“I’m writing to share a deeply upsetting experience I had at a shop where I’ve been a loyal customer for over a decade,” says Cailín.
“Last week, I purchased a dress for €85 that the owner assured me was vintage, in fact she told me that she thought it may have been a ballgown in a past life.”
Cailín used a €50 gift voucher and paid the remaining €35 by card.
“However, upon closer inspection at home, I noticed a ‘Made in China’ label. A quick reverse image search brought me straight to an Amazon listing for the same dress — clearly not vintage,” she says.
READ MORE
So she went back to the shop a couple of days later “expecting an apology and a straightforward refund given the mishap”.
But that is not what happened.
“Instead, I was told I could only receive an €85 credit note, which included reimbursement for the gift card and the cash portion. I explained calmly and repeatedly that I simply wanted my €35 refunded to my card, as the item had been falsely described.”
She says things took a turn for the worst and the “owner became extremely hostile”.
“She told me that she couldn’t be sure of every item she sold and accused me of being a bully — apparently because she’s a small business owner. I found this deeply unfair and distressing. Eventually, she did refund the €35, but the entire exchange was unnecessarily rude and aggressive.”
What our reader wants to know is, “in this case was the responsibility with me the customer, or with the owner?”
[ Clothes waste: How to be part of the solution, not the problemOpens in new window ]
“I understand the owner in question may have sold this as a vintage item in good faith, but when presented with clear evidence to the contrary she told me, it was her store policy to issue a credit note, this feels like a breach of the consumer rights law?”
Cailín says she is sharing this in the hope that it might raise awareness about consumer rights and the importance of respectful customer service, “especially when trust has been breached”.
From our understanding of consumer legislation and on a very basic level, this is a pretty open and shut case. Under consumer law, goods have to be fit for purpose and as advertised and it seems clear to us that the dress was not as advertised and as a result our reader should have been entitled to a full refund.
There is one potential issue however. The word “vintage” is not mentioned in any legislation in Ireland and it is something that might be considered open to interpretation.
The fact that it comes from China does not mean it is not vintage – it is a big country and there are no doubt many items made there that could reasonably be classified that way. The fact that our reader was able to find the same dress selling on Amazon is pretty damning mind you – unless it was listed on a vintage shop on that platform which seems pretty unlikely.
The bottom line is that it does appear as if her rights were infringed and the store had an obligation to refund her in exactly the same fashion that she paid – which is what it ultimately did but only after what sounds like an unpleasant row.
What we would suggest to readers is to establish the facts first and then go into the store armed with those facts and make the case for the refund in a calm and reasoned way which should make it impossible for the store to refuse and will hopefully keep things civil.
