Threat of Legal Action over returned good

[David010]

Hi, I run a small business selling wallets online. I'm the only person involved and it is my main income. We're not some big corporation that can afford expensive legal advice. A Customer recently returned a wallet merely stating "I REGRET ITS TOO SMALL FOR ME AND A BIT FIDDLY FOR MY HANDS."

I arranged for the return, stating returns are fine "presuming it is unused and in new condition".

Once it arrived back it had clear signs of use (scuffs and scratches to the leather). I wrote back explaining our returns policy requires goods to be in the same condition as sold and not used, meaning we couldn't offer a full refund, but listed 3 alternative solutions (return of the wallet at no cost, 50% cash refund or a £50 refund in the form of store credit - the wallet cost £75). I thought this was fairly reasonable given the circumstances.

Things then escalated very quickly, with the following email message: "Hello

It was never used and any marks are not my responsibility.

I took photographs of the unit so what I will do is to issue a county court writ and I see in court.

You are dealing with a retired legal executive so I know my rights.

Proceeding will be issue within 24 hours via internet."

This seemed quite extreme to me, so I replied the following:

I'm very sorry to hear that you wish to do that. We were merely informing you of the result of our inspection of the item and the outcome of that. If you feel it is not fair or you have any other information, you simply need to inform us and we're happy to review the return. I'm sure none of us would wish to go to court over a £75 wallet.

Our returns policy is quite clear in that returns can only be accepted if a product is faulty, or in the same new condition as received. Because the wallet has several scratches and marks to the leather which don't appear to have been present when received, this isn't the case here. This is why we were unable to offer a full refund, but instead tried to propose some alternative options given the circumstances.

However, it is great news that you took photos of your wallet, if you can send us the photos showing these scratches were not present when you sent it back to us then we can use those to review the decision for you.

I look forward to hearing back from you.
I thought this could lead to an open dialog to resolve any misunderstandings, and come to an amicable solution (I'm more than happy to refund the full cost of the wallet if it is fair, but feel like this all has got out of hand very fast). Then came the following reply from the customer:

Hello

It is obvious from your statement that you are not an honest organisation.

To take you court is not a big deal for me but under the protocols set by the court I am now serving you notice that if I do not get my full refund I will issue proceedings and I will provide evidence to the court rather then you as I can see that you are manipulative organisation in clear words,

You have 7 days to process my refund otherwise I will issue a county court writ straight to door on the 8th day,

I waste no time in litigation,

Let me enlighten you immediately that the goods when arrived was just thrown into a box that can easily create scratches on outer product and inner product had no paper to protect the product on both sides and the photos will be produced in a court room and I will also organise a dummy purchase of other goods and seek refunds via friends and I am sure you will produce the same remarks.

I am 63 years old with vast experience in how to deal with cowboy firms like you.

Please do not reply to this email as I have put your email to go to junk which are automatically deleted.

If I do not see the refund I will act accordingly.

Cost of issuing writ will be £35 plus my solicitors of £350 plus my counsel cost of £500 will be added to your bill with interest.

Thank you

Where do we stand here, is he serious and is this correct legal practice? This seems pretty extreme, if he had said upon receiving the wallet that it had scratches I would have arranged return at our cost and issued a full refund, no questions asked. To say he found it too fiddly to use, mention nothing about it arriving with scratches and then go through all this seems so strange.

I guess it might be easier to just refund the full amount and be rid of him, but I just feel like he's really abusing us as a small business and it all feels so unjust that I wanted to know where we stand and what any advice would be from a legal standpoint.

Many thanks in advance for any help!

 

[Paul Norman]

This guy may, or may not have been a legal ex. But assuming you have reproduced their responses exactly, they are borderline illiterate. So possibly not a legal executive.

As to the exact rights and wrongs of it, the law on distance selling is not supportive of the seller. You will need very clear proof that the goods were not scratched at the point of dispatch, which is difficult to provide.

However, this guy is a bit rude, to say the least!

 

[David010]

Yes, copied and pasted exactly only removing links and the beginnings/ends to protect identities.

That's the daft thing, if his first message had been "hang on a minute, those scratches were there when it arrived" I would have said, I'm really sorry about that, we will refund the full cost to you. The borderline bullying approach he's taken almost makes me want to call his bluff, but as you say in practice it would be hard for me to prove the scratches weren't our fault. In the end it's probably best just to refund the full amount. Just feels like giving into his intimidation which is a bitter pill to swallow - the money is neither here nor there to be honest.

Thanks for taking the time to respond and help me get it a bit clearer in my mind.

