Customer Service Query

[james.daly91]

Background first - I was building a new PC and chose to buy some of the components from Scan following a friend's recommendation. One of these components turned out to be incompatible with my build (misread the part number and bought a cooler for an AMD board rather than Intel). I tried to return this new, unused cooler to Scan within a 28 day window from my original order date and, lo and behold, a no quibble response of "No, we will not accept a return unless it is defective".

Now, most companies would be interested in trying to attract and retain new custom, particularly since I will likely be upgrading my parts in the future and not just doing this as a one-off thing. Scan, on the other hand, don't seem to be willing to adhere to their poorly worded terms (which, ironically, were meant to encourage goodwill between me and them). I'm now left with a brand new cooler which is all but useless to me, and left about £28 down until I can find someone to sell it on to.

All in all, I recommend that you not use Scan unless you are looking for a one-off purchase and do not care about customer service.

I will also be passing this message on to my friends and family and the other forums I used to review my build to ensure no-one else falls into the same trap as I of shoddy customer service.

[GeorgeStorm]

How many days had passed?

I'm assuming longer than 7 since I think then it would have come under the distance selling regulations so they would have had to have taken it back?

Disappointing to hear of your experience though, hearing more and more bad things about Scan

[kalniel]

Background first - I was building a new PC and chose to buy some of the components from Scan following a friend's recommendation. One of these components turned out to be incompatible with my build (misread the part number and bought a cooler for an AMD board rather than Intel). I tried to return this new, unused cooler to Scan within a 28 day window from my original order date and, lo and behold, a no quibble response of "No, we will not accept a return unless it is defective".

DSR is within 7 working days, not 28. You can't say it's poor customer service that they supplied you with a working product that you ordered and then you failed carry out a return under the time frame specified in their terms and conditions, and wider regulations (and that should be widely known).

That you're asking for a goodwill return above and beyond the terms you bought under is fair game, but it's not poor customer service that Scan didn't agree to it.

[Mark@SCAN]

james.daly91,

Please provide your invoice number so I can check the details.

Regards

[james.daly91]

It's more that the majority of companies will, as a gesture of goodwill, enable returns up to 28 days if they are incompatible (I returned an item to Amazon for a similar reason and they refunded no questions asked).

Furthermore, looking at their goodwill terms on their website (here) they actually mention that they understand items may be incompatible, but then confuse the statement by saying that only defective items would be returned within 28 days. As a customer-focused business, surely following the example of other companies would be a good policy? I will be using Amazon in the future, and never again using Scan. Quite simple really.

Edit: The invoice number was E2161849.

[cheesyboy]

Scan performed the transaction exactly as detailed in their terms. It's not poor customer service to not accept returns when they never offered a returns process (beyond the 7 days statutory).
It might be that you prefer to deal within a 28 day returns window, in which case perhaps Scan isn't the retailer for you. But let's not make out they are being unreasonable.

[kalniel]

It's more that the majority of companies will, as a gesture of goodwill, enable returns up to 28 days if they are incompatible (I returned an item to Amazon for a similar reason and they refunded no questions asked).

Sure - different companies have different methods - one company may have higher profit margins in order to cover more general goodwill conditions, another may offer goods at a lower price. We have the choice which we go with as customers.

Furthermore, looking at their goodwill terms on their website (here) they actually mention that they understand items may be incompatible, but then confuse the statement by saying that only defective items would be returned within 28 days.

OK I see what is confusing.

Points that I could see that are relevant include:

"You have a right to cancel the agreement at any time before the expiry of a period of 7 working days beginning with the day after the day on which you receive the goods. "

"we cannot and do not warrant the suitability of any of our goods for your particular purpose. "

"It is your responsibility to ensure compatibility of any goods offered for sale by us both with the existing components within your system and with any other goods offered for sale by us. "

which is fine, but then they say:

"We recognise that goods supplied by us to you may not meet your expectations. In our experience there are many reasons why that may happen. Examples of those reasons include a defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you, incompatibility with existing components within your system, poor installation or simply slower performance than you require.

