Originally Posted by
Saracen
We're at cross-purposes a bit here, Behemoth. Trading Standards certainly do prosecute traders, but I didn't intend to imply that that would help the consumer. I entirely agree, they don't act on behalf of consumers in the sense of getting money back, or directly enforcing consumer's rights, but where shops have committed offences, TS will deal with them. Note .... offences, not civil disputes.
Generally, if they get reports of certain traders committing some offence, it'll get recorded, but as a one-off, probably nothing much more than that. If TS get a pattern of offences from a retailer, they'll usually fire a warning shot across that retailer's bows, in the form of a letter or perhaps a visit. If they still get reports from consumers, then prosecutions will, evidence-permitting, follow.
It won't get the consumers their money back, but that's not the point. The point is to "encourage" shops from abusing consumer's rights in the first place.
One example that TS follow up on is shops denying that certain consumer rights exist. Another is misleading pricing, or misleading advertising. I've personally known of cases where, when misleading advertising has appeared from a retailer with a history, TS have responded with the reaction of "that's just one time too many", and they prosecuted. And won.
So yes, if you want to enforce consumer rights, then the first step is negotiation with the shop. It helps to know your rights, both what you are entitled to and what you are not. And if all reasonable attempts at dealing with the shop fail, then effectively as a last resort, yes, the only way to enforce it is small claims court. Even then, it may be that winning the case is the easy bit. Getting the judgement acted on may be harder .... and more expensive.