Are you being refused a refund?

Sorry Martin, but if you made a nonrefundable hotel booking, I would normally interpret that as meaning you have no entitlement to any form of refund if you do not or cannot use the booking.

Nonrefundable Hotel bookings usually cost significantly less than refundable ones, presumably on the basis that the hotel and booking agency do not need to carry the costs of potential insurance refunds.

If you took out “all risks” travel insurance for this trip, or if you have any via your credit card, then you may be entitled to claim costs back there.

I would not even try to get a refund on a non-refundable booking, but Martin has done and was told that he could dispute it in June, so it might be worth trying for some goodwill.

Hi Guinivere, from your account, you clearly established a verbal contract for the supply of a solid silver pendant.

After it broke within a few days, it became clear that the goods you were sold were not as described and also not sufficiently durable.

Hence I believe you have valid legal grounds for a refund.

I suggest that you write to or email the retailer to give them one last chance to obey the law on this matter.

If they still refuse, then I think you should escale the matter by appropriate legal action.

It will help if you have a receipt that describes the pendant.

Trading Standards are the people who should help with this sort of problem. Unfortunately Plymouth divert such complaints to Citizens’ Advice who do not generally seem equipped to provide direct help, but worth approaching to see what they can offer. Otherwise threaten the small claims court and see if the shop responds more positively. I would just ask a jeweller to confirm that it is silver plated and not solid.

Incidentally, a solid silver item should be hallmarked or, if foreign, marked with the purity. If yours is not of the purity stated the shop could be guilty of fraud.

I’m not sure about the company 3 Moon Majick. The website does not show an address for the company or a company number and I cannot see any products on sale.

There is no chance that Trading Standards will investigate you, Guinivere. They should however investigate the company. I suggest that you do contact Citizens Advice and they should refer your case to the local Trading Standards office. You could subscribe to Which? Legal for personal advice of how to proceed.

I did notice a number of Google reviews for that website. But all of them were 5 stars, which is normally a sure sign of faked reviews.

There seem to be a number of websites with the name “3 Moon Magick”. One of them showed this address for the shop:
3 Moon Magick, The House that Jack Built, 10 -11 Southside Street, Barbican, Plymouth, PL1 2LA.

I could find no other company information on the websites but I have not done a business search.

Perhaps the idea is that if you deal with a firm that features witchcraft and other mystical happenings then you should expect a bit of sorcery. That should not extend to ripping customers off with fake jewellery so a complaint via Citizens Advice is strongly recommended. The national consumer helpline number is 0808 223 1133 which accesses Citizens Advice consumer services.

I wonder how many people with a legitimate complaint about unfair trading get put off from pursuing it because of the anonymity and obscurity of the process. The theory that consumers can contact an errant company themselves and assert their consumer rights is fallible. I didn’t get the impression that a complaint would even reach the local trading standards service if CA didn’t think it deserved their attention. They seem to act not just as a gatekeeper but as a barrier.

Thanks John. I see the paranormal investigation site now, but that’s short on detail about what they offer. Maybe those who are interested will already be aware. 🙂

Citizens Advice refers people to Trading Standards, in the same way that a GP refers them to appropriate consultants. I have not used CA for years but have been happy with their service.

When your GP escalates your problem to a consultant you will hear from them and be dealt with. TS tell you they can’t deal with you so to contact CA. My experience was they – CA – don’t accumulate complaints nor follow them up, so they told me when I enquired. We need to be able to see complaints that are made and know someone is dealing with them. Time to fund a proper consumer protection service.

Here is information from the combined trading standards service that includes Plymouth –

“Trading Standards exists to ensure businesses across Devon, Somerset and Torbay treat consumers fairly and lawfully. We work with the Citizens Advice Consumer Service, who can advise you of your rights and what action you can take against a trader. . . . They may pass your complaint to us – we will contact you if we can investigate your case or require more information from you.”

