Refund query

[satin]

Out of curiosity, I would like to know when customers refund any items to most stores, do the customers have the right to say no for not giving their name and addresss for the refund?

[demon_x_slash]

I hate this. I don't think that they should be allowed to ask, even if the item's not faulty and they've taken it back on discretion. What business is it of mine if their staff are falsifying refunds? That's their problem...

[blacksheep1979]

its not just to stop staff its to stop customers who may use stuff and return it (well frequent offenders). So if they are doing you a favour you have to play by their rules.

[borisbeaver]

I returned a pair of shoes today for a no-quibble returns.

 

I was presented with the receipt asking for name, address and signature.

 

I did what I normally do.

 

Made something up. It was largely intelligable - like me!!

[satin]

its not just to stop staff its to stop customers who may use stuff and return it (well frequent offenders). So if they are doing you a favour you have to play by their rules.

 

Yeah i agree with you, I work in as shop in which i process refund transactions and I get few customers now and then who refuse to enter their details. I'm like thinking to myself don't bother returning items (non-faulty) if you do want to give your details.

[satin]

I returned a pair of shoes today for a no-quibble returns.

 

I was presented with the receipt asking for name, address and signature.

 

I did what I normally do.

 

Made something up. It was largely intelligable - like me!!

 

So, if they had any problems with transaction such as the amount not being credaited to your account (if paid by card), how is the shops supposed to contact you? The procedure is the for a reason.

[borisbeaver]

It was a cash transaction.

[satin]

It was a cash transaction.

 

Because it wasn't faulty, the shops can impose restrictions on how they could process the transaction as long as it complies with DPA. So I think stores can refuse any customers not wantimg to give their details out. Sounds fair to me

[Bookworm]

its not just to stop staff its to stop customers who may use stuff and return it (well frequent offenders). So if they are doing you a favour you have to play by their rules.

 

I quite disagree.

 

Companies that give you non-quibble returns don't do it to do their costumers a favour, but to encourage people to shop with them, knowing fine that despite the enhanced return policy, a lot of people won't actually bother, for various reasons.

 

As for their rules, I have yet to see any retail store that states in their return policy that you will have to leave your personal details in case of returns, and I personally think that it is an abuse of privacy and a possible breach of the DPA for them to demand it, as I fail to see how and why they should store it in compliance with the DPA, as technically, once the transaction is complete, so is your business with them, and there is therefore no reason for them to keep your data. Regardless of how I feel, however, the fact remains that if their T&Cs don't state they'll ask for your details in exchange for the extended rights, they shouldn't be demanding the info or denying you the refund when you refuse to give them the info.

[ManagingDirector]

Two points....

 

a) They cant demand it surely?

 

If you are within your rights then they have to give you a refund. I agree with bookworm, under DPA they cant store your details when the transaction has finished - they have no right to.

 

b) Writing a FAKE address is FRAUD

[demon_x_slash]

Why is it fraud, when you have no obligation to provide the details anyway? They say that they won't use the details for anything - good, they won't be able to! If the item is faulty, then the refund has to be unconditional. If the refund is a goodwill gesture, great, fine - but they can't turn round and demand my details after they've agreed to refund me, and expect me to roll over and hand 'em over like a good little zombie.

 

The real problem that I had in my case was that no one, absloutely no one, could tell me what they were going to do with the info, where it would be stored, and who would have access to it. Not even the store manager. Not out of some misguided commercial sensibilities - they simply didn't know. Why the hell should I have to give them my details if they can't tell me what's going to happen with them? No thanks, I'll shop elsewhere.

[ManagingDirector]

From your rights point of view you have no obligation...

 

but to get a refund you obviously need to provide the details - so you are obligated (unfairly).

 

What will they do with your details?

 

Sell them on and probably send you marketing sh*t...

 

I dont believe that no one knows what they use the details for... but you dont expect them to say they are going to sell them? As you wouldnt give them. But this would be fraud too... unless, of course, the company's management specifically didnt tell them...

 

 

As a test you could give a wrong ("unique") name... then when you get these spam mail - in that name, you can take further action. Any ideas?

[satin]

The company that I work for does not do anything with the refund details, it is kept in a box for a year wherre after a year it is destroyed. Only admin people are allowed to access the data.

[demon_x_slash]

Hahhh, er, yeah...in a store that I used to work for, there was a similar policy with till receipt rolls. The store till receipts (with all the card details on them) were meant to be filed away for six years against any fraud case that may have subsequently arisen, and destroyed after those six years... the actual practice was to throw them in store carrier bags at the end of each week and stuff them at the back of the cupboard in the cash office. When I got a little more veto power there after a while I 'audited' the bags. There were receipts there from eleven/twelve years ago, and if there had been a fraud case, there was no way in all hells that they would have been able to find the pertinent receipt. It was fun burning them all though

 

I use this to illustrate that having a 'company policy' is all very well, but what the policy says and what actually happens can be two very, very different things. Due to my experience in retail/company settings, I wouldn't trust 'em to look after a pet rock, let alone my personal details!

[demon_x_slash]

 

As a test you could give a wrong ("unique") name... then when you get these spam mail - in that name, you can take further action.

 

Heh, I've done that before, yes.

[satin]

Hahhh, er, yeah...in a store that I used to work for, there was a similar policy with till receipt rolls. The store till receipts (with all the card details on them) were meant to be filed away for six years against any fraud case that may have subsequently arisen, and destroyed after those six years... the actual practice was to throw them in store carrier bags at the end of each week and stuff them at the back of the cupboard in the cash office. When I got a little more veto power there after a while I 'audited' the bags. There were receipts there from eleven/twelve years ago, and if there had been a fraud case, there was no way in all hells that they would have been able to find the pertinent receipt. It was fun burning them all though

 

I use this to illustrate that having a 'company policy' is all very well, but what the policy says and what actually happens can be two very, very different things. Due to my experience in retail/company settings, I wouldn't trust 'em to look after a pet rock, let alone my personal details!

 

Yeah I understand your point but not all shops will misuse the personal details. I know for a fact my store does not do make use of the personal details because I am the one who is reposnsible for all the receipts being stored.

[blazing-badger]

I'm with Bookworm on this one. If the refund is under the Sale of Goods Act, the store has no right to set conditions for the refund. If it is a no-quibble refund, the requirement to give your personal details should have been stated when the contract was entered into, ie at the point of sale.

 

I can see why shops might want to capture this information, as a defence againt "frequent fliers", but that doesn't make it legal.

[itsamomentintime]

Heh, I've done that before, yes.

 

 

what happened?

[demon_x_slash]

what happened?

 

I did it when I signed up with the National Trust, and definitely ticked the no-spam box. I did get a few bits of spam mail addressed to "Mrs. Orchard" (I'm a Ms but put Mrs., and Orchard doesn't transpose any letters but it's close to the sound of my surname), unrelated to NT, but writing a rant to the companies concerned seemed to shut them up, as I never heard from them again. I didn't take it up with the National Trust because, tbh, I felt sorry for them; they must have been really strapped for cash if they'd taken to scribbling out a tick on the odd application here and there... I never got anything else afterwards, and I've moved since then, sooo...