Faulty Goods. NO REFUND without name address

[clampless]

Wickes, Wilkinsons, Aldis and who knows who else are requiring name address etc before refunding on faulty goods, even with a receipt and purchased with cash. I am getting a little fed up with having stand up rows in these stores, anyone know a way of enforcing sale of goods act without providing these gonniffs with free and valuable marketing information. Wilkinsons best to date, their EPOS till charged me £5.99 for an item flashed at £4.99 and they were saying they wouldn't give me the right change for a £10 note until I provided my personal details.

SW1A 1AA Windsor would only dump the resident at that address with unwanted Junk Mail.

I did once flummox them by explaining that I coudn't provide my name and address as to do so would be in contravention of the data protection act, but don't expect to be able to use that one again. Your guidance would be appreciated, my apology if I'm repeating an old post.

[WelshMam2009]

Wickes, Wilkinsons, Aldis and who knows who else are requiring name address etc before refunding on faulty goods, even with a receipt and purchased with cash. I am getting a little fed up with having stand up rows in these stores, anyone know a way of enforcing sale of goods act without providing these gonniffs with free and valuable marketing information. Wilkinsons best to date, their EPOS till charged me £5.99 for an item flashed at £4.99 and they were saying they wouldn't give me the right change for a £10 note until I provided my personal details.

SW1A 1AA Windsor would only dump the resident at that address with unwanted Junk Mail.

I did once flummox them by explaining that I coudn't provide my name and address as to do so would be in contravention of the data protection act, but don't expect to be able to use that one again. Your guidance would be appreciated, my apology if I'm repeating an old post.

 

No fixed abode??

HM Prison??

 

Annoys me too...but didn't realise they were doing it for such piddling amounts of money these days. Guess you could write something on the bottom forbidding them to process or use your data under the DPA??

[rdbrook]

Hi Guys, no excuse I know, but I have managed some of these shops and know why they do it. It's nothing to do with mailouts is to protect the company from staff fraud! I caught a MOS who had defrauded approx £700 from my store by actioning phantom or multiple refunds. If a company suspects a member of staff of fraud then they may try to contact the customer to verify the transaction. As I said not perfect but it keep staff on their toes.

[skonk]

If they're taking addresses to help them with thieving staff, then when a refund is being processed, the staff member should ask the customer if they would mind giving their address to prevent fraud, and if they say no, that that should be accepted. I can understand it from a managers POV, but at the end of the day, it's the customers who, basically, couldn't care less if they were served by dishonest staff. they just want the refund they are legally entitled to.

[gyzmo]

Why is handing your name and address over such a problem? I've done many a time and not had any junk mail from the companies involved.

 

Just give an address that does not exist or if writing the address down make it illegible.

 

IMHO, this is being awkward for the sake of it.

[rdbrook]

If they're taking addresses to help them with thieving staff, then when a refund is being processed, the staff member should ask the customer if they would mind giving their address to prevent fraud, and if they say no, that that should be accepted. I can understand it from a managers POV, but at the end of the day, it's the customers who, basically, couldn't care less if they were served by dishonest staff. they just want the refund they are legally entitled to.

I fully agree, I used to tell customers exactly why we would "appreciate" their details however I never forced them. A lot of companys won't explain because they don't like customers to know that they may potentially have a problem. I know for a fact that the company I worked for used to just file the details in case they were needed. They NEVER got sent out of the store or NEVER used to be keyed onto any databases.

[clampless]

Thanks people. As far as "asking, but no problem if you don't want to provide the info", Wickes are not the only company who input your personal details through the till system, thus the shop floor staff cannot make the refund that they are legally obliged to make until they have the details that they aren't legally entitled to demand. I appreciate the point about keeping staff honest, but with all respect that isn't my responsibility. I have no problem with my refund being signed off by a superviser or manager which would resolve that issue without the need for me to have to give this information. Lastly, I know my details have been used for marketing, because when I was willing to give my details I changed the middle initial to that of the store who took the details, amazing, junk mail with the incorrect initial! I am not saying all retailers will abuse the personal details they take; the ethical ones will tell they won't misuse the information, which is precisely what the unethical ones will tell you. Sorry, but I can't tell them apart. But the question still stands, how can I enforce my legal rights without being coerced to give information I don't want to provide and there is no legal reason for them to not ask; to but demand! I like the H.M. Prison (out on licence?) and NFA although I resent the need to lie any more good ideas?

