BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

[teaboy2]

As the title of the thread states, i have just been watching BBC News on BBC One where they just had a retail expert live on air encouraging consumers that have bought an item for Christmas, only to find that item is now at reduced price as part of Sales. To buy a second one at the sale price, and return the original one they bought along with the original receipt to to get a refund for the full original price for the original item, and therefore saving money.

This is fraud by misrepresentation, as it is a deliberate act taken with the intention of saving the consumer money but also to defraud the retailer of profits from the original sale.

When you purchase an item you are entering a contract, where you agreed to purchase the item at the advertised price and where the retailer has agreed to your offer to purchase by accepting your payment and handing over the item to you, which is when the property of the goods transfer from the retailer to the consumer.

The So called retail expert is also wrong when she stated that consumers are entitled to refunds for their original purchase, this is not true, as it is in general up to the retailers discretion, except in cases where the product is faulty, in which case the consumer has rights under warranty of contract for the repair, replacement or refund in full for the faulty item. A retailer does not have to except the return of an item that is not faulty!

I know most will think well its a good idea to do what the retail expert said to do as it saves you money, and that may be true. But its not a good idea for many retailers that depend on the profit generated on purchases made prior to the sales starting. In some cases some Retailers depend on xmas period to keep them going through to the next xmas.

To me the retailers experts advice (though given with good intentions) was highly irresponsible and is encouraging people to commit what is a criminal offense, and even more surprising is the fact the BBC condone such advice and clearly did not check the legal implications.

All it takes is for one shop assistant to recognise a consumer who purchased the same item in the sales and who is now returning the same item with a receipt for the price of the item prior to the sales, and that consumer could be prosecuted as a result. It is no different to shoplifters that swap prices on items!!

Haven't got a link as its not on BBC News website, it was live on their morning news program and the retailer expert will likely be back on later this morning.

[EXC]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

As the title of the thread states, i have just been watching BBC News on BBC One where they just had a retail expert live on air encouraging consumers that have bought an item for Christmas, only to find that item is now at reduced price as part of Sales. To buy a second one at the sale price, and return the original one they bought along with the original receipt to to get a refund for the full original price for the original item, and therefore saving money.

This is fraud by misrepresentation...

What has been misrepresented?

[teaboy2]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

What has been misrepresented?

The reason why, is that the customer is seeking a refund, and the fact the customer is only wanting a refund of the original purchase as she bought the same item at reduced price in the sale. So the customer is misrepresenting there position/circumstances and not telling the truth behind why the are seeking a refund for the original purchase, as they are hardly likely to say, "ohh, because i bought another one at the sale price, so i want to refund my original purchase so i can make a saving" - Basically the consumer is intentionally trying to defraud the retailer of the profit they made on the original purchase, just so the consumer can save a few pounds, yet still have the exact same item.

I know people lie as to why they want a refund and to return goods. But point of this thread is that the BBC is encouraging people to do this by condoning and allowing the so called retail expert to encourage people to commit this fraud by false represenation ( i keep calling in misrepresentation, sorry)

Fraud by false representation

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b)intends, by making the representation—
(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2)A representation is false if—
(a)it is untrue or misleading, and
(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

[EXC]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

The 'retail expert' did not advise that you should falsely misrepresent the reason for returning the item. She merely said that you can take advantage of the retailer's refund policy.

If you simply ask for a refund, as she advised, you are not misrepresenting anything as no representation has been made.

[teaboy2]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

But how many retailers will just refund something without a reason being given? and refund policies usually only cover faulty goods etc, and in regards to any other reason for seeking a refund, it is largely up to the retailers discretion (with the exception of distance selling regulations, if purchased online) whether they issue a refund or not.

End of the day the retail expert was encourage people to engage in activity to defraud the retailer i.e. course the retailer loss, in order to make a gain for themselves. Also this retail expert should know better, especially when she claims to be a champion for small businesses in retail. Her advise on the BBC, is counter to such claim as the advice she has given will lead to retailers losing out on profit.

[EXC]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

But how many retailers will just refund something without a reason being given?

