log in
register

Should retailers accept returns on bibshorts?

  • Creator
    Topic
  • November 14, 2014 at 7:58 am #22733
    KiwiMike

    So after extensive research I purchased a pair of Castelli Nanoflex bibs from Wiggle, paying strict attention to the size guide. They are rated 4.4/5 on Wiggle’s site, and the only ‘fit’ problems raised are with length.

    Tried them on in the privacy of my own home, looked good, felt good, all OK. No bunching anywhere, feel snug whilst not restrictive, etc etc.

    Go out on a ride, and within 20 miles, it feels like I’m sitting on a rolled-up sock. After 40 miles, I genuinely had to check I had them on the right way around (correct).

    Get home, give them a good wash, all seams/pad seem correct and accounted for.

    Return them to Wiggle for a refund, and they say:

    “We have received back your Castelli Nanoflex Bibshorts you would like us to refund due to the item not fitting. All customers have the opportunity to try on goods when they first receive them to check the fit and size of the item before using them. We hope you can appreciate that we have to follow our own returns procedure to ensure that we only sell goods in the best possible condition, we don’t sell used goods so we cannot accept back used goods. All returned goods must be returned to us unused in there original packaging and labels http://www.wiggle.co.uk/h/option/returnsprocedure. Unfortunately sizing issues are not a manufacturing fault therefore are not covered by warranty, due to this we are only able to return this item back to you”

    Now I ride about 5,000 miles a year. I have never had a saddle sore. I have never had any kind of issue in the nether department. Be it wearing normal. knicks or full-length bibs, waistband shorts or MTB baggies with a pad.

    Should a retailer have to honour a return where the customer has done everything they could to ensure it was a quality product, the right size, the correct fit, used correctly – and yet the product is simply not fit for purpose?

    Aside from Wiggle’s stupidity at potentially losing for life a customer who spends about £500 a year on stuff over an item they probably made £10 margin on, can I actually go them in a small claims court under the distance selling regs?

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 15 replies - 46 through 60 (of 70 total)
1 2 3 4 5
  • Author
    Replies
  • November 14, 2014 at 2:42 pm #820905
    0
    Chuck

    KiwiMike wrote:
    I don’t doubt

    KiwiMike wrote:

    I don’t doubt the ability of individual CS reps or team leaders to make errors of judgement, nor for currently-dominant retailers of commodity products to quickly fall from grace and ultimately go broke. ‘Big’ ≠ ‘Right’.

    ‘Not granting every customers’ every wish’ ≠ ‘Bad strategy for economic success’
    ‘Granting every customers’ every wish’ ≠ ‘Best thing to do at all times for business’

    November 14, 2014 at 2:20 pm #820903
    0
    KiwiMike

    C.Gregs wrote:I was refused a

    C.Gregs wrote:
    I was refused a return on a pair of bib shorts I purchased this summer from their Prudential Ride London stand at the excel after they developed a tear in the pad (let the jokes ensue) after 2 months of light wear.

    Is that something worth pursuing?

    I think the warranty on manufacturing defects is 12 months, so I’d say so. Castelli were great at organising a replacement set of armwarmers through the UK agent when the stitching came undone after 3 months of use. Even though they were purchased in Switzerland.

    November 14, 2014 at 2:08 pm #820901
    0
    crikey

    Attempts at sulk
    Attempts at sulk justification by claiming public service fall on deaf ears as sulk intensifies.

    November 14, 2014 at 2:08 pm #820899
    0
    C.Gregs

    I was refused a return on a
    I was refused a return on a pair of bib shorts I purchased this summer from their Prudential Ride London stand at the excel after they developed a tear in the pad (let the jokes ensue) after 2 months of light wear.

    Is that something worth pursuing?

    November 14, 2014 at 2:04 pm #820897
    0
    KiwiMike

    crikey wrote:Man continues to

    crikey wrote:
    Man continues to sulk.

    No, I’m pro-actively engaging with the retailer, distributor and manufacturer to resolve the issue and will advise when it is, either way.

    Hopefully others will benefit from this in future. It’s clearly an issue for this particular retailer to get right, as pointed out other major brands/retailers don’t have a problem with exchanges/refunds on products that don’t work out. If you personally like risking your cash and think the Distance Selling Regulations or other consumer legislation is not needed, feel free to accept poor CS.

    Noting this isn’t a ‘hygiene’ issue – the item in question could have been a light, or GPS, or shoe. The retailer could have been anyone. ‘Fit for Purpose’ isn’t a literal use of ‘Fit’.

    November 14, 2014 at 1:54 pm #820895
    0
    crikey

    Man continues to sulk.
    Man continues to sulk.

    November 14, 2014 at 1:52 pm #820893
    0
    DrJDog

    75% refund offer and you’re
    75% refund offer and you’re still whining? Amazing.

    November 14, 2014 at 1:31 pm #820891
    0
    KiwiMike

    Chuck wrote:KiwiMike

    Chuck wrote:
    KiwiMike wrote:
    crikey wrote:
    Man learns life isn’t always fair; sulks.

