ASA Complaint - Misleading Advertising

[Siandc]

When looking at returns policy for myself some time ago it does state on there that Q may close accounts due to high returns process. I must say I can understand this, within reason, as who's to say you won't buy a wardrobe of clothes for a holiday wear them and return the lot on your return! I've never had an issue with returns but then I guess I keep more than I send back.

 

[Akimbo]

Cast your minds back to 23rd Feb this year when this Laura Geller set was sold as being the last airing at the introductory price, I fell for it and was mightily peeved to find it was sold again on a later visit from LG and on principle (and because I didn't need it) sent mine back but I wish I'd complained properly. This, no doubt, contributes to my return total. I scribbled a note on the return slip but ofcourse they don't really take any notice of your reasons for return. Does anyone else remember this being touted as "last day at intro price" back in February? http://www.qvcuk.com/Laura-Geller-5-Piece-Studio-Classics.product.201517.html?upsh=1

I suspect this would be of more interest to the ASA than the "Letter"!

 

[alan1302]

Cast your minds back to 23rd Feb this year when this Laura Geller set was sold as being the last airing at the introductory price, I fell for it and was mightily peeved to find it was sold again on a later visit from LG and on principle (and because I didn't need it) sent mine back but I wish I'd complained properly. This, no doubt, contributes to my return total. I scribbled a note on the return slip but ofcourse they don't really take any notice of your reasons for return. Does anyone else remember this being touted as "last day at intro price" back in February? http://www.qvcuk.com/Laura-Geller-5-Piece-Studio-Classics.product.201517.html?upsh=1

I suspect this would be of more interest to the ASA than the "Letter"!

Now this is something that should be complained about.

 

[Akimbo]

I'm sure there are other instances like this where they hype the product to get the sale and suggest it'll sell out or can't be reordered, only to return under a different item number. But usually no one is monitoring their every movement. Those who order as a result of this over-hype may not realise they've been manipulated or are happy with the item and don't really mind. Or in my case I was over-taken by apathy and didn't take it further.

I'll be more vigilant in future.

 

[louise66]

Cast your minds back to 23rd Feb this year when this Laura Geller set was sold as being the last airing at the introductory price, I fell for it and was mightily peeved to find it was sold again on a later visit from LG and on principle (and because I didn't need it) sent mine back but I wish I'd complained properly. This, no doubt, contributes to my return total. I scribbled a note on the return slip but ofcourse they don't really take any notice of your reasons for return. Does anyone else remember this being touted as "last day at intro price" back in February? http://www.qvcuk.com/Laura-Geller-5-Piece-Studio-Classics.product.201517.html?upsh=1

I suspect this would be of more interest to the ASA than the "Letter"!

So, was it aired at a cheaper price than the IP? Perhaps a OTO, or a BH price?

 

[Akimbo]

Not cheaper, but they said it was the last day at the Intro Price because this precipitates sales, however this was untrue. It wasn't the last day...in fact it's still at the IP nearly 6 months later.

 

[Akimbo]

Bazinga!

At 11.05am today 8/7/13 Stacey (on with Claire Sutton) said item 201332 YBF Bro duo had NEVER been as low as today's Event Price of £16.42 (P&P 2.95). In my QVC account I bought this exact item number on 28/6/12 at a unit price of £14.44 (same £2.95 postage).

Shame on you QVC if you don't tell Claire to correct this statement during the hour...47mins to go ...Tick...Tock!

 

[Weathergirl]

Not only did she not correct it but Stacey compounded it just as the show ended. She repeated that she had never seen it at such a low price.

 

[Pinkpussycat]

ASA Complaint Update

Back on topic.

Just a quick update to say that yesterday I spoke to Mr McGarry (the person who adjudicated and then rejected my initial complaint) and I requested details about how I take this forward to the appeals procedure. Mr McGarry emailed me again this morning to clarify and confirm my complaint which in a nutshell is :

QVC strongly imply on air that their money back guarantee is unconditional, whereas in fact it is not, and their non disclosure of this fact is misleading.

which he will then refer it to the ASA Council for a review. If Council also reject my complaint I may be able to take it to an independant appeal but this process is quite strict (see link below) so I am hoping it will not be necessary.

http://www.asa.org.uk/Consumers/Independent-review-process.aspx

 

[Gemma1]

Good luck with it Sue

 

[Dips]

Great, Sue. Can I suggest that you search the ASA rulings site for similar cases that have been upheld and submit this as further supporting evidence?