I would say most.

[teaboy2]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

I doubt it Exc. Most will ask for a reason, and given the cost of repacking items for resale, they won't refund without a valid reason. Fair enough is the item is still in the original package. But where now deflecting from the original point of this thread. That being that the BBC retail expert was encouraging people to defraud the retailer, by buying a second version for the same item at the sale price and then returning the original bought at the original price prior to sale.

I also have worked in retail in the past and now own and operate two online retail businesses. So i know what items a retailer can send back to supplier and be refunded for, and what they can't. And what they can be charged for repackaging as well as a fee charged for returning items back to suppliers stock after repackaging. So its not s simple case of repacking items and putting them back on sale, as many believe.

If you bought a jumper for an Xmas present, and took the labels off, then saw the same jumper for sale at sales prices and bought another and took the original one back minus its labels. That jumper would have to be sent back to supplier to be repackaged prior to being put back on sale, and that's costs the supplier money, repackaging is not a free service, nor is relabeling items. This so called retail expert knows this very well, yet despite knowing this, she is encouraging consumers to partake in this kind of behavior that denies the retailer of profits as a result. Not something you would expect from a self confessed small retailers champion. To me it is clear fraud. Its no different to a shoplifter, taking the price label of a cheaper item and putting it on to a more expensive item!!

[michael]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

There's no fraud involved at all.

Nearly all major retailers offer to exchange or refund on items where the customer has merely changed their mind, usually with the proviso that it's within a certain period and is undamaged/unused in it's original packaging etc.

But there is no law that forces them to do that, it is entirely down to individual company policies and they could, if they wanted to, refuse to do so.....assuming they wanted to commit commercial suicide.

They do it, not out of the goodness of their hearts, but because in the long run it's financially profitable for them.

[Celestine]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

We recently bought an item for £460 from John Lewis who offer a 28 day price guarantee.

On day 28 they dropped the items price to £230 in their pre-Xmas sale.

Hubby rang them up and they simply refunded him the difference. Great customer service and saved us the hassle of having to 'commit a fraud'!? :santa_wink:

[michael]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

Great customer service and saved us the hassle of having to 'commit a fraud'!?

Exactly, and the chances are now that next time, John Lewis will be your first port of call.

[teaboy2]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

There's no fraud involved at all.

Nearly all major retailers offer to exchange or refund on items where the customer has merely changed their mind, usually with the proviso that it's within a certain period and is undamaged/unused in it's original packaging etc. Thats true, but this is not about merely changing your mind, this is about buying the same item a second tyime at a lower price, then returning the original item with the original receipt for the original price meaning the retailer has lost the difference in profit between the original price item and sale price item. That item in this case being the exact same item.

But there is no law that forces them to do that, it is entirely down to individual company policies and they could, if they wanted to, refuse to do so.....assuming they wanted to commit commercial suicide. I doubt they would be committing commercial suicide, as most people would not expect a retailer to take back an item for a refund, when they have removed the packaging and/or labels, an replacement is fair swap in such circumstances, or an item of same value.

They do it, not out of the goodness of their hearts, but because in the long run it's financially profitable for them.

See above.

We recently bought an item for £460 from John Lewis who offer a 28 day price guarantee.

On day 28 they dropped the items price to £230 in their pre-Xmas sale.

Hubby rang them up and they simply refunded him the difference. Great customer service and saved us the hassle of having to 'commit a fraud'!? :santa_wink:

In your circumstances the 28 day price guarantee formed part of the original contract of sale, so it was a term of the contract of sale that they had to honor, otherwise they'd be in breach of the contract of sales.

Am talking about sales of items where there is not an XX days price guarantee and where the items were not faulty and likely already taken out of their original packaging or had the labels removed. Is it right that people can buy a new dress, wear it for a night out and then return it for a full refund, like some admit to doing all the time. No its not, they gained from the use of it at no cost to themselves, where the retailer gained nothing and likely lost out on the profit from such purchase on top of the cost of having the dress relabeled/repackaged.

it costs myself 15% of the cost price (Including VAT) to have items repacked and restocked by the supplier if the item is found not to be faulty after testing by the supplier. So if a buyer returned a PS4 consoles and got a full refund from me, where the PS4 sells at 349.99 and has, for example, a cost price of 300 inc vat. Thats a cost of £40 for repackaging and restocking at suppliers, add that to the lost off profit on the sale and its an £80 loss for me - So am £80 worse off to what i was before the customer made the purchase in the first place. So the buyer clearly falsely claimed it was faulty which is false representation.

