And we wonder why the high street is going down the tubes...

OilCityPickups

ICBM said:

professorben said:

sev112 said:

So what are our thoughts if the Distance selling Regs were retracted?  Perhaps even to the extent that they remain if good are faulty only?

Because removing consumer protection is a good idea. 

I would like to see them retracted or at least made much more restrictive. It shouldn't remove protection for faulty goods or not fit for purpose - just remove the right to return at the seller's expense due to buyer's remorse or playing the system.

It's particularly bad in the clothing trade - it's very common for people to order more than one item knowing in advance that they're going to return all but one. This is an abuse of the regulations and causes huge costs for sellers, as well as being extremely wasteful - but is entirely legal under the current rules. I'm also certain that it happens in the musical instrument business too. A lot of people are honest and don't abuse it, but many do and it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the whole thing for everyone.

Personally I'm heartily sick of DSR returned pickups that have scratched covers, leads cut to a couple of inches, burred pole screw heads and destroyed boxes. Yes, I should refuse to reimburse for damaged returns, but if the item was bought with PayPal the most common thing is for someone to open a case against you if you don't roll over. It's been my experience that retailers NEVER win against customers in PayPal disputes, so we bite the bullet and refund cost and postage, ending up selling the serviced and repaired pickups at 'knock down' to cover at least some of our costs.  

professorben

OilCityPickups said:

ICBM said:

professorben said:

sev112 said:

So what are our thoughts if the Distance selling Regs were retracted?  Perhaps even to the extent that they remain if good are faulty only?

Because removing consumer protection is a good idea. 

I would like to see them retracted or at least made much more restrictive. It shouldn't remove protection for faulty goods or not fit for purpose - just remove the right to return at the seller's expense due to buyer's remorse or playing the system.

It's particularly bad in the clothing trade - it's very common for people to order more than one item knowing in advance that they're going to return all but one. This is an abuse of the regulations and causes huge costs for sellers, as well as being extremely wasteful - but is entirely legal under the current rules. I'm also certain that it happens in the musical instrument business too. A lot of people are honest and don't abuse it, but many do and it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the whole thing for everyone.

Personally I'm heartily sick of DSR returned pickups that have scratched covers, leads cut to a couple of inches, burred pole screw heads and destroyed boxes. Yes, I should refuse to reimburse for damaged returns, but if the item was bought with PayPal the most common thing is for someone to open a case against you if you don't roll over. It's been my experience that retailers NEVER win against customers in PayPal disputes, so we bite the bullet and refund cost and postage, ending up selling the serviced and repaired pickups at 'knock down' to cover at least some of our costs.  

Then don’t offer PayPal, don’t offer distance selling. 

Simple. 

But it’s not is it? 

Here’s the thing, retail has changed, the genie is not only out of the bottle, he’s settled down had kids and they are your new customers.

 Retail will never go back to the way it used to be, technology has changed buyers habits for good, retail either needs to adapt or sink, look at Mothercare, I mean babies is a sure fire business right? 

Well no, not if you are not the cheapest or fastest anymore it isn’t. 

People have options now, I can buy a guitar from Europe (political situation not withstanding) with the same expectation of service and price as I can from a shop an hour away, distance selling regulations are there to protect the customer not punish the retailers, yes some people abuse them of course, but that’s just people, some of them are just arseholes, councils are putting rates up..... why? 

Possibly because government funding is not enough to provide essential services in the community? Because increasing numbers of shops are standing empty? 

I agree the rates system should be overhauled and based on turnover, that gives a level playing field for all shops, payable a month in arrears. 

Hands up everyone that does their weekly food shop by visiting the local butcher, bakers, fruit and veg shop, very few do, and those that can are either comfortably well off or retired, the best majority of us shop at supermarkets and an increasing number of us are doing that online too, not hard to say in 30 years times supermarkets will be a dying breed. 

Music shops are part of the butchers/bakers sector, specialist shops for the enthusiast, I fear that even if specialists shops were given preferential treatment on rates and rents they would still struggle to survive simply because of the cost involved of stock and the ease of ordering on the Internet.  

sev112

So, whilst it is a nice “benefit” to be able to order online and be able to return at no cost to you,  why is it a legal requirement that retailers have to provide this. Surely that should be optional.  Then the companies that wish to do it can, and those that don’t wish to don’t have to.

professorben

sev112 said:

So, whilst it is a nice “benefit” to be able to order online and be able to return at no cost to you,  why is it a legal requirement that retailers have to provide this. Surely that should be optional.  Then the companies that wish to do it can, and those that don’t wish to don’t have to.

