Sony Vaio Z Canvas release date, price and specs: Another Surface Pro rival but for the US
The OFT has found many on line retailers to be in breach of consumer laws
"It has asked the retailers to change their websites before Christmas."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19910561 (Ignore the headline, read the test)
should they not have been told, rather than asked?
I have had problems occasionally with firms in the past. They soon cave in if they think you know your quote rights and quote chapter and verse of the Distance Selling Regulations leaving them in no doubt that you have consulted Your local Trading Standards Office.
The same goes when claiming back postage and packing when returning goods received damaged or not Fit for Purpose.
"The downside is that companies can claim they have never been found to be in breach of the rules"
That was the case with a return (Distance Selling) that I did (a laptop) it took a report to Trading Standards/ Local Council dept who contacted them on my behalf to point out the error of their ways and they were then 'persuaded' to change their ways and the wording of their Website or risk being prosecuted for breach of DSR (via my complaint). In my case it was one of the Big Retailers who also have a chain of stores nationwide. I believe customers no longer get stone-walled with DSR returns now.
I have in the past, when something bought in a shop has not been Fit for Purpose and a dispute has arisen, produced a copy of the Sale of Goods Act, quoting chapter and verse.
Many businesses I feel instruct staff to try and hoodwink customers who complain, but soon back down when they realise the customer knows his/her rights.
Transferred to Tech Consumer Advice from Speakers Corner.
The OFT regularly makes these sweeps, although they don't normally come up with so many possible breaches.
I imagine that if a similar sweep was made of the terms and conditions that are microscopically printed on the backs of paper invoices and delivery notes, all kinds of inaccuracies and omissions would be discovered.
The important thing to remember is that most commercial enterprises want to comply with the relevant legislation, either for on-line or off-line sales. Even if there are errors and omissions it makes no difference anyway - consumers cannot have their rights in law compromised by anything a retailer chooses to add, alter or omit.
It's far better for the OFT to issue reminders and requests than to start getting all heavy-handed, just because someone made a mistake on a web site.
Bought a 19 inch Philips Wide Screen monitor from Cash converters, When I bought it he plugged it into a PC turned it on but I was in a Disabled Scooter so was a lot lower down than the top shelf that it was on, he had to turn brightness and contrast up to get it to look something like, gets my till receipt goes home two months warranty or repair stamped on the till receipt. was not able to check it out until two days , when I did I could tell the the back light top tube was on its way out as I could not adjust it correctly for picture or text on Web pages. So I took it back he did not want to do nothing about it and said there was nothing wrong with it, so I stuck out my guns and told him what was wrong with it and wanted a refund. Well that was just like trying to get money back off anti-Wainwright on Last of the summer wine. I finely gave him the this is a shop selling to the public and what was stamped on the till receipt did not count, and that he was responsible, so I quoted Customer Rights. I soon got my Money back, as I said well if that's the way you want to go. Surprising what the correct words can do in that situation
I'm not sure what all that has to do with the OFT and its sweep of e-commerce websites.
FE. Are you not being a bit pedantic. Consumer Rights are exploited in shops also.
We're all aware of that, but this thread is about online retailers.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.