We are not able to establish why the goods have failed to meet your expectations without an opportunity of inspecting and testing the goods.

In any case where the goods fail to meet your expectations we invite you to return them to us with an explanation of the problem. "

"Insofar as it may be established that there was no defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you, we reserve the right to charge you £10 as a contribution towards the cost of inspecting and testing the goods.

In any case where it is established that there was no defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you

we will nonetheless try to assist you in resolving the problem
depending upon the age and condition of the goods, we may be prepared to accept the return of the goods subject to a restocking charge and refund or credit the balance of the costs of the goods. "

To me that reads like there is a voluntary code for return of goods because of incompatibility and at which point Scan will try to assist you in resolving the problem. There doesn't appear to be a time limit associated with this course of action (the 28 day limit applies to defects for the purposes of the voluntary code which as noted by Scan may be less favourable than you statutory rights which are not affected). Furthermore if they accept a return it's likely they will deduct a restocking/handling fee and maybe even an inspection/test fee if there is any need to establish whether there is a defect in the goods.

From that, my opinion would be that effectively they are only saying they will attempt to assist you - I'm sure that will now happen - but the cost to you of returning a working item that doesn't meet your expectations could be as high as £10+10%+your carriage costs of returning the item.

[james.daly91]

To me that reads like there is a voluntary code for return of goods because of incompatibility and at which point Scan will try to assist you in resolving the problem. There doesn't appear to be a time limit associated with this course of action (the 28 day limit applies to defects for the purposes of the voluntary code which as noted by Scan may be less favourable than you statutory rights which are not affected). Furthermore if they accept a return it's likely they will deduct a restocking fee and maybe even an inspection/test fee if there is any need to establish whether there is a defect in the goods.

That was the part that confused me to be honest. I would have been happy to accept a restocking charge as I did acknowledge it was my fault for not reading the part number correctly (A rather than I in the name). However, there was simply no two-way communication about it - just a flat "no" from them which particularly struck me as bad service. Better wording may have made the terms clearer on this part, such as "Goods which are purchased incorrectly (such as through being found to be incompatible with existing components) may be returned within 7 days for a full refund. Up to 28 days may be offered at the supplier's discretion and may be subject to restocking charges of up to £10." or something like that might be better.

All the same, Scan doesn't strike me as being a "small" company by any means - and they do say that good manners don't cost anything after all.

[Mark@SCAN]

I do not dispute that other companies returns policies differ and in certain circumstances may be more or less favorable than our own.

Your return request was made almost a week outside of the 7 working day cancellation period allowed under the DSR's:

http://dshub.tradingstandards.gov.uk/dsrexplained

Your customers’ rights to cancel under the DSRs

Time limits for cancellation

The rationale behind the cancellation provisions in the DSRs is to allow the customer to inspect what they have purchased.

The time limits for cancellation are as follows.

For goods

Provided you give your customer the required written information no later than the time the goods are delivered, their cancellation rights end seven working days after the day on which they received the goods.

Our terms are very clear in this respect and we comply in every respect with the DSR's:

http://www.scan.co.uk/terms.aspx

Part II

c) Your right of cancellation

You have a right to cancel the agreement at any time before the expiry of a period of 7 working days beginning with the day after the day on which you receive the goods.

I'm not sure I can agree with your thread title that the service we offer is shoddy...

[Mark@SCAN]

However, there was simply no two-way communication about it - just a flat "no" from them which particularly struck me as bad service.

This is simply not true, we sent a polite e-mail to advise that you were unfortunately you were outside of the DSR period and we could not accept the return.

You then replied and mis-quoted our own terms and conditions and said:

"Based on this, I would like to proceed to send my cooler back to your depot to be tested as per your conditions (although it should work perfectly - I haven't been able to test it myself)."

Please be aware had we done this and no fault be found (which is highly likely) you would then have been liable for the costs of the collection, testing and return of the item which are more than the cost of the item itself.

[james.daly91]

I do not dispute that other companies returns policies differ and in certain circumstances may be more or less favorable than our own.