 

[kulture]

The customer is a bully. For £75 he would be doing a small claims, not a count court writ. The costs he quotes are ludicrous. It is a simple scare tactic. Likewise his refusal to communicate will not help in court. I think you have been fair and reasonable and are clearly trying to find an equitable solution. That said, is it worth your time? Look up money claims online and read up on the process. See what the actual costs are, and the actual work involved. Then consider that this customer is not going to be 100% factual and may twist things. For an extra £25 I would refund him in full and suggest that he takes his business elsewhere.

 

[billmccallum1957]

Take look here...

https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/overview

and point this out to him

"The judge might not award you costs if they think you’ve made no effort to agree out of court."

 

[David010]

Thanks for all your input everyone. Been useful in helping me know how best to deal with him. In the end I'm going to be refunding it as I always thought I would. It's not worth the hassle as many have noted.

I guess I partly just wanted to be reassured that we haven't acted in an unfair way, and that these legal threats aren't realistic (as I had assumed).

My sense of justice and fairness makes me want to call his bluff and have my day in court to fight my corner, but I know that is pointless and likely fruitless - I can still dream of my Erin Brockovich style moment though

Thanks again everyone, very appreciated.

 

[Newchodge]

He won't get solicitor's or barrister's fees in the small claims court, just the court issue fee. he is bullying you. He is required to try to resolve the issue and his rejection of your suggestion to view the photographs and review your decision would not go down well with a judge.

However, what is he trying to achieve? Are you sure this is genuinely the wallet you sent out and not an identical one he bought a year ago and now wants to replace free of charge?

 

[kulture]

The problem is that the sensible business decision in this kind of circumstance is to pay up. People know this and act accordingly.

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

You are dealing with a retired legal executive so I know my rights.

No he doesn't.

Being "TOO SMALL FOR ME AND A BIT FIDDLY FOR MY HANDS" are not issues that are covered under either the Consumer Rights Act (2015) or, before that, the Sale of Goods Act (1979), which is the only relevant law.

Absent that, this situation is governed by your returns policy.

I would waste no more time on this and tell him to get on with his "County Court Writ" (I have issued hundreds of sets of proceedings in my career, and I have yet to come across a County Court Writ).

He won't.

In the very unlikely event that he does, post back here and I will talk you through an application to strike out his proceedings and obtain Summary Judgement.

Dean

 

[14Steve14]

In most cases it is easier to refund in full to save the hassle, but I think in this instance it would be best to see whether the customer will carry out his threat. I may even send a partial refund as you have suggested you would do, in line with your returns policy, and see what happens. I am sure that it will not be cost effective for him to start a claim for only half the purchase costs. That would just be stupid on his part.

The language used in the replies is all wrong, and bullies like this need stopping.

 

[Gecko001]

This customer has rejected your options of a remedy and has threatened legal action. All you can do is wait for legal action. If it never comes then you probably will never hear from this client again. If it does come, then go to court. That is what courts are there for and instead of you worrying about the rights and wrongs of the situation a judge will do it instead.

 

[GraemeL]

Something has to be done by the seller, because at present the buyer has paid in full for an item the seller now has. The longer the seller has the item without taking action, the worse the problem will get.

 

[Gecko001]

Something has to be done by the seller, because at present the buyer has paid in full for an item the seller now has. The longer the seller has the item without taking action, the worse the problem will get.

Something has been done by the seller. The seller has offered three remedies and they have been rejected by the buyer. The seller cannot force a remedy on the buyer. The seller could back down in light of the threats of legal action and give what the buyer wants.

PS. This type of situation often comes up on this forum. The buyer is probably a chancer out to rip the seller off. They reject everything that is offered to them by the seller as all they want is a full refund. The fact that the seller has tried to be nice to them and offer them a compromise or options rather than sticking strictly to the their own terms and conditions probably does not help. The buyer sees that as not being nice but just being weak and they hold their ground hoping that the seller will give in because of adverse publicity etc. .

 

[GraemeL]

Repeat again - something more has to be done by the seller. The seller currently has both the money and the item. Does not matter what the seller has offered and is waiting for a reply, or if the seller is in the right or the wrong, the seller cannot just wait to see what happens but must DO something. (eg return the wallet as was one of the sellers suggestions)

 

[Paul Norman]

I have many years of experience in ecommerce. Most customers, by a long, long way, are reasonable, and decent. If the wallet were scratched, they would have just exchanged chatty conversation with the seller, and received a full refund.

When you get the 'instantly agressive' ones, they still get a refund. But obviously go on a black list of people to whom you will not again send.

