To think House of Fraser’s refund policy is another nail in their coffin

[Bearbehind]

I bought several expensive and heavy items online with the intention of choosing 1 and taking the others back to my local store for a refund

Turns out you can only exchange or get a credit note in store

If you want your money back you have to post it back at your own cost

Given the weight and value, I’m nearly £30 down for the pleasure.

Surely they can’t afford to piss customers off by refusing to refund in store - what difference does it make to them?

Very expensive lesson learned!

I will never buy from them again

For the retailer, they need to decide whether it’s actually advantageous to them, or whether it costs more than it brings in.

The point many of us are making here is it seems more than a little short sighted of HOF to impose this policy though as, on the face of it, it has to be damaging to them

They offer very little that can’t be bought from competitors who provide better customer service so why would people choose them?

Even if it does cost them more to process refunds in store, surely that’s better than not making the sales in the first place?

For the consumer, sure. For the retailer, they need to decide whether it’s actually advantageous to them, or whether it costs more than it brings in. As a PP who actually works in the sector says, this sort of behaviour is not without cost to shops.

I'm sure what OP does is a cost to the shops. However, many of us order stuff online with the intention of keeping it all. I rarely take stuff back but if I do I want the option of taking it back for free so will choose a company that lets me do that. HoF policy isn't just going to lose the custom of shoppers like OP. It will lose the custom of most people who shop online. Obviously that may be sensible if online shopping makes no money for them but if that's the case what is the point of selling things online in the first place?

The point many of us are making here is it seems more than a little short sighted of HOF to impose this policy though as, on the face of it, it has to be damaging to them

Things might make more sense if you delineate the "them" you are referring to. If it's Mike Ashley and his merry band, then I suspect it's not "damaging" them. If it's the staff and customers ... then maybe it is.

I very much doubt Mike Ashley has a 5 or 10 year plan for House of Fraser.

I very much believe Mike Ashley has a 50 year plan for Mike Ashley.

Even if it does cost them more to process refunds in store, surely that’s better than not making the sales in the first place?

Not necessarily. If people generally return more than they keep, the company isn't going to make a profit. Processing returns costs money, even if done in store. Two lots of card transactions (sale and refund), two lots of postage costs (warehouse to consumer, consumer back to warehouse, or shop back to warehouse if returns are done in store), the loss of stock to the business (we can't sell stock that's being held in a returns warehouse even if there's nothing wrong with it) etc etc.

Retailers need to weigh up whether offering free in-store returns is advantageous to them. HoF have clearly decided it isn't. Other businesses presumably make enough money to be able to absorb those costs, or have decided that the extra cost in providing that service is worth it in the long run.

For the retailer, they need to decide whether it’s actually advantageous to them, or whether it costs more than it brings in. As a PP who actually works in the sector says, this sort of behaviour is not without cost to shops

You know, a lot of things are not without cost to the shops. Turning the lights on, providing air con in summer, etc. They are already trimming costs in HOF by not refreshing the decor and by basically not stocking anything (if you have been in a branch recently it looks like a clearance outlet). They certainly don’t “order you a different size into store” if they don’t have your size.

They can’t have it both ways. If customers using the website is to be discouraged, because it puts jobs at risk, and shopping in store is discouraged (because I’d have more chance of finding what I want round the corner in an actual branch of Topshop/Warehouse that carries a decent range of stock), then HOF is probably not it going to be around for much longer. 🤷‍♀️

I'm sure what OP does is a cost to the shops. However, many of us order stuff online with the intention of keeping it all. I rarely take stuff back but if I do I want the option of taking it back for free so will choose a company that lets me do that.

If a store has free delivery and free returns I’d generally only order the item I thought would be the most likely to like as it’s saves the hassle of actually doing the return anyway

The fact they charge £5 per order for delivery is the reason I bought all possible options at once

As it turns out it could have been cheaper to order 1 at a time!

It all fits together though.

