You've booked the table, ordered the flowers and bought the expensive engagement ring, but how do you get your money back if she says no?Besides the Government's Consumer line becoming like the Samaritans, I wonder exactly how many "numerous calls" really is. After a short discussion at work we think numerous is five or more, although it is contextual.
Last year, Consumer Direct, the government advice service, received numerous calls from spurned lovers asking how they could get a refund on engagement rings that were no longer needed after February 14th.
As it's a press release it must be less than a thousand, otherwise they would've said "thousands" wouldn't they? All suggestions and guesses greatly appreciated.
Update: very odd, but I rang them and asked what the FoI request address was. I was told that they may not be able to answer because of the Enterprise Act??
4 comments:
Ho ho ho.Good spot Dizzy...and what will you be buying your computer to celebrate the festival of love...
Don`t bother with the wife she will assume you are building up to admitting your are unemployed.Or is that just me .....
Why, precisely, should you be able to get your money back if you have entered into a contract with a shopkeeper, both in good faith, paid your money and got genuine goods in return?
My girlfriend is a consumer direct 'legal advisor'. I'll ask her if she's had any calls of that nature. I doubt it to be honest.
Sale of Goods Act applies in this instance. If it's not faulty and is as described when it was sold, then the seller is not obliged to give a refund.
Part 9 of the Enterprise Act prevents enforcement authorities disclosing information that they have gaining using their statutory powers.
Quantitative complaints data would not be covered by this. It should in fact be published every year.
However I doubt the information will be recorded in catergories a s specific as 'refund on engagement' ring. I doubt they could actually give you an answer without trawling through the free text on every complaint, which they obviously won't do.
Post a Comment