Because people are unscrupulous, both buyers and sellers.

SteveRobinson

I'm sorry that is your experience, it isn't mine

professorben

SteveRobinson said:

I'm sorry that is your experience, it isn't mine

It’s better to legislate to prevent bad things happening then to legislate hoping they won’t. 

professorben

SteveRobinson said:

I'm sorry that is your experience, it isn't mine

Let me sell you something.....

sev112

professorben said:

SteveRobinson said:

I'm sorry that is your experience, it isn't mine

It’s better to legislate to prevent bad things happening then to legislate hoping they won’t. 

No I strongly disagree. Prosecute the bad stuff that DID happen, rather than control stuff that doesn’t happen 

darthed1981

sev112 said:

professorben said:

SteveRobinson said:

I'm sorry that is your experience, it isn't mine

It’s better to legislate to prevent bad things happening then to legislate hoping they won’t. 

No I strongly disagree. Prosecute the bad stuff that DID happen, rather than control stuff that doesn’t happen 

You can't prosecute someone for something if there is no legislation making it a crime...

sev112

But you legislate for breaking rules. That’s not the same  as over - legislating everyone just in case 

sev112

For example, we could stop people from speeding and killing innocent people by banning driving above 10mph,  but we don’t because it would have a huge impact on society, but we would eliminate needless fatalities. 

darthed1981

sev112 said:

For example, we could stop people from speeding and killing innocent people by banning driving above 10mph,  but we don’t because it would have a huge impact on society, but we would eliminate needless fatalities. 

That's a bit of a straw man, we stop people from speeding by banning... speeding, its illegal and if you do it enough or excessively and you lose your license.

The idea of the distance selling regulations, ironically, was to allow people the same rights they have with an online retailer they have with a local shop, as you can't try before you buy online. 

Equally ironically, it puts huge extra costs on online retailers, and this thread was originally about how unfair it was for the high street having to compete with them, I think...

So we have come full circle!

jeztone2

crunchman said:

jeztone2 said:

I find this interesting.

I was in Leipzig two weeks ago. Next to my hotel was a small mom and pop guitar store and it was really busy. Yet Germany is the home of Thomann? 

Then I walked around Leipzig City centre and saw hardly any homeless people and one empty shop front. The department stores were doing a roaring trade.

I’m starting to think the Mary Portas excuse for the high street is bullshit. I just think incomes have been squeezed since 2008, and it’s created this race to the bottom on price. It’s worrying. 

I suspect that Germany doesn't have our business rates, and that rents are lower.

I suspect your right. But I also suspect they’ve not had austerity. Outside of London and the South East. The public sector is still the biggest employer in the regions.  

professorben

darthed1981 said:

sev112 said:

For example, we could stop people from speeding and killing innocent people by banning driving above 10mph,  but we don’t because it would have a huge impact on society, but we would eliminate needless fatalities. 

That's a bit of a straw man, we stop people from speeding by banning... speeding, its illegal and if you do it enough or excessively and you lose your license.

The idea of the distance selling regulations, ironically, was to allow people the same rights they have with an online retailer they have with a local shop, as you can't try before you buy online. 

Equally ironically, it puts huge extra costs on online retailers, and this thread was originally about how unfair it was for the high street having to compete with them, I think...

So we have come full circle!

Yes, DSR are supposed to even the playing field by helping bricks and mortar shops, and offering an extra layer of protection to the consumer. 

The fact that traditional shops also provide distance selling is by the by. 

prlgmnr

sev112 said:

For example, we could stop people from speeding and killing innocent people by banning driving above 10mph,  but we don’t because it would have a huge impact on society, but we would eliminate needless fatalities. 

It is a bit weird that we accept any fatalities at all as an acceptable part of people being able to get around the place faster.

SteveRobinson

professorben said:

SteveRobinson said:

I'm sorry that is your experience, it isn't mine

Let me sell you something.....

Not a chance, you've already told me what kind of seller you are! 