This is a quote from Norfolk Trading Standards about “what happens to your report” –

“The Citizens Advice consumer service will assess your report and, where appropriate, give you information about how to resolve the issues you have raised. They will then share the information with Trading Standards so that we can tackle wider problems with businesses at a local level. We use the information that Citizens Advice consumer service shares with us to direct our resources at the areas of greatest need. We might use this information to take action to stop the trader from acting unfairly, for example by educating them about the law. If necessary, we may take legal action against them to stop their illegal practices.”

These statements are too conditional for my liking and I would expect something more reassuring. I would also like them to promise to obtain a remedy for the customer where unfair trading has occurred.

Malcolm – CA provides certain advice and if necessary refers consumers to a range of other services that can give specialist advice. After referral of my cases to TS I have had details of my enquiry read back to me. It’s up to TS and other services to follow up cases. I have had that happen but only to be told on two occasions that my cases would not be pursued unless there were further problems.

CA is a charity and many people act as volunteers. I have a family member who still volunteers part-time and she must be in her late 70s, though she must have ten years of experience by now. Sadly, we are reliant on many people doing charity work that should really be done by the government.

John – What you have quoted sounds very familiar, so this wording might apply across the country.

As we have discussed at length elsewhere we need a national trading standards service so that customers can report problems with large companies rather than expecting local TS offices to relay this information.

I think consumers deserve more than a volunteer service that just offers advice. We need an organisation that acts. I got nowhere asking about why Whirlpool were allowed to get away with such a pathetic plan to deal with tumble dryers, why Currys bad practice was not dealt with and why Amazon were not prosecuted for selling electrical equipment fitted illegally with 2 pin plugs. I didn’t need advice but a response to pertinent questions.

The service provided by CA since the days of WW2 provides consumers with individual help. At present it refers cases that require more than routine advice to the appropriate organisation(s) that are in a position to provide help and follow-up cases if necessary.

Whirlpool had a primary authority agreement with Peterborough TS, arranged by National Trading Standards – a company that does not see contact with the public as within its remit. Many larger companies have these agreements and liaison generally assists companies comply with their legal requirements. I believe that NTS should invite input from the public and provide feedback.

Until we have a government that is prepared to raise more taxes from those who can afford to pay them I see little hope for improvement of TS or National TS.

VAT is a good tax for revenue rising with spending power. Trading standards and consumer protection are essential functions of government in an economy that is characterised by largely unregulated retail and service sectors. I see no need for higher rates of tax, just better use of the taxes that are collected.

As we see here almost every day, not everyone is capable of taking a case forward by themselves for a range of reasons so the notion that the consumer can obtain their own redress with a bit of advice from a voluntary worker in a part-time office is a fallacy.

The case under discussion here and now involves a small business which could be difficult for a consumer in Guinivere’s position to wrangle with since the interaction is personal but which could be regarded by the local TS service as not worthy of their time and effort. It might even be possible for the Somerset & Devon with Torbay unit to deal with it on the telephone to Guinivere’s satisfaction if Citizen’s Advice take it seriously enough to forward if for action and keep an eye on the case until it is resolved. I don’t wish to do CA a disservice but I have little confidence in that happening since there seem to be too many optional excuses for not doing so. Moreover, it is difficult to hold a voluntary organisation to account and to ensure that a statutory service fulfils its obligations when it deems the issue to be too low-level to justify allocating resources. It might not appear to be a major problem to them but for the consumer it could be a serious let-down and represent an underestimation of its financial significance to them and thereby a mark of disrespect.

VAT is a regressive tax and raising it will affect everyone, including those who struggle to cope at present. I suggest IHT, CGT or income tax would be better ways of raising more funding from taxation. Two of our contributors on Convo have pointed out that Trading Standards is very much constrained by inadequate funding.

In Guinivere’s case I would expect CA to collect the essential information about the case and refer this to Trading Standards to pursue. The case in question is clearly within the remit of TS and once the details have been passed on I would not expect CA to have any further involvement.