Does that matter? Not much, mostly. But when they do turn up again, (for someone like me with a number of unrelated stores that happens), at least you are protected.

 

[Chris Ashdown]

You have a duty to refund within 14 days, you cannot prove where and when the scratches were made, be it in the post to him or back to you or already there and not noticed. Give the nasty man his money back and get back to making money

 

[Gecko001]

Certainly the problem could be solved with a full refund. I would look closely at your terms and conditions and go by them. Forget about any other options you have presented to the buyer. However the threat of legal action, in my view, is significant in this matter. This guy is a grown up and is responsible for what he says and if he makes threats he should be willing to carry them out or not make them at all.

 

[The Byre]

This customer is obviously a nutter and none too bright either!

Follow Dean's advice to the letter! I would add to that, write to him by proper letter only.

 

[The Resolver]

You are entitled to withhold a reasonable sum to cover for loss in value of the item due to damage caused by the buyer. You have give him an opportunity to help you determine how it was caused . He is acting unreasonably. I would deduct a small amount say £20 and ply the balance.

Whether you do that or pay in full you should gain your fullest satisfaction by reporting him to the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives for breach of this section of the Code of Conduct
"3.2 Not intentionally mislead anyone you deal with".

Telling you he will obtain legal and counsels costs is misleading . His general tone of his e-mails also would breach the more general conduct standard of behaviour

You might also first of all check his file on the register.

Please let us all know how you get on.

 

[Xtm_Mike]

How long did he have the wallet? if it's a couple of weeks I'd potentially just issue the refund and be done with it.

If it is much longer then I absolutely would not pay, his reason for refund is stupid. If I buy some clothes and don't return them within the return window unworn and undamaged then it's tough.

I'm no legal expert so I can only tell you 'what I would do' but I would be absolutely following The Resolver's and Dean's advice. You created a returns policy for this reason, stick to it!

It's ok saying 'just refund, it's not worth the hassle' but where does it end? Are you just going to refund everyone who decides they no longer want your product and drops a couple of threats? You will find these kind of threats are not uncommon so it could happen again.

 

[Stuart Bailey]

there are two issues here, the legal one and the practicable one. Putting aside the legal issues think about the time you are spending dealing with this issue, never mind the worry and stress it brings. The time you are wasting could be put to spending more time on your business which will give you better returns than going to court. He does sound a bully and his rhetoric is not befitting a retired legal executive but you need to think what's best for your business.

 

[David010]

Hi everyone. Thanks for all your responses. They have been insightful and helpful. Thank you to Dean especially for the very good advice and kind offer and also to the resolver for some very solid legal points which I would never have been aware of. I apologise for not being more involved in responding but as I'm sure you can imagine this is a very busy time for an e-commerce business like mine.

I thought it only fair to update you. After weighing everything up I decided, however much I loathe it, the sensible business decision is to refund him and be done with it. £75 is not worth the headache and hassle a customer like this is hell-bent on causing. Nice as it would be to pursue fairness and justice, it just isn't worth it in this case, in my opinion. The fact of the matter is I have had close to 1000 customers and in my experience although some customers might at times be challenging or difficult, the majority are great, and 99.99% would never dream of acting in such a way as this man has, so I'm not worried about opening some kind of pandora's box here. I very much anticipate this being a one off.

As such, I processed the refund a couple of days ago - I did not send notification as he had explicitly asked for no further communication. As we are probably all aware, a refund can take anywhere from 1-10 days to clear, largely, depending on the bank or card issuer.

Then this evening I had the treat of hearing from our "favourite" customer again. I will copy the email exchange here - again removing the beginnings and ends for privacy reasons, I will keep everything else verbatim.

I should note for complete clarity, I sent this message just after posting the initial question, to which I received no response:

"Given that you have now proceeded with the course of legal action, this is a brief message to let you know we will not be commenting further until we seek legal advice from our lawyers on what action to take against this. It is a shame we could not discuss it more amicably further.

According to your email you will presumably not read this, but we wish to keep you informed as per our legal duty.

Kind regards,"

The next I heard was this evening:

"Hello

I confirm that I have issued proceeding against REDACTED company registration number REDACTED at its registered office and we will also be claiming full damages as well compensation for wasting my time.

This notification will form a part of Witness Statement.

Sincerely"

I responded with the following, admittedly, fairly curt message:

"Hi X,

Perhaps you should check your account and stop harassing us.

Have a nice Christmas."

Then came the following shortly after:

"Hello

Proceeding have been issued.

This is not called HARASSMENT.

What you have done is called HARASSMENT.

We have not received any payment from you.