Brize

OilCityPickups said:

Personally I'm heartily sick of DSR returned pickups that have scratched covers, leads cut to a couple of inches, burred pole screw heads and destroyed boxes. Yes, I should refuse to reimburse for damaged returns, but if the item was bought with PayPal the most common thing is for someone to open a case against you if you don't roll over. It's been my experience that retailers NEVER win against customers in PayPal disputes, so we bite the bullet and refund cost and postage, ending up selling the serviced and repaired pickups at 'knock down' to cover at least some of our costs.  

That's unbelievable. I always thought that pickup manufacturers would get practically no returns because, once the pickups had been fitted and the wires cut, no reasonable person would expect their right of return not to be invalidated.

Danny1969

Brize said:

OilCityPickups said:

Personally I'm heartily sick of DSR returned pickups that have scratched covers, leads cut to a couple of inches, burred pole screw heads and destroyed boxes. Yes, I should refuse to reimburse for damaged returns, but if the item was bought with PayPal the most common thing is for someone to open a case against you if you don't roll over. It's been my experience that retailers NEVER win against customers in PayPal disputes, so we bite the bullet and refund cost and postage, ending up selling the serviced and repaired pickups at 'knock down' to cover at least some of our costs.  

That's unbelievable. I always thought that pickup manufacturers would get practically no returns because, once the pickups had been fitted and the wires cut, no reasonable person would expect their right of return not to be invalidated.

Recently on here someone tried to upgrade some ram on a new laptop and destroyed the trackpad zif connector while taking it apart ... then sent it back ...... no one seemed bothered in the thread ...... 

https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/162969/laptop-help-asus-gx701-trackpad-ribbon

This is the world we live in online returns wise 

Voxman

It's more than a shame, it's tragic. I've just dropped my Laney Cub 12R into Richard Hill of Electrohill in Palmers Green - lovely, quiet unassuming guy I've known for donkeys years.  Chatted, caught-up asking how he is (he's well & looks fantastic for his age by the way!) and how business is going....he reiterated that business is dead, and that all retail has been or is being killed by the internet.  Stores just can't compete with the prices, the internet offers, 60 day no quibble returns, 3 years warranties etc etc.  Interestingly (and no names) there are some big outlets (even with big internet business) that are still losing money hand over fist at £1m a year.  

Like most folk here I'm a culprit too - I don't buy new guitars, but when I buy strings, leads, capods, guitar stands, straps and small stuff eg fx pedals, it's via the internet - aside from cost, it's just so goddamned convenient.  But the big downside is that the internet can't fix your amp or set up your guitar or give you a face-2-face personal service.  I understand how the world is now, obviously - but like many folk here who've been playing 40-50 years or more, its just a very, very sad state of affairs - not all progress is all good!   

  

gavin_axecaster

darthed1981 said:

sev112 said:

For example, we could stop people from speeding and killing innocent people by banning driving above 10mph,  but we don’t because it would have a huge impact on society, but we would eliminate needless fatalities. 

That's a bit of a straw man, we stop people from speeding by banning... speeding, its illegal and if you do it enough or excessively and you lose your license.

The idea of the distance selling regulations, ironically, was to allow people the same rights they have with an online retailer they have with a local shop, as you can't try before you buy online. 

Equally ironically, it puts huge extra costs on online retailers, and this thread was originally about how unfair it was for the high street having to compete with them, I think...

So we have come full circle!

Actually it is not so home customers can "try before you buy" it's so they can inspect the product, same as in a shop. Signs of use are grounds for withholding a portion of the refund if returned for change of mind under distance selling.

Changing the distance selling regs wouldn't create a level playing field - larger companies will still offer more generous returns policies that smaller businesses can't afford to match. Many (large/chain) bricks and mortar businesses offer generous change of mind returns policies, even though they are not legally obliged to.

Rent, business rates and the proliferation of online shopping is the cause of the high street malaise. Frankly I'm amazed that my local high street still has 3 greengrocers within 50 yards of each other. The only local music shop closed a few years ago after 30+ years trading after trying to survive by downsizing to half the floorspace to no avail. The last ironmongers closed after 50+ years in the same location about 3 years ago. For the most part the spaces are not being filled by retail, it's offices or cafés taking their place.