Littlewoods - Discount Codes - Reversed !!

[dgif1973]

I have searched the forum for this problem so sorry if it is a duplicate, in 2007 someone had similar issues but Littlewoods T&Cs have changed since then.

 

I have been a Platinum member of Littlewoods for years and am rgularly sent discount offers. I have also used a few I have found online.

 

On Thursday this week I attempted to make a purchase on their Website using my Credit Account and a discount code I found online. The transaction was refused. I phoned them to ask why and they asked whereI got my codes from. I said the internet. I was informed I was not allowed to do this and that all my previous discounts would be reversed and added to my account. I now owe them several hundred pounds from previous discounts.

 

I am unable to tell if the discounts are from online codes or ones I received in the post.

 

Is this legal after so long? Their current Website T&C state:

 

"2.3 Promotional codes are codes that enable customers to obtain benefits such as discounts, free delivery and free gifts. These codes are non-transferable so may only be used by the person to whom they are issued and must only be used in accordance with their terms and conditions of use. If you use a promotional code to claim a promotional benefit, you must first check that it was issued to you and that you are eligible to use it. By using it to claim a promotional benefit you will be confirming that:-

 

(i) you are entitled to use the code;

(ii) you meet all the conditions that apply to its use;

(iii) you agree to the terms set out below.

 

If, before accepting your order, we find that you are not entitled to use the code or do not meet all the terms and conditions of its use, we may reject your order or alternatively process it without the promotional benefit being applied. If, after accepting your order, we find that you were not entitled to use the code or did not meet all the terms and conditions of its use, we may reverse the benefit that you obtained. If you transacted on a cash basis e.g. by debit or credit card, we may take a further payment, equivalent to the value of the benefit obtained, from the card used. If you transacted on a credit basis, the value of the benefit obtained may be charged to your credit account."

 

 

Any advice welcome.

 

Thanks

[Kraken1]

hmmm. not sure. On a contractual basis it seems they can, but I'm not sure how this would pan out on an utccr point.

 

It seems ropey, but I'm sorry I can't think of something that gives you a decent right of action I'm afraid. Others might come up with something.

[haggis1984]

So they reckon they can unilaterally go back over all your previous transactions and increase the price do they?!

 

Shocking!

 

Id have thought this was a pretty clear UTCCR. They don't even specify a time limit within which they are 'entitled' to reject the dicount. Imagine if Tesco had T&Cs stating that in the case of a mistaken discount they can retrospectively re-debit your credit card?! Give Trading Standards a ring about this.

 

Write to them asking for evidence that you were not entitled to use the previous discount codes. Also send a CCA request and see if there's anything in the credit agreement allowing them to do this.

[Yorky2008]

If, after accepting your order, we find that you were not entitled to use the code or did not meet all the terms and conditions of its use, we may reverse the benefit that you obtained.

 

That line there to me says that they can only reverse the discount on the order you used an invalid code for. It does state that they can reverse al other transactions where you had a valid code.

 

Also, they may accept your order but isnt the legal terms with regards to contracts that once you have paid the contract is binding, so they reverse it once they have accepted the order but once you have handed over the money they have accepted your purchase? One for those more knowledgable....

[Kraken1]

unfortunately not. a contract does not end when you pay, there may be terms of the contract that still bind you and can be enforced at a later date, even after the substance of the contract has been performed. Look at buying a house, employment contracts or even warranties.

 

I think the utccr angle might be the best, but couldn't promise.

[MrShed]

They've done this many times in the past and had legal challenges I believe, which have come to no avail.

[Yorky2008]

unfortunately not. a contract does not end when you pay, there may be terms of the contract that still bind you and can be enforced at a later date, even after the substance of the contract has been performed. Look at buying a house, employment contracts or even warranties.

 

Thats true, I guess the OP would have to look at the T&Cs and see what they say in total.

 

What about the wording of the terms? It says to me it is only on that transaction, not on every purchase they have ever made! Could end up going back years for some people....

[Kraken1]

I think you might be right here - the burden of proof is generally on the party asserting a fact or term. Here that would be for Littlewoods to show the breach. No idea how they'll do this.

 

as for this:

 

"If you transacted on a cash basis e.g. by debit or credit card, we may take a further payment, equivalent to the value of the benefit obtained, from the card used."

 

I think that this is bang out of order, and I'm not sure they can actually do this.

[chesham]

Contracts are formed after consideration has passed. Consideration is the benefit each party to a contract gets from a transaction. In the case of shopping, this is the payment and the goods/services. At the moment the order is accepted AND the money is paid, the contract is formed and binding. As above, there may be terms and conditions which bind you after the contract is formed and will continue to be binding.

 

However, the UTRCC is there to stop one part benefitting from the other's disadvantage. My [personal] opinion is that whilst I agree with what they are doing in principle, they need to do more in order to prevent the codes being used by everyone. For example, Ocado shoppers can only use codes which their account accepts such as first time orders etc. Although investment is high, surely customer's respect would improve. I think that these charge backs are unfair, they certainly seem to put Shop Direct in an unfair position, and although included within the terms and conditions that doesn't mean to say that it is legal and enforceable.

 

I do not agree with the charge back which they do and cause so much grief in doing so, however if they do not want people to use codes which are so freely available, they need to invest more in the controls they use to administer accounts, simply as that.

 

One day, someone will sue, and I hope they win, it's not a good way to do business

Edited February 18, 2010 by chesham
Typo..

[labrat]

hmm would love to see other store terms on this

 

as currently i would owe pizza hut around ohh.. probably £250 or so

 

ive never paid full price

[gezwee]

I'd play them at their own game, sar them and include a request for signatory evidence of all items allegedly delivered on the account.

 

If they come back with tripe about the customer should check all statements ask them 'what statements?' and how soon do they expect to be able to provide these for you along with evidence of receipt for every item listed.

 

You require a full audit of the account, nothing less...

 

Gez

[dgif1973]

Hi,

 

Thanks for your responses, I have written to Littlewoods and they are refusing to respond in writing, they say the department dealing with my complaint only deal with phone calls. Is there anything I can say to insist that they communicate to me in writing?

 

Thanks

[Conniff]

Yes you can send them a tenner and a SAR and get back everything on which you will be able to check if you have used genuine issued to you codes.

[labrat]

ask them to confirm IN WRITING that you cannot comunicate in writing

 

i know its an oxymoron but advise them that if you are refused the option of communicating in writing then you reserve the right to record all future calls

 

they will go monkey dodo but hold firm remind them that you have verbally advised them that you are herby removing any right to take money from the card and you require an address to write to and back this up, advise them that even an office address such as reception will do. write to this address recorded delivery, REMEMBER THE PAPER TRAIL IS EVERYTHING

 

point out that they can transfer you to a debt collection agency all they like under guidelines they have to refer it back if advised its in dispute

[dgif1973]

Just had a chat with Littlewoods. They were unable to document the transactions they were charging me £140 for, they were also unable to provide the list of codes they had offered me in the past. £140 to be refunded! Yipee.

 

Thanks guys.