But then lets say the same buyer was also found to have bought another PS4 from us whilst the item was on sale a day before returning the original one that they claimed was faulty. Saving themselves £20 for example whilst costing myself £80 minus the £20 profit for the purchase of the same version of the PS4, so am still £60 worse off. How is that not fraud!! It may seem to the general public as innocent enough thing to do and to not cost the retailer anything (due to misguided assumption it costs the retailer nothing to repack/restock etc), but for those of us in retail and in the know as to how the industry and supply chain works, it is not an innocent thing to do and it does cost the retailing sector millions each year - Which means it also costs jobs too not to mention forcing some businesses out of business if they are already struggling.

[michael]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

As usual, you introduce red herrings into the equation. If the item is returned as sold then there is no re-stocking/re-packaging costs.

[leclerc]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

Did the person on BBC news state that the item could be returned without tags or without the original packaging?

Were they male or female?(Declan Curry had two women on his program talking about returning items from sales albeit not in the same manner as you have stated above)

The link below is the program I just watched: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...ey_21_12_2013/

[leclerc]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

And what was suggested was not something new as this Daily Mail article from 2008 can attest to:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...g--20-off.html

[teaboy2]

Re: BBC News Allows Retail Expert to Encourage Consumers to Commit Fraud

As usual, you introduce red herrings into the equation. If the item is returned as sold then there is no re-stocking/re-packaging costs.

Ohh and what red herring is that then, and as for "As usual", that's rubbish, in fact i don't think we have even come across each other on the forums till now. There's also no red herrings in the truth!! I started this thread, others are misguiding it based on the misguided assumption that doing what the retail expert recommend is acceptable and has not financial impact on the retailer and that the retailer incurs no loss, when in fact they do.

So the fact i started this thread and the fact i own two retail companies puts me in a better position then the majority of you posting to say whether what the so called retailer expert recommended would amount to loss for the retailer and therefore amount to an act of fraud by the customer, if they have mislead the retailer as to the reason behind their request for a refund. So i know exactly what the subject of the thread is and i am trying to point out to those that do not know about the in's and out's of how the retail industry and its suppliers and the contracts between retailers and there suppliers work. And yes those contracts are relevant as they dictate the cost to the retailer when it comes to having to repack and restock items that have been returned to the retailer by the customer, regardless of whether the customer got a full refund or took a replacement or item of similar value.

What i stated in my last post was not a red herring, but an example of the true behind the scenes going on's and costs tot he retailer when it comes to returned items that are not faulty and have to be restocked and repacked/relabeled, and the actual cost this is to the retailer. Along with an example for the loss a retailer can make if anyone follows the advice of this so called retail expert. Would you like to be £60 worse off than what you were prior to that one customer making their original purchase, followed by a second purchased of the same item but at the sale price. And then later that day or following day returning the original non sales item, claiming its faulty and asking for a full refund, when its not was never faulty to begin with - No you would not!!

Would like it if your employer deducted £60 from your wages, claiming you damaged some property, which was already, in fact, damaged - No you wouldn't! Well a retailers loss, such as the £60 loss in my example given in my last post, is the equivalent of having £60 deducted from the retailers wage pool, used to pay employees - less funds for the wage pool and its redundancies.

Now for the last time, this is not about items returned as sold. Its about buying one version of the item at original price, then buying the same item at the sale price and the returning the originally purchased item for full refund. Meaning the retailer as still lost out on the difference of profit between the profit on the original item and the profit on the second item. And from experience i can tell you that most items are not returned as sold, so need to be resealed, relabeled or repacked - The suppliers charge the same regardless!!