distance selling query

in article [email hidden], raisethe
at [email hidden] wrote on 31/7/07 15:29:

Quoted message said:

Am I entitled by law to a
refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
cost of the goods)?

No, the postage and packing is at your own expense. But I think another
poster in a thread last week said that the company had to, if asked, arrange
to pick-up of the goods (still at your expense)- I may have mis-remembered
though. It was in relation to picking returning a bike.

Ben

Ben Micklem said:

in article [email hidden], raisethe
at [email hidden] wrote on 31/7/07 15:29:

Quoted message said:

Am I entitled by law to a
refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
cost of the goods)?

No, the postage and packing is at your own expense. But I think another
poster in a thread last week said that the company had to, if asked, arrange
to pick-up of the goods (still at your expense)- I may have mis-remembered
though. It was in relation to picking returning a bike.

It depends on the contract. Most companies have a contract which specify
that you have to pay for the return.

The DSR mean that you are entitled to a refund even if you do not return
the goods. However if you do not return the goods and the supplier has
to recover them at their own expense they can pass this charge on to you.

Nick said:

Ben Micklem said:

in article [email hidden],
raisethe
at [email hidden] wrote on 31/7/07 15:29:

Quoted message said:

Am I entitled by law to a
refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
cost of the goods)?

No, the postage and packing is at your own expense. But I think another
poster in a thread last week said that the company had to, if asked,
arrange
to pick-up of the goods (still at your expense)- I may have
mis-remembered
though. It was in relation to picking returning a bike.

It depends on the contract. Most companies have a contract which specify
that you have to pay for the return.

The DSR mean that you are entitled to a refund even if you do not return
the goods. However if you do not return the goods and the supplier has
to recover them at their own expense they can pass this charge on to you.

If the supplier fails to deliver the right goods or unfit for purpose goods then that's
the supplier's liability. s previously : Check with Trading Standards this is their bread
and butter.

--
Peter Fox
Beer, dancing, cycling and lots more at www.eminent.demon.co.uk

raisethe said:

I want to return something to one of our favourite online stores, an
item of cycling clothing that doesn't fit. Am I entitled by law to a
refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
cost of the goods)?

No. You're not even entitled in law to the cost of goods if you bought
them by mistake. Many suppliers however, have a policy of offering
refunds in such cases.

The only time you have a legal entitlement, to both the cost and
return postage, is if they are faulty or not as advertised.

MBQ

in article [email hidden],
[email hidden] at [email hidden] wrote on 31/7/07 16:39:

Quoted message said:

raisethe said:

I want to return something to one of our favourite online stores, an
item of cycling clothing that doesn't fit. Am I entitled by law to a
refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
cost of the goods)?

No. You're not even entitled in law to the cost of goods if you bought
them by mistake. Many suppliers however, have a policy of offering
refunds in such cases.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2000/20002334.htm

7 day cooling off period.

Peter Fox said:

Nick said:

Ben Micklem said:

in article [email hidden],
raisethe
at [email hidden] wrote on 31/7/07 15:29:

> Am I entitled by law to a
> refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
> cost of the goods)?

No, the postage and packing is at your own expense. But I think another
poster in a thread last week said that the company had to, if asked,
arrange
to pick-up of the goods (still at your expense)- I may have
mis-remembered
though. It was in relation to picking returning a bike.

It depends on the contract. Most companies have a contract which
specify that you have to pay for the return.

The DSR mean that you are entitled to a refund even if you do not
return the goods. However if you do not return the goods and the
supplier has to recover them at their own expense they can pass this
charge on to you.

If the supplier fails to deliver the right goods or unfit for purpose
goods then that's the supplier's liability. s previously : Check with
Trading Standards this is their bread and butter.

Sure if he is rejecting the goods as unfit under the sale of goods act.
But to do this he would need to prove the size indication was wrong as
it is normally the buyers responsibility to check that the clothes fit.

I was assuming that he was rejecting them under the distance selling
regulations.