Online shopping does, without a doubt, have an impact on bricks and mortar stores. People find it easier and more convenient to shop online. But, as a result of that, the shops make less money. The less money a shop takes, the less profit they have to spend on re-doing the decor, staffing costs and actually filling the branch with stock. Then people buy online because the shop doesn't have what they want, and it goes round again.

Not necessarily. If people generally return more than they keep, the company isn't going to make a profit.

Obviously, but generally people must keep more than they return. If they didn't then online retailers wouldn't be doing so well because they are in the same position. You would think from this thread that online shopping isn't profitable for shops but that obviously isn't the case. The unprofitable part must be having a storefront in the first place and the collapse of companies on the high street could be despite the fact that some people buy their goods online rather than because of it.

There are lots of 🚌 ness models where bricks and mortar are just neccsary but unprofitable costs nowadays.

The most obvious of which that I can think of is estate agents.

They advertise their products on line and the product is obviously other people’s property, yet they have, an often very plush physical office.

It will change hugely over the next decade or so and that will lead to the demise of the high st in favour of shopping centres and on line, but what is the alternative?

We all go back to having limited choice and going without if something isn’t in stock in our local Dorothy Perkins?!

Christ knows why that put a bus emoji in instead of saying business 😂

Someone posted upthread about ASOS barely turning a profit because of their business model. I'm not sure how true that is, but it wouldn't surprise me.

People on here are assuming that 90% of people are just returning a handful of items and are keeping the majority of their purchases but my experience tells me otherwise. I have customers who, looking at their history, have spent (as in, bought and kept) 5k worth of clothes over the years, which sounds great, but at the same time they have returned 35k worth. They buy online, spend enough to qualify for free postage and return it all in shops. That's not an unusual scenario either. At least twice a week we deal with refunds that are £500+ in value - always from online orders, and normally from people who've bought three pairs of jeans in a 12 and a 14 in three different colours (so nine pairs in total) and have decided they don't fit any of them.

Writ large, the problem is an entrenched mindset of people that can't deal with a paradigm shift.

No amount of wailing was ever going to stop the demise of horses in favour of cars.

And now, no amount of wailing is going to stop the demise of the High St. (which is in itself an ephemeral concept) in favour of "remote shopping".

We still have horses, of course. And we'll still have shops. Only different.

Someone posted upthread about ASOS barely turning a profit because of their business model. I'm not sure how true that is, but it wouldn't surprise me.

They didn't make as much last year but previous years have been extremely profitable. You can't argue that online shopping isn't profitable when online retailers are making a profit whereas shops with a store front are closing.

They can’t have it both ways. If customers using the website is to be discouraged, because it puts jobs at risk, and shopping in store is discouraged (because I’d have more chance of finding what I want round the corner in an actual branch of Topshop/Warehouse that carries a decent range of stock), then HOF is probably not it going to be around for much longer.

Hey, I’m not saying that the HoF model is the right one. I very rarely shop there, it’s not been great for years and there is little incentive for me to try it again.

That said I don’t think anyone here is suggesting HoF or anyone else are trying to discourage online shopping. They appear to be discouraging the ‘buy lots online and return most to a shop’ mentality (and perhaps also the ‘buy lots online and return most of it through the post’) approach which seems to be beloved of a few people on here.

As people who have worked in the sector have pointed out, that model of shopping eats into margins. Yes, businesses have costs. It’s up to them to decide which of those costs are necessary for profitability, and which are driving an unprofitable model.

It’s never so simple as ‘customers like it, so it must be worth their while.’

There are other shops with different business models who cater to that shopping preference. HoF has clearly decided it doesn’t work for them. Clear choice, surely?

They didn't make as much last year but previous years have been extremely profitable. You can't argue that online shopping isn't profitable when online retailers are making a profit whereas shops with a store front are closing.