    Person doesn’t get fundamentals of customer service, brand loyalty, economics in a competitive market, or indeed UK/EU Distance Selling Regulations. Posts comment.

    Well, his line is basically the same as Wiggle’s, and since it was recently reported on here that they have become the UK’s biggest cycling retailer I’d say they’ve got a pretty good grasp of the fundamentals of customer service, brand loyalty, and economics in a competitive market.

    I don’t doubt the ability of individual CS reps or team leaders to make errors of judgement, nor for currently-dominant retailers of commodity products to quickly fall from grace and ultimately go broke. ‘Big’ ≠ ‘Right’.

    November 14, 2014 at 1:21 pm #820889
    0
    Chuck

    KiwiMike wrote:crikey

    KiwiMike wrote:
    crikey wrote:
    Man learns life isn’t always fair; sulks.

    Person doesn’t get fundamentals of customer service, brand loyalty, economics in a competitive market, or indeed UK/EU Distance Selling Regulations. Posts comment.

    Well, his line is basically the same as Wiggle’s, and since it was recently reported on here that they have become the UK’s biggest cycling retailer I’d say they’ve got a pretty good grasp of the fundamentals of customer service, brand loyalty, and economics in a competitive market.

    November 14, 2014 at 1:03 pm #820887
    0
    KiwiMike

    crikey wrote:Man learns life

    crikey wrote:
    Man learns life isn’t always fair; sulks.

    Person doesn’t get fundamentals of customer service, brand loyalty, economics in a competitive market, or indeed UK/EU Distance Selling Regulations. Posts comment.

    November 14, 2014 at 12:58 pm #820885
    0
    crikey

    Man learns life isn’t always
    Man learns life isn’t always fair; sulks.

    November 14, 2014 at 12:48 pm #820883
    0
    mtbtomo

    The shorts have been USED so
    The shorts have been USED so its totally reasonable they won’t accept them as a return. The fact it was “only” one ride, is neither here nor there. It tough luck. Put them on ebay and don’t buy Castelli again.

    Some manufacturer’s will give unconditional returns because they’re that confident in their product but at a supplier level I don’t think its often the case.

    I doubt you’d find a retailer who would accept a return on used goods unless they were demonstrably faulty (or had a supplier scheme). They just don’t fit you, and that’s tough luck unfortunately.

    November 14, 2014 at 12:47 pm #820881
    0
    KiwiMike

    bendertherobot wrote:What did

    bendertherobot wrote:
    What did you say when returning them? Surely you just reattach the tag, stick them in the bag and select “wrong size.”

    I could have washed them thoroughly, put the tag back on (Castelli ones are held in place by a safety pin) and returned as ‘unworn, size wrong’.

    Instead, I was honest and explained everything in detail.

    That’s what it gets you.

    Spiny wrote:
    I don’t think it’s reasonable, havnig worn them to send them back.

    I ordered two pairs of tights from Wiggle wore one & found it was too short after a ride. I send the second, unopened one back & got a replacement.

    Having done that I left a review on the tights & mentioned the sizing chart was too small and the advice I got from their on-line char was wrong. They just read the same chart I guess. The review was denied as being “against guidelines”, but no further explanation given.

    So you followed the rules, lost out on cash, they denied you the chance to warn others, and you *still* think they are right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome, much?

    As unconstituted said above re. returning boots, the outdoors industry has a model in place here. Why should I accept that because it’s my arse not my foot, that things are different? No-one’s going to try to resell *anything* that’s used.

    Retailers should have the confidence to back their products and help conscientious consumers when things go wrong. Plenty of firms have policies where they allow returns up to a year later, no questions asked. Case in point: NorthFace: a one-year, no-quibble used-kit return for a full refund. *THAT’S* good CS.

    http://www.thenorthface.com/en_US/contact-us/return-policy/

    You don’t see NorthFace going broke, or hordes buying their kit to return after one hillwalk.

    =======================

    An update: Wiggle CS have offered a 75% refund. Still not happy with that. I haven’t done anything wrong. I trusted a much-loved brand and a frequently-used retailer to give me a usable product.

    November 14, 2014 at 12:12 pm #820879
    0
    Spiny

    I don’t think it’s
    I don’t think it’s reasonable, havnig worn them to send them back.

    I ordered two pairs of tights from Wiggle wore one & found it was too short after a ride. I send the second, unopened one back & got a replacement.

    Having done that I left a review on the tights & mentioned the sizing chart was too small and the advice I got from their on-line char was wrong. They just read the same chart I guess. The review was denied as being “against guidelines”, but no further explanation given.

    November 14, 2014 at 12:00 pm #820877
    0
    bendertherobot

    What did you say when
    What did you say when returning them? Surely you just reattach the tag, stick them in the bag and select “wrong size.”

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 15 replies - 46 through 60 (of 70 total)
1 2 3 4 5
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.