[rdbrook]

Thanks people. As far as "asking, but no problem if you don't want to provide the info", Wickes are not the only company who input your personal details through the till system, thus the shop floor staff cannot make the refund that they are legally obliged to make until they have the details that they aren't legally entitled to demand. I appreciate the point about keeping staff honest, but with all respect that isn't my responsibility. I have no problem with my refund being signed off by a superviser or manager which would resolve that issue without the need for me to have to give this information. Lastly, I know my details have been used for marketing, because when I was willing to give my details I changed the middle initial to that of the store who took the details, amazing, junk mail with the incorrect initial! I am not saying all retailers will abuse the personal details they take; the ethical ones will tell they won't misuse the information, which is precisely what the unethical ones will tell you. Sorry, but I can't tell them apart. But the question still stands, how can I enforce my legal rights without being coerced to give information I don't want to provide and there is no legal reason for them to not ask; to but demand! I like the H.M. Prison (out on licence?) and NFA although I resent the need to lie any more good ideas?

I may be wrong (i'm sure someone will correct me if I am) my understanding of SAGA is that the company has to issue you the refund, it doesn't make any provision about HOW they refund! If the companies poliicy is to take name and address you only have 2 choices. 1 - give false info OR 2 - use your right under DATA PROTECTION to insist that your details are not used for marketing etc.. As I stated before the company I worked for never used the information however I take your point about not knowing if they do or don't. Unfortunatly there is nothing illegal in a company asking for these details. Might be a good idea to start naming and shaming the companies who do misuse the info supplied!

[Humphh]

This is a rant - its absolutely outrageous! How dare they use the fact that cash is going the other way as leverage - blackmail - into getting you to divulge our personal info. They are NOT entitled - any more than I am to know their name, address, phone number, post code when I bought the item in the first place. Its absolute rubbish that they say it is to prevent staff fraud because they don't ask for ID, and a fraudster could simply give false details. And anyway, its not our obligation to help them sort out their staff! Ohhh I'm so angry! And no - I refuse to give false details to pander to them - why should I lie!? I have done nothing wrong! It took me nearly an hour to get a refund from B+M store for a bag of crisps that was out of date and soggy the other day. And also, the shop Screwfix want you details when you buy anything! What the hell is going on!? It contravenes the sale of goods act - your receipt is your contract with the shop - and I have been told on many occasions that I am the only one who has ever refused! Come on people!

[BazzaS]

This is a rant - its absolutely outrageous! How dare they use the fact that cash is going the other way as leverage - blackmail - into getting you to divulge our personal info. They are NOT entitled - any more than I am to know their name, address, phone number, post code when I bought the item in the first place. Its absolute rubbish that they say it is to prevent staff fraud because they don't ask for ID, and a fraudster could simply give false details. And anyway, its not our obligation to help them sort out their staff! Ohhh I'm so angry! And no - I refuse to give false details to pander to them - why should I lie!? I have done nothing wrong! It took me nearly an hour to get a refund from B+M store for a bag of crisps that was out of date and soggy the other day. And also, the shop Screwfix want you details when you buy anything! What the hell is going on!? It contravenes the sale of goods act - your receipt is your contract with the shop - and I have been told on many occasions that I am the only one who has ever refused! Come on people!

 

Why have you resuscitated a 6 year old thread?

 

 

As for "It contravenes the sale of goods act" : what actions do you feel contravene what part of the Sale of Goods Act?.

 

Why should we be convinced by "It contravenes the sale of goods act" as an unqualified statement? You've also said

"your receipt is your contract with the shop" which is just plain wrong.

 

Why it it wrong? Your receipt is proof you have paid, which is providing consideration, and likely showing what you purchased.

However:It is entirely possible to have a contract:

a) without a receipt, and also

b) it is possible (in fact: it is usual) to have a contract that the receipt represents only part of the store's standard conditions under which the contract was entered into.

[Humphh]

I have resurrected the thread as you say, for two reasons:

1. It is still relevant and the important points were missed

2. I didn't realise it was a 6 year old thread.

 

Anyway, the CAB told me that my receipt was my contract with the shop - I presumed they were telling the truth, and the reason it contravenes the 1974 sale of goods act is because it does not state anywhere in that act that your personal details are required before you are eligible for a refund on faulty goods.

Are you seriously saying that you think this is ok?

[BazzaS]

I have resurrected the thread as you say, for two reasons:

1. It is still relevant and the important points were missed

2. I didn't realise it was a 6 year old thread.

 

Anyway, the CAB told me that my receipt was my contract with the shop - I presumed they were telling the truth, and the reason it contravenes the 1974 sale of goods act is because it does not state anywhere in that act that your personal details are required before you are eligible for a refund on faulty goods.

Are you seriously saying that you think this is ok?

 

No, I don't think it is OK.

But nor are you likely to win any argument in a store saying "my receipt is my contract and you are breaking the Sales of Goods Act".

