Bank statement as proof of purchase

Deedoodee

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81982729#Comment_81982729

well, explaining my legal rights and having to repeatedly calmly explain that asking for my legal rights to be fulfilled does not make me a ‘rude’ ‘nasty’ ‘entitled’ (etc) person to a manager is one thing, but then having that reinforced by the customer service is a whole other.

I asked the customer service (via email) point blank about the till process refusing a refund without a receipt and how that falls with consumer rights law. And they are adamant that a voucher is enough.

I could email the CEO but these looks like company policy.

Alderbank

The manager was presented with a pair of shoes which are being returned because there is some kind of flaw in one of the uppers.

The customer has no receipt but has a bank statement saying only that they made a purchase for £60 in a branch of the chain three months ago.

The manager says the retail price of those shoes is more than that. The customer says they were a sale item.

The manager is aware that the chain has a policy of discounting items on the spot for minor defects. He has been trained that in those circumstances he must note the defect on the receipt. He has been told about s14(2) of the CRA 2015.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/section/14

He knows the store policy is to refuse a refund when it is because of a defect noted on a receipt. However this customer does not present a receipt. To resolve the issue he offers a credit note, which he is empowered to do where there is a dispute about the validity of a claim.

Of course none of the above might have happened! but if it did it would explain the store's actions including their insistence that they comply with CRA.

Deedoodee

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81983023#Comment_81983023

that’s actually very interesting. I think it would have been more understandable and less frustrating. The manager went for ‘they obviously weren’t like this when you bought them otherwise you wouldn’t have bought them’ and ‘ you need a receipt to you prove you bought them here’

highlander58

The manager DID gIve a refund through till - after insisting they couldn’t. So clearly they were trying to fob you off with less than your legal rights.

The rest is irrelevantl. OP said (at start) that shoes developed fault AFTER purchase. OP also says manager said OP wouldn’t have bought shoes with this defect. So Alderbank’s suggestion that OP knowingly bought damaged goods is another pointless rabbit hole.
‘Company policy’ does not trump legal rights.
Rather than waste time/effort dreaming up excuses for this shoddy customer service - I’d email the CEO & see where that gets me.

Alderbank

…'So Alderbank’s suggestion that OP knowingly bought damaged goods is another pointless rabbit hole.

‘Company policy’ does not trump legal rights'…

Read what I said. I don't suggest that the OP bought damaged goods. I enjoy browsing around for bargains and I've sometimes bought items from shops like Next where when I've pointed out a defect they have given a discount but noted it on the receipt, in compliance with s14(2) of CRA.

Just giving one real-life reason why a bank statement on its own does not always tell the full story…

Deedoodee

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81983227#Comment_81983227

yes, I think they were trying to fob me off. And when the manager started on his ‘you’re being so rude. I’ve offered a solution’ tirade. It made me think more that he was trying to fob me off.

But the customer services is saying that a voucher as a replacement fulfils their obligation under consumer rights. She’d essentially saying replacing for another pair of similar value is sufficient.

I don’t agree with because i tried on about 10 pairs before that pair so I’d expect a replacement to be the same fit as well, and if one can’t be found then a refund would be required. But who is legally correct?

born_again

Just who is this retailer?

highlander58

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81983236#Comment_81983236

As you said yourself: “none of the above might have happened” - & in fact it didn’t happen. Unless OP now tells us otherwise - let’s stick to the facts. Shop insisted on till receipt - your hypothesis would not be proven by that either. So - it’s all irrelevant to the issue as stated by OP.

highlander58

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81983341#Comment_81983341

‘Replace’ means replace in CR law; it doesn’t mean ‘voucher to replace’. A voucher gives no certainty that you will be able to find an equivalent pair for same/less money. Customer service again trying to fob you off. They & manager already tried to fob you off with excuse that refund through till without receipt wasn’t possible - but then they did it. So - why give credence to anything they say?

You have a choice: either accept the money & go - or escalate to CEO. CEO can provide better redress for all the unpleasantness & inconvenience - aiming to persuade you to shop there again in future.
CEOs of large companies tend to have ‘executive offices’ around them: a group of competent people whose job is to make these sort of problems go away. If a customer is able to explain their problem concisely & politely - the executives will usually provide redress with speed & efficiency.
Rather than waste time here chewing the cud about nothing - with a negative experience like yours, I’d put my time & effort into a brief CEO email.

MyRealNameToo

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81975696#Comment_81975696

Do you think Apple is the only shop in the world that sells iPhones?

OP hasn't identified the brand in question but there are many brands that have their own dedicated shops but other shops also sell their products. About 15% of the world's iPhone sales are made directly with Apple with the rest being bought from other sellers.

Clearly walking into an Apple shop with a Samsung phone and a bank statement showing an appropriately valued transaction in Apple will certainly get a clear "you didnt buy that from us" response but the odds are that the person didnt buy an iPhone from them either.