To expect a refund?

[Kai1977]

I bought a top from Zara a week ago, got it home to find a buttonhole was damaged. I can't find the receipt but the amount shows on my credit bill.

Zara will only offer an exchange. Does the credit card bill not count as proof of purchase?

Shop assistants word wouldn't be usable as proof as they have a vested interest - ie could lose job etc.

This is why shops red dot clothes or mark the receipt if damage is pointed out to the customer - or why they will knock a pound or two off so the receipt shows damage notified with the reduction

If it's within 30 days it won't be a problem at all and stand your ground if they say otherwise.
Within 6 months the retailer has the burden of proof so they have to prove the item was faulty at the time if the sale however they can offer an repair or exchange rather than a refund

I think the key thing here is item not fit for purpose/damaged or deficient rather than just don't like it or changed mind.

And no the shop assistant saying no it wasn't faulty when it was sold isn't good enough, or no one would ever get a refund!

From the govt website

You can ask the customer for proof that they bought an item from you. This could be a sales receipt or other evidence such as a bank statement or packaging.

The retailer gets to chose what is satisfactory proof of purchase, Zara want a receipt as is their right.
Anyone that has ever worked in a shop will know that the idea of just giving a refund for anything without any receipt is ridiculous - people would nick stuff, break it and bring it back ( it already happens all the time)

This; nancy75 is right.

In my previous retail jobs we would never have accepted a refund without a receipt. People tried to use just their credit card receipt but no, we would never accept it because it doesn't tell you exactly what was purchased.

In future, keep hold of your receipt so situations like this don't occur.

You don’t need a receipt... so walk into a large shop.... pick something up and go to the till and ask for a refund

See where it gets you

And with no receipt.... those quoting ‘the law’, what would happen if customer claims they paid cash?

You need proof of purchase you don't need a receipt for a faulty item, if you change your mind you'll need a receipt.

If you paid cash and have no receipt then you have no proof of purchase so you don't get anything. You could try but there's no guarantees.
But with proof of purchase you get a refund for faulty items (not change of mind)

Faulty could be claimed to be anything.....it won’t be tested in store so you could present anything at the till and call ‘faulty’

I think you should cancel the cheque

Runningoutofcharge most large shops have security tags on pretty much anything so you can't just pick something up.

Either way, the law says you can go in without a receipt or proof of purchase such as statement and it is up to the store to prove it wasn't faulty when you bought it.

Not fair? Perhaps. But that's what the law says.

Yes you can say anything is faulty. A new tablet wasn't charging I took it back to currys they plugged it in to test it.
I took a kettle back to Argos for some reason that I can't remember and they just accepted it but they could have filled it with water plugged it in and turned it on, it's up to the shop how they accept faulty items.
But they can't refuse to refund a faulty item within a reasonable time frame with proof of purchase.

See I think that law has changed under the old sale of goods act you did not need a proof of purchase if the item was faulty. I certainly returned items which disintegrated after one wash etc after having chucked the receipt.

Seems the 2015 act is clear proof of purchase is required.

Raizel that was an example, it is of course unlikely (although for example a security camera might prove larger damage) but my point is that the law doesn't count a person's word as proof on its own, anyone could make up what they wanted if that was the case.

With electrical you can’t just plug them in!! H&s rules ... especially if you are claiming they are faulty!

Security tagging is also very lacking on the high st I find

I've no idea what they can or can't do in order to prove it's faulty or not.
But they still can't refuse to give a refund if you have something that's faulty (like the ops cardigan) with proof of purchase.

Either way, the law says you can go in without a receipt or proof of purchase such as statement and it is up to the store to prove it wasn't faulty when you bought it. apart from that's not what the law says, it says the retailer has a right to ask for a proof of purchase. As for security tags - if a shop has to refund something faulty without receipt what's to stop me ripping of a security tag & then wanting a refund for a stolen item because it's got a hole in it?

Either way, the law says you can go in without a receipt or proof of purchase such as statement and it is up to the store to prove it wasn't faulty when you bought it.

Not fair? Perhaps. But that's what the law says.

No, the law doesn't say that, as explained by nancy75 at least twice now.

And as I've already explained:

"If your goods are faulty and you don't have the receipt, you still have the same rights to a repair, refund or replacement as under the Consumer Rights Act.

Under the Consumer Rights Act you have an early right to reject goods that are unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described, and get a full refund.

But this right is limited to 30 days from the date of purchase.

After the initial 30 days, you can't demand a full refund in the first instance, but you still have the right to a repair or replacement."

I think if the top is faulty it shouldn't matter whether you have a receipt or not. They should give you a refund. Of course that's just my opinion.
You don't want to take it back because you've changed your mind about the colour or it doesn't fit etc.. You want to take it back because it's not been made properly and therefore not sellable. So why should they be able to keep your money?

Definitely get the refund- its faulty!!
CRA 2015.

If the shop want to go out their way to be sure you bought it they're welcome to check their cctv, their call, either way you get your refund!!

I don't want to keep arguing. I know the law you can keep quoting different acts at me. I've had the same arguments with customers, I've argued with citizens advice who have been on the phone with customers because they don't understand the law, I've never been prosecuted, neither has the shop so I really do know the law.

You are interpreting the law to give you an advantage that's fine. It's really frustrating because you are ignoring people who actually work in retail because your not getting the answer you want. I wish you luck but I can't imagine they will refund it.

OP asked their legal rights, not what the shop might fancy doing, or what individuals think is fair.

To clarify a few points:

The consumer has the right to reject goods (for refund) that do not conform to contract within the first 30 days from purchase. (s.20 CRA) Rejection of goods means refund, not replacement or repair.

The reported fault "is presumed to have been present at the time of delivery unless the trader proves otherwise or this presumption is incompatible with the nature of the goods or the particular breach or fault." (CRA explanatory notes.) Note that this requires proof, a report from a suitably qualified party, not the vague opinion of the manager.

Nowhere does the Act state that a receipt is required in order to assert your rights. A court would work on a balance of probabilities basis, is it more likely than not that you did in fact buy the item? I'm not aware of any case law under the CRA, but under SoGA a CC/ bank statement - even for a larger amount - was adequate. If the statement showed a larger amount you would be able to show the other items purchased to reach that amount. The evidential burden has not changed since SoGA, there's no reason to believe that a CC statement would not be acceptable.

OP I would speak to customer services. If they are initially unhelpful then quote the relevant sections of the CRA to them. If you wanted to pursue it further you would need to write a letter before action to them and ultimately issue a small claims action. I'd be very surprised if you had to take it that far.