For example, have a look at the upheld ruling on Tesco with regards to hiding limiting clauses in T&C's without making reference to them in the main body of the advert

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2011/11/Tesco-Stores-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_153233.aspx

To my mind, the ASA reasoning here competely contradicts the ruling that was made in your case.

You can search for rulings here
http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/Advanced-Search.aspx

And filter for upheld etc

HTH

 

[Pinkpussycat]

Hi Dips many thanks for that info hon and the links which are really useful. I really can't see why my complaint shouldn't be upheld because it's clearly misleading that QVC do not state there is a returns condition linked to their mbg and quite frankly I would call it dishonest trading. Anyway we shall see what the ASA Council decide about it.

 

[Akimbo]

Best of luck Sue!

 

[neelia]

Excellent endeavour.

I personally have found customer service very good and I have a low returns rate. However, I am disgusted that I am being mislead.

 

[Pinkpussycat]

Thanks Jude. I'm pleased that the misunderstanding about my complaint was sorted out with Mr McGarry. It never was anything to do with my account being closed (although obviously the two things are intrinsically linked), but about honest and transparent representation of their mbg by QVC.

 

[Pinkpussycat]

Excellent endeavour.

I personally have found customer service very good and I have a low returns rate. However, I am disgusted that I am being mislead.

I have no issues with Customer services neelia, they were very helpful to me over the 15 years I was a customer. The decision to close my account was made by the finance department who couldn't see the bigger picture.

 

[neelia]

I realise that Sue. I was just making the point that I had been happy with QVC and unlikely to fall foul of this rule but that I still don't like being deceived and being told that there is a no quibble MBG and so many times invited to buy beauty products a) just to try out and b) use as much as necessary in the 30 days and still be free to send them back is deceiving me. It annoys me even if I don't tend to do what they invite me to do.

 

[Pinkpussycat]

Yes Neelia the deception has irritated me for years too even though I didn't do the buy and try thing myself either. QVC are very crafty because they don't actually say on air that their mbg is unconditional but it is strongly implied by their presenters in every show and QVC's lack of disclosure regarding their returns and account closure policy endorses this perception even further. In effect QVC are not doing anything 'wrong' because they do give a 30 day mbg but it is their lack of transparency over the consequences of returning items which is very wrong in my opinion and by the comments made on this forum it seems many others feel the same way.

I have heard back from Mr McGarry this afternoon...my complaint has now been escalated to the ASA Council for their consideration and he says this can take several weeks so I will update again when I hear anything further. After the misunderstanding of my complaint was cleared up I have to say he has been extremely helpful.

 

[alan1302]

I think I could see QVC saying that they actually don't go against what they say on TV. If you buy an item then they allow you to return it in 30 days.

What QVC are doing is blocking people from buying from them again if QVC feel that they return so much there is no profit to make.

So they are not going against what they say just stopping you from buying - which any company is allowed to do.

 

[Pumpkin]

I think I could see QVC saying that they actually don't go against what they say on TV. If you buy an item then they allow you to return it in 30 days.

What QVC are doing is blocking people from buying from them again if QVC feel that they return so much there is no profit to make.

So they are not going against what they say just stopping you from buying - which any company is allowed to do.

QVC state that they have a 30 day 'no quibble' money back guarantee. The presenters all push this by urging customers to buy and try, order different colours for choice and return if not wanted/liked or no results seen. They also state an empty pot can be returned. However, as we all know this is not true. The fact is the 30 day MBG is subject to t & c's, therefore it is not quibble free. They have never stated this on air so are misleading customers. They then go on to close accounts of customers who, according to them, fall foul of these t & c's. It is evident from this that they are going against what they say. This is ridiculous. How can they claim to have a 'no quibble' 30 day MBG but then close accounts of those customers who take them at their word??
What they should say is, yes we do have a 30 day MBG but it is subject to t & c's.

Good luck PPC. I am pleased the ASA exec eventually managed to grasp what your complaint was about. I hope you get the result which you qre looking for and this will hopefully help others as well. QVC cannot have it both ways and it's high time the ASA intervened and put them right.