 

You need to be able to point them to which section requires the refund and doesn't require you to give your name and address.

 

As for "the CAB say my receipt is my contract" : either their first line advisor got it wrong (not unheard of) or you've misunderstood them (equally not unheard of when errant advice gets rechecked with the CAB)

 

My view: the Sales of Goods Act (as amended) doesn't require the purchaser to give their name and address, nor does it prevent the store from asking.

However, if you decline to give those details - how will you enforce your rights?

If you write them a letter before action (a pre-requisite to bringing an action in the small claims track of the county court) - what details do you think they will need to reply?

 

So, they can't insist you supply them, but to enforce your rights you are going to have to somehow, if they play difficult.

 

You can also give your name & address and then contact their data controller to ask that they don't keep or pass on your details. I like the approach of using different combinations of name / different middle initial to know who is "leaking" your details.....

[Humphh]

Thanks for the reply-informative. If I switch it around and ask them to show me where in the sale of goods act it says that I have to - that should win the argument - because it makes no mention of customers' personal details and that act is their bible isn't it? Anyway, I haven't lost an argument for years now and it usually ends up with the manager overriding whatever the till and cashier are trying to insisting upon.

I wish I knew how to start some kind of public awareness campaign because surely they are breaking the law by insisting? I am no lawyer but it feels very wrong to me and I find the fact that everybody in the world except me gives their info to be worrying...its like no one cares about their rights any more or perhaps they 'don't want a fuss' on the shop floor. Perhaps going to court is the answer.

[BazzaS]

Thanks for the reply-informative. If I switch it around and ask them to show me where in the sale of goods act it says that I have to - that should win the argument - because it makes no mention of customers' personal details and that act is their bible isn't it? Anyway, I haven't lost an argument for years now and it usually ends up with the manager overriding whatever the till and cashier are trying to insisting upon.

I wish I knew how to start some kind of public awareness campaign because surely they are breaking the law by insisting? I am no lawyer but it feels very wrong to me and I find the fact that everybody in the world except me gives their info to be worrying...its like no one cares about their rights any more or perhaps they 'don't want a fuss' on the shop floor. Perhaps going to court is the answer.

 

Would it ever reach court? I doubt it, as:

You can't go to court without issuing a LBA.

Your LBA would have to have your name and address, giving them their "win", so they could then issue the refund before you can start court action.

 

So: How are you going to get it to court without giving them your name and address??.

[citizenB]

It does seem odd restarting a thread that is nearly 6 years old - especially as there have been many changes to the regulations since this thread started.

 

However, I have to admit, if they insist, then giving them your name and address with errors in your name would certainly be one way of tracking back any marketing material - at which point you could then sue them for misusing your data, does sound like a winner.

 

I guess you could also indulge in a little time wasting and insist that a Supervisor is present and provides you with a signed assurance that your personal details will not be abused and remind them of the Data Protection Act.

[Humphh]

I don't see why it wouldn't get to court. As far as I can see, retailers are abusing the rights of consumers on a massive scale on a daily basis

and it needs addressing. Also don't see why they should know where I live in order for me to take them to court..why? Surely that is half the point of court - a legal interface between you both? They don't give the victim's address to the rapist or the person suing etc! same applies to less severe cases surely?

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

You issue the claim and you need you give your service address.

You CANNOT issue court action without giving an address.

[Humphh]

To the court yes - but not to the person/company I am taking action against -= surely!? That would leave me open to intimidation etc Anyway, I wouldn't mind giving my address to them to take them to court - I don't see that as letting them win because I am providing my details for a different reason - not for my refund.. and if that is just a part of the process of making them account for their actions for the common good then so be it. It is the principle of the matter I want to fight against - their arrogant expectation that they are ENTITLED to my details for a trivial refund of faulty goods that is their fault in the first place!

Constantly making me feel like an awkward customer when it is they who are being the awkward retailer - and they must be breaking the law by telling us that without our details we don't get our cash back because its not true!

What do you think?

Edited June 3, 2015 by Humphh
additional info

[BazzaS]

To the court yes - but not to the person/company I am taking action against -= surely!? That would leave me open to intimidation etc Anyway, I wouldn't mind giving my address to them to take them to court - I don't see that as letting them win because I am providing my details for a different reason - not for my refund.. and if that is just a part of the process of making them account for their actions for the common good then so be it. It is the principle of the matter I want to fight against - their arrogant expectation that they are ENTITLED to my details for a trivial refund of faulty goods that is their fault in the first place!

Constantly making me feel like an awkward customer when it is they who are being the awkward retailer - and they must be breaking the law by telling us that without our details we don't get our cash back because its not true!