Nick said:

Peter Fox said:

Nick said:

Ben Micklem wrote:
> in article [email hidden],
> raisethe
> at [email hidden] wrote on 31/7/07 15:29:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Am I entitled by law to a
>> refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
>> cost of the goods)?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> No, the postage and packing is at your own expense. But I think another
> poster in a thread last week said that the company had to, if asked,
> arrange
> to pick-up of the goods (still at your expense)- I may have
> mis-remembered
> though. It was in relation to picking returning a bike.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It depends on the contract. Most companies have a contract which
specify that you have to pay for the return.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The DSR mean that you are entitled to a refund even if you do not
return the goods. However if you do not return the goods and the
supplier has to recover them at their own expense they can pass this
charge on to you.

Quoted message said:

If the supplier fails to deliver the right goods or unfit for purpose
goods then that's the supplier's liability. s previously : Check with
Trading Standards this is their bread and butter.

Sure if he is rejecting the goods as unfit under the sale of goods act.
But to do this he would need to prove the size indication was wrong as
it is normally the buyers responsibility to check that the clothes fit.

I was assuming that he was rejecting them under the distance selling
regulations.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My question was with regard to rejecting them under the distance
selling regulations as you say Peter. I thought this might be a
simpler solution to getting my postage back, but the answers here seem
to make it pretty clear that it is my responsibility.

My second line is that the clothes are under-sized (ie smaller than
the suggested size on the website), as indeed are a lot of cycling
clothing. So I will try and get a reimbursement based on that. I am
sure that I have that entitlement, only that it might be difficult to
prove.

It will be interesting to see whether the CTC's much heralded new
cycling range will include suitable sizes for their slightly larger
members, or if their description of themselves as representing a broad
church of cyclists is just more of their hot air.

raisethe said:

I want to return something to one of our favourite online stores, an
item of cycling clothing that doesn't fit. Am I entitled by law to a
refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the

Only if the contract doesn't have a term that you must return the goods,
in that case you can make them available for collection at their expense.
It's not very likely that they would omit such a term.

In article <[email hidden]>,
raisethe
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I want to return something to one of our favourite online stores, an
item of cycling clothing that doesn't fit. Am I entitled by law to a
refund of the cost of posting the item back to them (as well as the
cost of the goods)?

It depends on the small print. The seller is required to inform you of
your rights under DSR[1], and in that information he can specify that
you are responsible for the cost of carriage. If the seller doesn't
make a compliant declaration then the buyer's rights are extended,
including a longer cooling-off period and no requirement to pay for
return carriage.

[1] This information is usually included in the standard Ts&Cs or
purchase confirmation email.

In article <[email hidden]>,
raisethe
[email hidden] says...
<snip>

Quoted message said:

My second line is that the clothes are under-sized (ie smaller than
the suggested size on the website), as indeed are a lot of cycling
clothing. So I will try and get a reimbursement based on that. I am
sure that I have that entitlement, only that it might be difficult to
prove.

I think that one will fall at the first hurdle - everyone knows that
cycle clothing is sized for terriers, so unless the seller confirmed
that the size ordered is specifically suitable for the person for whom
it was ordered you don't really have a "fitness for purpose" argument.

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
raisethe
[email hidden] says...
<snip>> My second line is that the clothes are under-sized (ie smaller than

Quoted message said:

the suggested size on the website), as indeed are a lot of cycling
clothing. So I will try and get a reimbursement based on that. I am
sure that I have that entitlement, only that it might be difficult to
prove.

I think that one will fall at the first hurdle - everyone knows that
cycle clothing is sized for terriers, so unless the seller confirmed
that the size ordered is specifically suitable for the person for whom
it was ordered you don't really have a "fitness for purpose" argument.

You're probably right. However, the website does provide a size
conversion guide (XXL = 38" etc) so I could argue that my measurement
is x inches, the website says the clothing I have purchased is also x
inches, but it is too small, therefore the product is not fit for
purpose.

In article <[email hidden]>,
raisethe
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

You're probably right. However, the website does provide a size
conversion guide (XXL = 38" etc) so I could argue that my measurement
is x inches, the website says the clothing I have purchased is also x
inches, but it is too small, therefore the product is not fit for
purpose.

In that case I think you're right to make a claim.