I hope CA will pass Guinivere’s case through to the local trading standards service for attention and that they then take action on her behalf, but none of that is assured under the present arrangements. It will be interesting to learn what does happen in practice if Guinivere does make a report to CA and gets any feedback on the outcome. I hope she would let us know.

I find it very difficult to see what our county trading standards services actually does except circulating immense amounts of information on scams and bogus callers which is mainly recycled from other sources. In a list of many things it does not do it includes “After you have reported a matter to the Citizens Advice consumer service we will only make contact with you if we need further information or cooperation. We will only provide feedback if formal action has been taken to deal with the matter you reported“. It is silent on whether or not it keeps CA informed about results.

With much new house-building and rising populations in most areas, local authority revenues should be showing significant increases year on year for little extra expenditure on civic infrastructure including consumer protection. Population-based services such as the number of elderly people and children will require additional funding but there is normally no need for immediate additional expenditure on roads, street lighting, parks and open spaces, libraries and leisure facilities. It is a matter of managing resources and determining priorities carefully. A reduction in the number of councils and councillors would be beneficial in my view. Some parts of Norwich, outside the city boundaries, have three layers of local government so I am not persuaded that a lack of money is the real problem. A reform of the council tax banding structure would help but successive governments have funked any meaningful adjustments in valuations and thresholds.

With most food and children’s clothing on zero VAT and energy at only 5% the tax has a lower impact for those on low incomes. Income tax allowances, benefits and pensions are also structured to provide relief. As I wrote, I am not advocating a higher rate of VAT; the gradual rise in prices for goods and services means it is a buoyant tax whereas Income Tax, looking forward over the next few years, is unlikely to yield increased revenue in real terms due to the recession.

Perhaps a macabre thought, but I wouldn’t suggest any increase in Inheritance Tax while the death rate is higher than normal due to a pandemic; that would rightly be seen as callous and opportunistic. I agree that Capital Gains Tax could be tweaked to yield more but going too far stimulates the tax avoidance professions into action. A balance of fiscal measures is necessary in an economy like ours.

Hopefully Guinivere’s will report back. I have been annoyed that CA have always passed on relevant cases to TS for me but TS has declined to take action. The lack of help for individuals from TS does nothing to deter crime.

If Guinivere is not successful via our suggested route then perhaps making a claim against her credit card provider is a possible route for obtaining a refund.

It would be good if Which? examined the effectiveness of the current system of dealing with problems via CA and TS. This is clearly a consumer issue.

If Trading Standards should get involved they may take action against the retailer but will not help Giunivere recover her money.

I hope we get an update. Many people post their problem here, are helped, but we never hear from them again. If Which? required all who contribute to register their contact details then they could follow up important problems for further action, including those issues that accumulate such as Curry PCW bad or illegal sales practices on pre set up laptops, Amazon’s illegal 2 pin plug sales, and such like.

Even if you don’t register as a user you are required to provide an email address, so presumably Which? could contact anyone who post here. I would like to see users register so that they can find responses to their comments. I wonder how many helpful responses are never seen by those who are seeking help.

Suzanne – Has the company stated the grounds of their refusal? It would be useful to know the strength of their position. On the face of it I don’t think they have a good defence so it could be that they are just trying to frighten you off.

If the Court throws out their case you will be able to recover your costs. Did you invoke the law of frustrated contracts in your claim [The Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943]? That applies when a contract becomes impossible to perform, due to the fault of neither party; it is treated as frustrated, meaning that neither party is bound by it and any advance payments, including deposits, have to be refunded.

During the coronavirus emergency, there has been a supervening event, namely government regulations prohibiting travel, restrictions on gatherings, and the enforced closure of venues. That meant that the company was not able to fulfil their obligations under the contract to provide a service and your daughter was not able to partake of the hospitality arrangements you had ordered and paid for. In that circumstance both parties are released from the contract so I would expect the bar’s counter-claim to be rejected.

I think you should press on with your case and prepare yourself for an out-of-court settlement being offered – but don’t accept less than you have spent.