See in court.

Sincerely,"

Then before any response on my part came the following:

"Hello

Having checked all my accounts VERY CAREFULLY for the last 7 days there is no credit showing from REDACTED.

I expected this behaviour.

What can you expect from a dishonest man and its organisation.

Do not contact me further as I can report you to police for dishonesty right now.

Disgusting."

I must admit I was becoming both amused and frustrated with him, and took this opportunity to speak my mind a little. Many of the more salient points in the following email were formed from advice in this thread, so thank you for that. I acknowledge some of the following message was probably churlish and not wise, but I had got to the point where I felt he had to be told and put in his place. Not saying it was right, but this is the message I responded with:

"Please understand. Your money has been refunded. Whether you have received it yet is up to your bank or card issuer.

Your threats of legal action are preposterous. You are evidently not a former legal executive, or were a very poor one. An issue like this would not require a county court writ but would be dealt with in a small claims court. A place where your refusal to communicate to reach a solution and provide evidence you claim to have would be highlighted as not attempting to reach a solution outside of court. A requirement of a small claim. You would not be able to claim expenses or interest on a matter such as this.

You are being entirely unreasonable, despite the fact you have achieved your goal of getting a refund. Part of me would have liked to allow you to continue with your so called legal proceedings so justice could be served. However the sensible business decision is to refund the wallet because you are not worth the time, effort or hassle. You know as much, which is presumably why you have acted in this way.

Please now go on with your life in the satisfaction you have achieved your goal.

As an aside, I took the time to check out your website. Some great looking products you have there. Perhaps one day I will order some. Let's hope I don't have to return any.

Kind regards,"

Yes, that last line was childish and foolish, but I couldn't resist given the fact his email address gives away the fact he himself runs (or at least works for) an online clothing store. I won't give out the URL out of fairness, but the site looks shoddy to say the least.

The final reply at this point is the following:

"
Hello

I am well aware of my capabilities and I do not need your lecture on court procedure.

You do not have any clues about distant selling laws and its very serious implications.

Legal proceeding have been initiated.

It’s obvious that your lies would have emerged at the hearing so the refund drama.

I do not need your business or even I do not care about your interest in my business I run a very highly respectable business.

I do not cheat customers like or into such cheap correspondence.

So have a miserable Christmas.

Sincerely"

So there we have it. I presume he will disappear now - he has won in many ways unfortunately. I know I didn't act in a totally professional way or in line with exact legal advice. However, I did what I felt right in my gut and perhaps at times let my emotions lead a little, but what's done is done. Ordinarily, I would never speak to a customer (or anyone for that matter) in the manner of the later emails, but to be honest this man felt like he had passed from customer to abuser some time ago.

Hopefully that is the end of it, although a large part of me looks forward to seeing what on earth a county court writ is and what antics that may or may not entail. Apologies for the long message, but I felt it was only fair to update you all on the full course of events.

Merry Christmas to you all as well!

 

[Gecko001]

This looks like a battle of who will have the last word. Just ignore this nutter. It will mean that he has the last word, but hey that is what nutters always want.

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

Hi David

What an oddball! If you do eventually get a summons, let me know and I'd be happy to draft a strike-out application for you. No charge. The entertainment value of your case (well, his behaviour) precludes the need for payment.

Best wishes and have a good Christmas.

Dean

 

[STDFR33]

Hi David

What an oddball! If you do eventually get a summons, let me know and I'd be happy to draft a strike-out application for you. No charge. The entertainment value of your case (well, his behaviour) precludes the need for payment.

Best wishes and have a good Christmas.

Dean

I'm not the OP but that's very kind of you, Dean.

'Av a good un!

 

[IanG]

He sounds bonkers.

I'd have been tempted to go along for the ride as it looks like hogwash to me, no expert.

Sound business to refund though.

 

[smallclaimsassistance]

I'm not the OP but that's very kind of you, Dean.

'Av a good un!

I meant the other David (@David010 ).

Same to you anyway mate .

 

[hortonas_tjh]

What a story! Reluctantly, I probably would've ended up doing the same thing (refund) just to get the guy off my back.

I think you did the right thing, and top marks @David010 for putting up with it!

 

[Ally Maxwell]

Did I read this right ? The buyer has a website and also sells goods online ? Really ?

C'mon......spill the URL

 

[CW Legal Services]

Firstly, he is not a legal executive (except in the public bar) any more than I am the Prime Minister. I'd refund his money minus the actual cost of the wallet and any postage. In the refund,send it by post, enclose a picture of what he sent back
If he files a claim defend it. It will be switched to your local county court.