Who’s arguing that? Particularly about online-only rather than integrated businesses?

no amount of wailing is going to stop the demise of the High St True! Just as no amount of wailing will stop the remaining, entrenched od fashioned shop and shopper, whilst they still exist.

We will have a competely different High St soon. Between now and then there will be a growth on the dead, empty, boarded up High Street. Even the bookies that moved into empty shops are closing down now!

Many people won't chnage their business model, they will hope to eek out a living until retirement. They won't see it, won't engage with it and high streets al lover the country will falter and close. Look at the ones that have already made a leap and have changed themselves, Totally Locally and other ideas for keeping local shops open for local people are just one example.

Online shopping will become the norm and the cost of it will change as that happnes. There will be less fighting for screen space, discounts will decrease and profit margins will begin to increase again. All the current 'free returns' etc will be more visible in the cost of each item.

You only have to look at Amazon prices to see that!

That said I don’t think anyone here is suggesting HoF or anyone else are trying to discourage online shopping. They appear to be discouraging the ‘buy lots online and return most to a shop’ mentality (and perhaps also the ‘buy lots online and return most of it through the post’) approach which seems to be beloved of a few people on here.

They are discouraging people from buying clothes online from them altogether though if they charge for returns when other online clothes businesses do not. If they wanted to just discourage people from buying a lot and returning it all they could have specific policies in place for this. It's inevitable that people will return some clothes as you can't always tell what something will look like from the picture so they need to either stop selling online all they need to make a certain amount of returns free

It's inevitable that people will return some clothes as you can't always tell what something will look like from the picture so they need to either stop selling online all they need to make a certain amount of returns free

It’ll be interesting to see which way they go on clothes (if they exist at all). I think there’s probably an argument for targeting the confident rather than browsing online shopper (segments I’ve invented but basically the difference between those who are very unlikely to return an item, and those who are likely to return most of their order). Whether a business of HoF’s size and lack of distinctive USP can operate in the more niche markets is a different question.

Of course it may just be basic survival for them right now and nothing more long term or strategic. Who knows?

Out of interest why should any of them make postal returns free for non faulty goods?

Is that the 'Amazon Effect'?

It isn't a very savvy business strategy and so must, in reality, just increase the unit cost of every item, as the seller adds a small % increase to all items cover their return losses.

Why would you buy straight away more than you plan on keeping? Just don't get it . If you want to browse go to a shop

Because you want to try stuff on and see if it suits you.... How is that difficult?

Sorry lots of people now BROWSE on line! It might be a revelation but true . You do not have to GO TO A SHOP.

Like it or not.

And just as well for the time poor or night workers or people with mobility issues or those with small children or out of towners or those in rural areas etc and anyone else generally who might want to or have to buy online.

Can't believe that pp on here who talk as if systems should be about making things easier for the shop and not the shopper

Online works better when combined with click and collect. Next is great at it. I think HOF is useless generally and I'm not really surprised that It is them OP is complaining about.

Don't agree. @CuriousaboutSamphire think making online postal returns free is very savvy.
Makes me shop with them.
Of course everything has to be paid for somewhere.

And incidentally you pay for returns with Amazon.

And incidentally you pay for returns with Amazon.

Do you?, I have never paid to return anything to Amazon, also they do Amazon Wardrobe where you are encouraged to buy a few things and try before you buy

Can't believe that pp on here who talk as if systems should be about making things easier for the shop and not the shopper

They have to work reasonably well for each, otherwise the retailer either won’t have enough sales, or its sales won’t cover its costs.

Retail is a business, not a public service.

Out of interest why should any of them make postal returns free for non faulty goods?

I don't think anyone has said that they should but in order to compete with shops where you can try clothes on they need to do that really. I'm good at working out whether something will suit me from how it looks on the model. However I can never be 100% certain so I wouldn't take the risk if I couldn't send it back for free. Sure most people are the same.

Retail is a business, not a public service.

Totally. You have to make it work for your customer. Or you won't have customers.