MOTHERCARE Trying for A Refund but Shop is Refusing

ginormousflares

Hi everyone I would like some advice please. Bought a foot muffler from Mothercare on 28 Oct 07. The zip at the bottom has bust and cannot be zipped up. I took it back for refund today and they told me that it is Mothercare's policy not to refund items after 28 days from date of purchase but that they would replace it for me. I said no, I didn't want a replacement, I wanted a refund. But they said no, I asked to speak to a manager and the girl said she was the supervisor and she would have to do. I said that I would like to make a complaint and would like her name, the phone number and address of their complaints office. She gave me a number, I quoted the sale of goods act to her and asked if she was aware of it (scare tactics I suppose - didn't work) after which she accused me of harrassing her (I wasn't being abusive, wasn't offensive and wasn't swearing) and that she would call the police and have me removed from the premises, I said go ahead, I'm not causing a scene. I asked for the address of the complaints office again and she written down a customer services number on the back of a till receipt, flung a mothercare catalogue in my general direction and told me to look in there for it and shouted 'next please'. So I have 2 dilemmas, can I get a refund and how do I complain about her disgraceful behaviour? Thanks GF

alwaysonthego_2

By law you are not entitled to a refund. Either a replacement/repair. Sorry.

Regards to complaining about the sa you should write a letter to ho

RAMBLER

with regard to a refund - I don't think they need to either - but always check with the Citizens Advice Bureau.
Personally I think they were being quite fair to offer a replacement because you must have wanted it in the first place.

With regard to the SA, there are always two sides to every story so write to Head Office and be accurate with your complaint.

Good luck

Blacksheep1979

under sale of goods act after the initial period where can reject the goods for a full refund (few days/week or so) it's up to the rtailer what they want to do refund/replace/repair. If however this happened a further few times then you may have the right to request a refund but not after only 1 failure.

markchap

ginormousflares wrote: »

I quoted the sale of goods act to her and asked if she was aware of it

I used to work in a shop, it really bugged me when customers thought they knew the Sale of Goods act and tried to quote it when trying to get a refund etc. Always made me chuckle when I corrected them.

ginormousflares

Thanks for the advice peeps. I have to say, she did put in my place; but still gonna complain

RadoJo

I'm not sure what you're going to complain about? From the sounds of it, the person you spoke to in Mothercare followed procedure correctly, and you were the one who was pushing it by mis-quoting the Sale of Goods Act and, in your own words, trying to scare her! What was she supposed to do? As she said, you were kind of harassing her by refusing to accept what you were legally entitled to and trying to extract more by deliberately misinterpreting the law in your favour. Once she had offered you the replacement, given you the details you asked for, and asked you to take the matter up elsewhere for resolution, what did you want? You say in your post that she had already gievn you the details you asked for, and then you asked for them again - why?

sweep9

markchap wrote: »

I used to work in a shop, it really bugged me when customers thought they knew the Sale of Goods act and tried to quote it when trying to get a refund etc. Always made me chuckle when I corrected them.

Sorry... slightly off topic this but it's relevant to this quote...

I was once quoted by a customer that the sale of goods act said that she could have a refund for unwanted wallpaper for up to two years with a receipt!!! :rolleyes:

tigtag02

RadoJo wrote: »

I'm not sure what you're going to complain about? From the sounds of it, the person you spoke to in Mothercare followed procedure correctly, and you were the one who was pushing it by mis-quoting the Sale of Goods Act and, in your own words, trying to scare her! What was she supposed to do? As she said, you were kind of harassing her by refusing to accept what you were legally entitled to and trying to extract more by deliberately misinterpreting the law in your favour. Once she had offered you the replacement, given you the details you asked for, and asked you to take the matter up elsewhere for resolution, what did you want? You say in your post that she had already gievn you the details you asked for, and then you asked for them again - why?

I think GF was lookig for advice. Not his wrists slapping and the 3rd degree :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Hopefully though your condescending post has made you feel better

uktim29

tigtag02 wrote: »

Hopefully though your condescending post has made you feel better

"ginormousflares" seems quiet happy to be like that with shop assistants so I don't think they'll mind!

ginormousflares wrote: »

I quoted the sale of goods act to her and asked if she was aware of it (scare tactics I suppose - didn't work)

"I [strike]quoted[/strike] the sale of goods act to her and asked if she was aware of it (scare tactics I suppose - didn't work)"

Should read

"I made up a part of the the sale of goods act that doesn't exist to her and asked if she was aware of it (scare tactics I suppose - didn't work)"

Why do people quote things they know nothing about?

The op has acted out of order and people who may have worked in such positions where they have had to deal with the likes of the op will probably write what they think.

ginormousflares wrote: »

how do I complain about her disgraceful behaviour?

A classic example of someone with no self awareness.

tigtag02

uktim29 wrote: »

A classic example of someone with no self awareness.

A very sweeping statement dont you think.

Hardly a well balanced judge of character based on ONE thread.

It makes you little better than how you are portraying the OP who accepted his misquote of the act but was unhappy with the SA attitude!!