distance selling?
2. Where orders have been paid for with a mix of cash and vouchers earned on previous purchases can they refuse to reinstate the voucher part of the transaction to use at a later date? 
I am not sure whether this is a legal practice or simply a matter of poor customer relations?

 Only British companies are covered by the distance selling regulations. 

As Shein operates as a “marketplace” it depends who the seller is of the item in question - but on their UK website their own stuff appears to be sold by one of their UK companies. And the site itself is operated by a UK company.

  Isn't it Singaporean? 

No, like I said. Go look at the website yourself if you don’t believe me.

Okell

marcia_ said:

A_Geordie said:

marcia_ said:

 Only British companies are covered by the distance selling regulations. 

Just wanted to point out, this is not true, otherwise it would be impossible to sue companies like eBay, Amazon, Facebook (Meta) etc. The general rule is that if the trader is directing their activities to consumers the UK even if there is no physical presence, then they are almost always going to be bound by consumer rights laws.

Shein is no exception. 

 What rubbish. Your rights lie with the legal jurisdiction the company is based . Try enforcing your uk rights in a UK Court against an overseas company 🙄

I believe @A_Geordie is a solicitor so might no what they are talking about.

I think he (or she) was replying to a comment that "only British companies are covered by distance selling rules".

I think they are pointing out that that is not necessarily true.  

Of course, although non-UK companies may be subject to UK consumer protection legislation, it doesn't necessarily mean that getting a resolution out of them will be easy.

FWIW I would like to know what the source of "the general rule" is and how  a UK judgment would be enforced

marcia_

user1977 said:

marcia_ said:

user1977 said:

marcia_ said:

susiepops100 said:

As many will be aware Shein have a policy with regard ro returns and refunds but more recently have introduced limitations. 
1. In some instances it is stated that a sale item cannot be returned  for a refund. Does this exonerate them from the rules on distance selling?
2. Where orders have been paid for with a mix of cash and vouchers earned on previous purchases can they refuse to reinstate the voucher part of the transaction to use at a later date? 
I am not sure whether this is a legal practice or simply a matter of poor customer relations?

 Only British companies are covered by the distance selling regulations. 

As Shein operates as a “marketplace” it depends who the seller is of the item in question - but on their UK website their own stuff appears to be sold by one of their UK companies. And the site itself is operated by a UK company.

  Isn't it Singaporean? 

No, like I said. Go look at the website yourself if you don’t believe me.

 You are right x 

 still doesn't mean your legal rights against a foreign company can be enforced by a uk court. Your rights generally lie with the jurisdiction the company is based. 

A_Geordie

marcia_ said:

 What rubbish. Your rights lie with the legal jurisdiction the company is based . Try enforcing your uk rights in a UK Court against an overseas company 🙄

@Okell is correct. You made a statement that only British companies are subject to the regulations which is just not true. Your next post is also (strictly) not true when you say that your rights lie with the jurisdiction of where the company you are contracting with is based.

The contract will be governed by the law agreed by the parties and the 'jurisdiction' determines which courts or tribunals are entitled to hear any claim. It is a different kettle of fish when businesses contract with consumers in the UK. 

Prior to Brexit, the UK was bound by the Brussels I (Recast) Regulation and has a specific carve out about jurisdiction which allowed consumers in cross-border disputes to sue or be sued in their home country. Rome I Regulation incorporated similar legal provisions but with respect to choice of law i.e. a consumer will not be deprived of their consumer rights that are applicable in their home country even if the choice of law says otherwise in the contract.

Post-Brexit, the UK retained the Rome Regulation for choice of law (Article 6), and the jurisdiction provisions in the Brussels Regulation were incorporated into The Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1972 (Section 15B).

Governing law, jurisdiction and enforcement of a judgment are 3 distinctly separate issues and you seem to be conflating them as if they all mean the same thing. If you still think I am talking rubbish, then please can you share your source of authority (outside of you just saying it is rubbish and not right), which confirms that I am wrong and you are right.

Okell said:
FWIW I would like to know what the source of "the general rule" is and how  a UK judgment would be enforced

You could enforce the judgment in the UK if the foreign business has assets. Large foreign companies like Shein might have a distribution warehouse in the UK to store their goods, and if one were to know where that warehouse is, you could obtain a court order to send in the bailiffs to seize those goods. That's assuming the goods actually belong to Shein and don't have customer labels. Likewise, if they have funds coming into a UK bank account, you ask the court to make an order for the bank to secure those funds to satisfy the judgment.

If the foreign company simply has no assets in the UK at the time judgment is obtained, a CCJ doesn't expire so you could hang on for months or years and if they suddenly have assets or physical presence in the future, you could then look to enforce the judgment - you have up to 6 years and after that you need the court's permission to enforce the judgment which is usually a formality as long as you can explain why you haven't enforced it in the prior 6 years. 

As for enforcing a UK judgment overseas, that's highly unlikely unless there is a reciprocal treaty of some kind that recognises UK judgments. You would be better off starting legal action in that country and save yourself some money here.

marcia_

A_Geordie said:

marcia_ said:

 What rubbish. Your rights lie with the legal jurisdiction the company is based . Try enforcing your uk rights in a UK Court against an overseas company 🙄

@Okell is correct. You made a statement that only British companies are subject to the regulations which is just not true. Your next post is also (strictly) not true when you say that your rights lie with the jurisdiction of where the company you are contracting with is based.

