Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • markluke123
    • By markluke123 11th Aug 18, 2:54 PM
    • 4Posts
    • 0Thanks
    markluke123
    Shop claimed the item was damaged after 14 day return.
    • #1
    • 11th Aug 18, 2:54 PM
    Shop claimed the item was damaged after 14 day return. 11th Aug 18 at 2:54 PM
    We purcahsed an item online from a shop and took out online finance which was advertised on their site. We decided that the item was not really what we wanted after all and returned it unopened and un altered within 14 days. On receiving the goods we noted that the packaging look insufficient for the item in question wich was an intergrated amplifier for a stereo system.
    To return the goods, we had to arrange and pay for a courier as per the shops policy. On receiving the returned amp, the shop claimed that it would not power up and that they would not refund the money. They seem to be giving every excuse to avoid it. This has left us in a difficult position as technically we have an outstanding loan debt and no refund.
    We do not think the shop is acting reasonably as they would surely need to prove that the item worked before they sent it. Also, since we were entitled to return the item within 14 days as a distant purchace, we were not obliged to check the item on receipt or bare any responsibility for the packaging in which it was originally sent. We have informed The Financial Ombudsman service but would really like some advise as to the behaviour of the retailer in question.
Page 1
    • Carrot007
    • By Carrot007 11th Aug 18, 3:02 PM
    • 1,855 Posts
    • 1,614 Thanks
    Carrot007
    • #2
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:02 PM
    • #2
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:02 PM
    Your problem is you thought the packaging looked bad and so it could have been damaged yet ignored this and sent it back as a change of mind return.


    As such they were expecting an item with no issues and think you are trying it on.


    Why would you do such a thing? They may be acting bad, but you acted worse and seem like a child tantruming by saying you were not obliged to check.


    You brought this on yourself by acting stupid.
    • elsien
    • By elsien 11th Aug 18, 3:12 PM
    • 17,823 Posts
    • 45,281 Thanks
    elsien
    • #3
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:12 PM
    • #3
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:12 PM
    Your problem is you thought the packaging looked bad and so it could have been damaged yet ignored this and sent it back as a change of mind return.


    As such they were expecting an item with no issues and think you are trying it on.


    Why would you do such a thing? They may be acting bad, but you acted worse and seem like a child tantruming by saying you were not obliged to check.


    You brought this on yourself by acting stupid.
    Originally posted by Carrot007
    Is it really neccessary to be quite so rude?
    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.
    • markluke123
    • By markluke123 11th Aug 18, 3:14 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    markluke123
    • #4
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:14 PM
    • #4
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:14 PM
    The packaging did not appear damaged but had no fragile stickers and a thin layer of bubble wrap. Our return of the item had nothing to do with the packaging.

    We simply returned it as it had been sent. If the shop deemed the packaging adequate, why would we repackage it? That makes no sense.
    How can a shop prove it worked before it was sent?
    • Carrot007
    • By Carrot007 11th Aug 18, 3:24 PM
    • 1,855 Posts
    • 1,614 Thanks
    Carrot007
    • #5
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:24 PM
    • #5
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:24 PM
    The packaging did not appear damaged but had no fragile stickers and a thin layer of bubble wrap. Our return of the item had nothing to do with the packaging.
    Originally posted by markluke123

    Well that is different then, But you obviously though it enough of an issue to mention it here, so why would you not mention it to them?


    We simply returned it as it had been sent. If the shop deemed the packaging adequate, why would we repackage it? That makes no sense.
    Originally posted by markluke123

    More excuses? If you thought it unsuitable why would you not repackage it and bring it to the shops attention? It makes perfect sense, just because someone else thinks it good enough does not mean you should.


    How can a shop prove it worked before it was sent?
    Originally posted by markluke123

    How can you proove it did not?


    The questions to think about are. How long did you take to tell them it was sent back. If more than a day they would expect you to have looked at it. Why did you send back in packaging you deemed inadiquate? Maybe some new employee wrapepd it and has now been fired? And if you thoguht the packaging was bad why did you not tell them in order to cover yourself for the exact situation that has arisen?


    You should still get your money back but you have not in anyway made it easy for yourself. If you are saying the same sort of thing to the company rather than being open you may not, still always small claims.
    • markluke123
    • By markluke123 11th Aug 18, 3:32 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    markluke123
    • #6
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:32 PM
    • #6
    • 11th Aug 18, 3:32 PM
    The point is that the seller surely has the burden of proof for the condition of the item when sent not the buyer.
    We had 14 days to inform of a return. The packaging did not look damaged. We merely expressed an opinion that we thought the packaging should be better, based on previous experience of similar packaged items.

    The shop claim that the packaging was adequate as per courier guidelines. Either it was or it was not. They can't have it both ways.
    • theonlywayisup
    • By theonlywayisup 11th Aug 18, 5:00 PM
    • 13,055 Posts
    • 8,853 Thanks
    theonlywayisup
    • #7
    • 11th Aug 18, 5:00 PM
    • #7
    • 11th Aug 18, 5:00 PM
    The point is that the seller surely has the burden of proof for the condition of the item when sent not the buyer.
    We had 14 days to inform of a return. The packaging did not look damaged. We merely expressed an opinion that we thought the packaging should be better, based on previous experience of similar packaged items.

    The shop claim that the packaging was adequate as per courier guidelines. Either it was or it was not. They can't have it both ways.
    Originally posted by markluke123
    The issues are that you chose not to test the item on receipt. You then chose to return it as per your rights under CCCR; cancelling as not suitable. It is then up to you to return the item to the seller (assuming they complied with CCCR) and that included using a courier and packaging that would protect it. It was down to you to ensure it got there in one piece.
    Last edited by theonlywayisup; 12-08-2018 at 9:58 AM. Reason: Spelling.
    • markluke123
    • By markluke123 11th Aug 18, 6:45 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    markluke123
    • #8
    • 11th Aug 18, 6:45 PM
    • #8
    • 11th Aug 18, 6:45 PM
    We returned the package exactly as sent. The seller claims that the packaging was within the guidelines of their courier which was DPD.
    We returned the package via The Post Office which has less specific guidelines. If the package was good enough on the outward journey then it was good enough to return.

    There is nothing in the 14 day return laws that say that we have to repackage goods unless they have been opened for inspection in a way that could reduce the value. The package was not opened..
    Secondly. It makes a mockery of the CRA if a seller could potentially send out an item that is broken before postage and then claim it is broken when returned. Any shop could claim that every time someone returned an item within 14 days because of a change of mind .

    Surely the burden of proof is on the shop to show that it worked in the first place irrespective of packaging. Also.we had no choice but to organise and pay for a return to get our refund. The seller did not offer to organise the return. If the seller had requested an inspection or a repackage then we would have complied but we were obliged to do neither under the 14 day return rules.
    • mutzi
    • By mutzi 11th Aug 18, 9:52 PM
    • 156 Posts
    • 123 Thanks
    mutzi
    • #9
    • 11th Aug 18, 9:52 PM
    • #9
    • 11th Aug 18, 9:52 PM
    If you have a legitimate complaint and the retailer isn't helping, you should go to the lender before the ombudsman. Assuming the retailer/lender are different.

    I would tend to agree with the others though, the retailer is right to assume it happened on the way back - and that is from your own version of events, I wonder what theirs is?

    The only strange thing here is no mention of actual damage, or is that just missing from the details here?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,541Posts Today

7,016Users online

Martin's Twitter