What do you think?

 

I think you have ignored my previous point.

You must give them an opportunity to resolve the issue by sending them a letter before action before starting court proceedings. If you don't they can get any court case struck out, as an abuse if process.

 

Your LBA needs to have a contact for you so they can reply.

They can issue a refund to that contact.

So, the issue remains that

a) you'll have to give them contact details before starting a court case

b) they can settle before court.

 

As for you comparing this to a rape trial: short version : you are making a ludicrous comparison.

 

Long version: in a rape trial there is an alleged victim, an alleged perpetrator (the accused - the defendant) and the prosecution (the CPS). The CPS's address is in the public domain, the alleged victim's address can be withheld.

In a civil case there is a plaintiff and a defendant, and their addresses for service of documents are disclosed to each other.

[my-spirit-soars-free]

It is, however, still wrong that the retailers feel that they can force us to fill in long forms, tick the box that says "no spam", and process our details in their "abuse prevention system" as a condition of their refund.

 

I have been in the situation where a large retailer did not have the computer game I had bought. Apparently, they have a policy of not taking the cases off display in case you want to know that they will have it back in. Anyway, I picked one case up, took it through the till, another member of staff went to get the disc while I paid. They did not have the item!

 

As they did not have the item I had to queue up at CS (with my frozen food melting), fill in their paperwork (including DOB and a reason for the refund - of course there was no fitting one), and I was told that the details would go onto a database to monitor refund abuse. Then the money went back onto my card - after a nice bit of humiliation because the CS terminal is too high to be reached from a wheelchair, and this is my fault, apparently.

 

I have never bought anything similar from this retailer again, and my main food shop is now done elsewhere - but the point remains. I had to agree to my details going onto a system, they asked for personal stuff including DOB, all because they had sold me something they did not have in the first place.

[Humphh]

Yes - I know that the rape and refunds differ - I wasn't suggesting otherwise! All I am saying is that I am happy to give my address to take them to court if it means a step forward towards getting them to stop this practice. They haven't 'won' because they have my address, they are hopefully on the road to losing.

So when I send them a LBA as you suggest, I have gone past the point of actually wanting my money back - I am now fighting the principle of the matter..I don't want to settle out of court - 50p for a pack of crisps! I want to get the law amended so they stop it. I won't make any analogies because that seems to confuse things but surely I am still entitled to challenge what they are doing despite them offering to rectify it afterwards? After all, they will still continue to do it to everybody else - and me in future.

[Humphh]

Well, in my experience you could have (and should have) refused to give your details - it would have taken longer to get your money back, along with extra humiliation being made to feel like an awkward customer etc. They generally have to get the store manager to override the system as the till staff get really flustered when confronted by a thinking being and not a robot who obeys! They use the fact that you want your money back as leverage to get your details - a form of blackmail really and I am going to try to get this changed. Try it next time - because there will be a next time.

What store was it by the way?

[BazzaS]

Yes - I know that the rape and refunds differ - I wasn't suggesting otherwise! All I am saying is that I am happy to give my address to take them to court if it means a step forward towards getting them to stop this practice. They haven't 'won' because they have my address, they are hopefully on the road to losing.

So when I send them a LBA as you suggest, I have gone past the point of actually wanting my money back - I am now fighting the principle of the matter..I don't want to settle out of court - 50p for a pack of crisps! I want to get the law amended so they stop it. I won't make any analogies because that seems to confuse things but surely I am still entitled to challenge what they are doing despite them offering to rectify it afterwards? After all, they will still continue to do it to everybody else - and me in future.

 

Your LBA sets out what you are claiming.

They can give you what you are claiming and prevent you issuing court action.

So you can't not "want to settle out of court - 50p for a pack of crisps!" IF that is all you are entitled to.

 

The court isn't there for you to campaign for a change in the law. The court is there to uphold current law, and if the issue is "failure to issue a refund under SoGA" : if they issue the refund once they receive your LBA (in which you will give your name & address): you have no case for the court to hear.

 

This is the third time in which I've tried to make this point so that you can understand it.

 

You issue the LBA, they issue the refund; on what grounds / head of claim can you then go to court? That they did wrong but have corrected it??

 

Apologies if it isn't what you want to hear : but it is why I don't think court is the way forward for you (nor is Judicial Review : as the actions aren't those of a public body).

[Humphh]

Ahh! Now I get it! So any idea how I do I proceed in order to get the law changed?

[BazzaS]

Ahh! Now I get it! So any idea how I do I proceed in order to get the law changed?

 

Raise it with Trading Standards

Raise it with your MP

Raise it with Watchdog.

Start an only petition & try to gather support here / through Social Media.