The contract will be governed by the law agreed by the parties and the 'jurisdiction' determines which courts or tribunals are entitled to hear any claim. It is a different kettle of fish when businesses contract with consumers in the UK. 

Prior to Brexit, the UK was bound by the Brussels I (Recast) Regulation and has a specific carve out about jurisdiction which allowed consumers in cross-border disputes to sue or be sued in their home country. Rome I Regulation incorporated similar legal provisions but with respect to choice of law i.e. a consumer will not be deprived of their consumer rights that are applicable in their home country even if the choice of law says otherwise in the contract.

Post-Brexit, the UK retained the Rome Regulation for choice of law (Article 6), and the jurisdiction provisions in the Brussels Regulation were incorporated into The Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1972 (Section 15B).

Governing law, jurisdiction and enforcement of a judgment are 3 distinctly separate issues and you seem to be conflating them as if they all mean the same thing. If you still think I am talking rubbish, then please can you share your source of authority (outside of you just saying it is rubbish and not right), which confirms that I am wrong and you are right.

Okell said:
FWIW I would like to know what the source of "the general rule" is and how  a UK judgment would be enforced

You could enforce the judgment in the UK if the foreign business has assets. Large foreign companies like Shein might have a distribution warehouse in the UK to store their goods, and if one were to know where that warehouse is, you could obtain a court order to send in the bailiffs to seize those goods. That's assuming the goods actually belong to Shein and don't have customer labels. Likewise, if they have funds coming into a UK bank account, you ask the court to make an order for the bank to secure those funds to satisfy the judgment.

If the foreign company simply has no assets in the UK at the time judgment is obtained, a CCJ doesn't expire so you could hang on for months or years and if they suddenly have assets or physical presence in the future, you could then look to enforce the judgment - you have up to 6 years and after that you need the court's permission to enforce the judgment which is usually a formality as long as you can explain why you haven't enforced it in the prior 6 years. 

As for enforcing a UK judgment overseas, that's highly unlikely unless there is a reciprocal treaty of some kind that recognises UK judgments. You would be better off starting legal action in that country and save yourself some money here.

Ive bought from Australian and American website that specifically say in their T&C the law  applicable is the Law of the state/territory that they choose. I have no say in that. 

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/changed-your-mind/changing-your-mind-about-something-youve-bought/

"If you bought something from a company based outside the UK

Your rights might be different if you bought something from abroad. 

You should check the seller’s terms and conditions to find out if you can return the item. If you can return it, you should check who will pay for the return postage and if you can get the original delivery cost refunded."

A_Geordie

marcia_ said:

Ive bought from Australian and American website that specifically say in their T&C the law  applicable is the Law of the state/territory that they choose. I have no say in that. 

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/changed-your-mind/changing-your-mind-about-something-youve-bought/

"If you bought something from a company based outside the UK

Your rights might be different if you bought something from abroad. 

You should check the seller’s terms and conditions to find out if you can return the item. If you can return it, you should check who will pay for the return postage and if you can get the original delivery cost refunded."

The keyword from CAB in that statement is might be different. CAB provides general advice to the public and their articles do not cover all of the specific scenarios.

As I mentioned before, the general rule is that if the trader is directing their activities to the UK consumers then, regardless of what the terms and conditions state, you retain your consumer rights. Whether a business is directing their activities towards the UK is a question of fact but offering to deliver to the UK, having a physical presence in the UK, offering goods or services in GBP currency or having a co.uk or .uk website are all signs of directing activities to UK consumers.

Just to further back up my point, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 says this in its Explanatory Notes (my emphasis below): https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/notes/division/2/7

27. European Regulation EC 593/2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations sets out the rules as to which country’s law applies to consumer contracts. It is known as the “Rome I Regulation”. It confirms that it is open to a consumer and a trader to choose the law of any country to govern their contract. Where they do not choose, if a trader pursues its activities in or directs its activities to the UK, (whether the trader is in the UK or not) and the contract covers those activities, the Rome I Regulation provides that a contract with a consumer habitually living in the UK will be governed by UK law. Even if the consumer and trader do choose another country's law to govern their contract, the Rome I Regulation provides that where the trader pursues or directs its activities to the UK and the consumer is habitually resident in the UK, any UK protections that parties cannot contract out of under UK law (such as the key protections covered by this Act) will still apply. Depending on the circumstances, pursuing or directing activities might, for example, include having a website translated into English or with a ‘.uk’ web address from which consumers in the UK can purchase goods, services or digital content in sterling.

And just in case you still think I'm talking rubbish, I would also direct you to the recent MSE article about online return rights (which are exactly the same rights CAB discusses in the link you provided): https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2025/07/retail-wrongs-legal-online-returns-rights/.

In the table of companies listed, the first company named is Benefit and their T&Cs state that the laws are governed by the state of California. The MSE article claims that Benefit are not complying with distance selling rights in relation to some of their language and in the table explain why, with reference to the regulations.

If you are to be believed, the MSE team who conducted that research must be wrong because the T&Cs on the Benefit website are governed by US law. Therefore the distance selling regulations don't apply and UK consumers will be subject to US law, cannot assert their consumer rights and have no right to bring a claim in the UK - in complete contrast to what the MSE article says. I should add that Benefit are not the only company on that list to have a different governing law either, Bondi Sands (Australian law) is another example listed in the table. 

Of course, this is a public forum for people to express their own views and opinions but I am confident that your views on this matter is wrong, not mine (as well as the CRA and the MSE article). It is up to others who read these posts to decide what they want to believe.