{"id":337,"date":"2008-12-15T18:43:05","date_gmt":"2008-12-15T18:43:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/?p=337"},"modified":"2009-05-17T15:54:41","modified_gmt":"2009-05-17T15:54:41","slug":"a-letter-to-littlewoods-direct-or-why-youve-got-to-read-the-small-print","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/?p=337","title":{"rendered":"A letter to Littlewoods Direct. Or why you&#8217;ve got to read the small print"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>People who follow <a href=\"http:\/\/twitter.com\/dalelane\" target=\"_blank\">my tweets<\/a> may have already heard my moaning about Littlewoods on Friday, but I&#8217;m still hacked off about it enough to post about it here too. <\/p>\n<p>I have written them a letter (in the perhaps misguided belief that paper letters get more attention than emails). The contents are posted below to share my ranting and whining more widely.  <\/p>\n<p>Comments are very welcome&#8230; am I being too ranty and unreasonable? How much responsibility do we consumers have for reading small-print? <\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Dear Sir \/ Madam,<\/p>\n<p>Last week, I received a gift voucher for Littlewoods Direct. It promised \u00c2\u00a330 off for new customers making an order of \u00c2\u00a360 or more. I needed to get some Christmas presents, so thought I&#8217;d give you a try. At first, all seemed well &#8211; I signed up, made the order, entered the voucher code and got what I thought was a good price for the presents I was buying. <\/p>\n<p>Things started to go wrong when you delivered them. <\/p>\n<p>We were out when the delivery arrived, so your driver helpfully left them in our front garden. On a day of heavy rain. The boxes were pretty much destroyed &#8211; the cardboard being so sodden that you poked your fingers through it if you weren&#8217;t careful, and all the paperwork that came with it had turned into a papier-mache-style mush. <\/p>\n<p>I dug out your customer services number, and rang to get this sorted. <\/p>\n<p>A customer services person arranged for new items to be delivered, and a date for the damaged ones to be collected. They apologised, and sounded very polite and helpful. I thought this was all resolved, and hung up a happy customer (if a little unimpressed with your drivers). <\/p>\n<p>Then I got the email confirming the new delivery. You had charged me another \u00c2\u00a33.95 for delivery &#8211; which seemed unreasonable considering it was your fault that I needed another delivery in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>And you hadn&#8217;t included the \u00c2\u00a330 off voucher. So even after I claim back the money you charged my credit card for the original order (which you still refuse to let me do until you get around to collecting the items on Friday) I was being asked to pay an extra \u00c2\u00a334 because your drivers screwed up.<\/p>\n<p>I phoned again, assuming this was an oversight.<\/p>\n<p>It wasn&#8217;t &#8211; it was intentional.<\/p>\n<p>I spoke to a different person this time, who explained that I wasn&#8217;t actually elegible for the voucher code. When I pointed out that I was elegible for the voucher the first time I put the order through, he said I hadn&#8217;t been, and that even my first use of the voucher would have &#8220;been bounced&#8221; eventually.<\/p>\n<p>I learnt that your system is set up so that it lets all voucher codes through at the point of sale, and that transactions where vouchers are used are manually verified after the sale has completed. Any transactions where a voucher was used by a customer not entitled to use it are then charged the cost of the voucher. <\/p>\n<p>So, to be clear, at the point of sale, you:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Verified and accepted my voucher code (I typed it into a text box on the web site, and you verified it as a valid code and deducted the voucher amount from my bill accordingly)<\/li>\n<li>You charged my credit card<\/li>\n<li>You delivered the items (albeit incompetently)<\/li>\n<li>And then at some future date (presumably once I&#8217;d already opened and discarded the boxes, making it impractical for me to return them) you were going to charge an extra \u00c2\u00a330 to my credit card<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The customer services person I spoke to was a little vague on whether this is done because it&#8217;s too complicated to verify voucher codes fully at the time of sale and\/or because it helps not to &#8220;scare off&#8221; new customers by rejecting their voucher codes. <\/p>\n<p>Either way, it&#8217;s appalling.<\/p>\n<p>The reason I wasn&#8217;t elegible for the voucher is because I set up a new cash\/credit-card account, rather than a new Littlewoods Credit account. Fair enough &#8211; I can appreciate that you will generally make more money from credit customers and will want to incentivize them accordingly. I don&#8217;t have a problem with not being allowed to use the voucher. <\/p>\n<p>What is unacceptable is that you wait so long to point this out.<\/p>\n<p>The customer services person said that this is stated in the voucher&#8217;s terms and conditions, and true enough, buried five paragraphs down in a sea of small print it does say:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>If, after accepting your order, we find that you were not entitled to use the code or did not meet all the terms and conditions of its use, we may reverse the benefit that you obtained. If you transacted on a cash basis e.g. by a debit or credit card, we may take a further payment, equivalent to the value of the benefit obtained, from the card used.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>That is bad.<\/p>\n<p>I don&#8217;t care that it&#8217;s in the small print. Let&#8217;s be honest &#8211; we don&#8217;t all read a page of small print when completing an order. It&#8217;s not unreasonable for me as a consumer to expect that the onus is on you to decide whether or not to let me use a voucher. <\/p>\n<p>Particularly in this sort of case &#8211; by the point I&#8217;m entering the voucher code, you already know that I&#8217;ve opted to create a cash account, rather than a Credit account. So you could have easily rejected the voucher code at that point, rather than accepting it (without any on-screen warnings that I was liable for future charges to my card when you finally get around to doing a ridiculously simple rule check). <\/p>\n<p>In a way, I&#8217;m actually quite thankful to your delivery driver. At least this way, I found out about your voucher policy early enough to be able to cancel my order and make a new order with another retailer. When you finally get around to picking up the items on Friday, I expect a full refund and that will be the end of this whole waste of time. But if they hadn&#8217;t screwed up, causing me to make a manual order and find out about all of this up-front, then I would have had a nasty surprise when I saw a \u00c2\u00a330 charge on a future credit card statement. <\/p>\n<p>As customer service policies go, it&#8217;s short-sighted. It might help you avoid scaring off potential new customers, but it certainly wont help you keep the ones you do get!<\/p>\n<p>Please review this policy. Please update your systems so that they check voucher codes properly, or stop applying conditions to vouchers that your systems are not smart enough to check without manual intervention. Please stop relying on &#8220;it&#8217;s in the small print!&#8221; as a way of justifying poor retail practices. (Oh &#8211; and please explain to your drivers that cardboard is not waterproof).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, please be aware that I have also posted this letter to http:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog and any response I receive will be similarly shared.<\/p>\n<p>Kind regards<\/p>\n<p>Dale Lane<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><strong>Update (4th Mar 2009):<\/strong> Despite sending this both by post and email, Littlewoods never replied. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>People who follow my tweets may have already heard my moaning about Littlewoods on Friday, but I&#8217;m still hacked off about it enough to post about it here too. I have written them a letter (in the perhaps misguided belief that paper letters get more attention than emails). The contents are posted below to share [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[316,314,315],"class_list":["post-337","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-misc","tag-complaint","tag-littlewoods","tag-littlewoods-direct"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/337","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=337"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/337\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=337"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=337"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dalelane.co.uk\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=337"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}