Hi Mark,

As in my previous post my confusion centres not around the DSR's (with which I am familiar), but with your terms of goodwill that are highlighted below that part. The wording I have discussed, so you may wish to look at amending that so you don't fool customers into believing that you would extend any form of service beyond damaged goods beyond the 7 days you have no control over.

I would suggest having a look at the returns policy offered by Amazon as an example(here) who offer up to 30 days returns on most items (including computing products). This is in addition to the DSR regulations, and just highlight what I would describe as good customer service.

Compliance under DSR doesn't amount to good customer service, that's called legal compliance and is mandatory. Goodwill gestures, such as this returns discrepancy, are what amount to customer service and frankly, you have failed miserably. Therefore, yes, I believe the title is justified.

Please be aware had we done this and no fault be found (which is highly likely) you would then have been liable for the costs of the collection, testing and return of the item which are more than the cost of the item itself.

Regarding this point, your terms state "Insofar as it may be established that there was no defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you, we reserve the right to charge you £10 as a contribution towards the cost of inspecting and testing the goods.", and the cost of carriage would not be likely to cost more than £5 so you are incorrect to state that the cost would outweigh the value. I paid (from the top of my head - the invoice is at home) around £23 for the cooler plus a further £5 for the carriage (which was a shame, my friend said that you sometimes offer free delivery).

[Mark@SCAN]

But I do not feel the code you are referring to applies to your situation, you knew already when you contacted us that the item was not correct. The code states:

"We recognise that goods supplied by us to you may not meet your expectations. In our experience there are many reasons why that may happen. Examples of those reasons include a defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you, incompatibility with existing components within your system, poor installation or simply slower performance than you require.
We are not able to establish why the goods have failed to meet your expectations without an opportunity of inspecting and testing the goods."

There was no need for us to inspect and test the items, you knew already the item purchased was incompatible, however unfortunately your request to return was made outside of time.

Regards

[james.daly91]

But I do not feel the code you are referring to applies to your situation, you knew already when you contacted us that the item was not correct. The code states:

"We recognise that goods supplied by us to you may not meet your expectations. In our experience there are many reasons why that may happen. Examples of those reasons include a defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you, incompatibility with existing components within your system, poor installation or simply slower performance than you require.
We are not able to establish why the goods have failed to meet your expectations without an opportunity of inspecting and testing the goods."
Regards

I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make with this quote here. When I originally placed the order, I assumed that the part was compatible. During the build process I then identified that the part was incompatible with the existing components and so would be of little use to me. Without trying to sound deceitful, the terms made it sound as if were I to send them back with an explanation that they were incompatible, you would then test them (I assume this would be standard procedure before letting goods go back on sale) and then charge a contribution as highlighted. I can't see anything that states conditions under which items should be sent in the first place, but it does say (I'll quote here so you can see where I'm coming from):

"In any case where it is established that there was no defect in the goods at the point of delivery to you
- we will nonetheless try to assist you in resolving the problem
- depending upon the age and condition of the goods, we may be prepared to accept the return of the goods subject to a restocking charge and refund or credit the balance of the costs of the goods."

As it's a new item, the age side of it shouldn't be an issue. You say you "may be prepared" but don't stipulate upon what terms this relies upon, other than your insistence that beyond the DSR regulations you have no desire to accept returns.

On a side-note, I'm not seeing any of this that is making me rethink my title relating to the quality of your customer service.

[virtuo]

Had you opened the packaging before realising it wasn't compatible?

[Mark@SCAN]

Ok, how about we accept back the return of the cooler on the condition a new order is placed for a compatible cooler from us first.

That shows good will on both parts would you agree?

[james.daly91]

Ok, how about we accept back the return of the cooler on the condition a new order is placed for a compatible cooler from us first.

That shows good will on both parts would you agree?

That would be agreeable, thank you. Is there a returns number I should attach to the box when I send it back? I'll send it to the address in Middlebrook?

I will double check the cooler required (was looking at LN40974) then place the order for it later today.