Should a Refund Have Been Provided? - Yd. Aus

Mintee on 18/12/2024 - 18:18

Hi,

TLDR: - Situation:

Aunty brought me a shirt from YD. Aust, I tried on the shirt and it was genuinely too small (the fit was slim). I personally dont often shop at Yd. as I find all there stuff doesn't really fit me well.

The purchase was done on Dec 13th; I was given the receipt where the shirt was paid by a debit card via a cheque account.

I proceeded to return the shirt in store on Dec 16th:
The refund was denied as I did NOT have the card that was documented on the receipt. I was offered an exchange or store credit. Which I didn't want for numerous reasons (doesn't generally fit well, being rushed in a time constraint etc etc)

My argument was that, according to their returns policy online, I met their criteria for their refund. I had the receipt, it was unworn and, Swing tag is still on the item. No where was it specified that the same payment method was to be used.
https://www.yd.com.au/au/returns

**Additional information: **

I called head office as I was not happy with this outcome in store, who said they can generally make exceptions, but escalated to the same area manager that they did in store, where my request and it was denied I was then provided with this response win writing. The area manager called me, to inform me that its a policy that they do not refund onto other cards, I questioned where this policy was as it was on on their website, and wondered if this was a system limitation. She said she would escalate to the state manager and call me back, instead I got this:

We have since had confirmation from our Area Manager, XXXX, that she has spoken with you and has provided you with the options available for this return. You are more than welcome to head back into store for a store credit or exchange for the item/s however we will be unable to provide a refund unless your aunt[Who brought me the shirt] is present.

Please be assured that we are not taking your dissatisfaction lightly and the feedback has been passed on to the relevant teams for their review.

We will now be closing this ticket, however, should you require any further assistance, please reply to this email and we will be happy to help.

In the end I went to another store, played stupid, that I got my card stolen and got my refund on another card

With an ever transforming society, where card is the accepted form of payment, should I have been given a refund?

Poll Options

  • 60
    Yes
  • 361
    No
Fashion & Apparel

Related Stores

yd.
yd.

Comments

  • CyberMurning on 18/12/2024 - 18:22
    +48

    Anti money laundering

      • Hardlyworkin on 18/12/2024 - 19:39
        +44

        Was the transparent part when you lied and said the card was stolen?

      • dizzle on 18/12/2024 - 20:23
        +36

        It's often a rule set by the bank to prevent money laundering and fraudulent transactions. Now, for that price I wouldn't expect money laundering, but fraud is a common occurance in this exact situation. People purchase items on stolen credit cards, then return them on different cards. A small purchase like this could be testing the waters before doing it again for a $1000 sale/refund.

        My store worked with Westpac, and it was in the terms and conditions that if this occured and the card owner disputed the transaction, then the store would be liable and lose the money. Hence why store don't want to make exceptions. An exchange is a feasible way around this as most stores don't allow exchanges/store credit to be refunded. Some stores will offer to do a bank transfer to your account (instead of a card transaction to a different card), because by the time it gets to the accounting dept to process the transaction, most people would have reported the fraud already. But they don't have to offer that.

        It's most likely the store that ended up returning it probably just didn't know the process.

        • Mintee on 18/12/2024 - 20:24

          Respect. Thank you.

        • HeWhoKnows on 19/12/2024 - 08:19
          +4

          "The refund was denied as I did NOT have the card that was documented on the receipt"

          This is normal procedure

        • mhz on 19/12/2024 - 11:02
          -2

          Surely if the person returning the item produced a receipt, that receipt could be scanned and would flag in a stores system as being a fraudulent sale/transaction?

          • Agret on 19/12/2024 - 15:32

            @mhz: Only if the card owner had disputed the transaction prior to you attempting your return. If they don't notice it for a week/fortnight and you've returned the items 3 days later then there's nothing to flag as the return has already been processed.

            • Mintee on 19/12/2024 - 16:46

              @Agret: How would this work, though wouldn't the banks play some logic in that its a bricks and motor store? and deny the charge back? *Im very stupid when it comes to charge bank, as Ive never been in the situation where ive needed one?

          • dizzle on 19/12/2024 - 20:20

            @mhz: From my understanding, very few stores or POS systems will (or have the capability to) actually link that. Many stores only input receipt numbers/dates etc into the system as a cross reference in case anything gets picked up in the future.

            It's one of the many reasons that stores try linking your purchases to an account with your name and contact details (which many people still don't like to give stores).

        • Chandler on 19/12/2024 - 17:55
          +1

          The issue also is that this is not documented in the stores returns policy, which is part of Mintee's argument.

          It also doesn't account for situations exactly like Mintee's - where the item being returned was a gift, and thus the original card is not readily available, and depending on situations could be difficult to get access to (i.e. interstate or international gifter)

    • node modules on 19/12/2024 - 19:44
      +1

      yd is the gateway for ML for teens. they then grow into casinos, international financial services and terrorist financing

    • kaleidoscope on 20/12/2024 - 15:33
      +2

      aunty money laundering 🤫

  • Nillionaire on 18/12/2024 - 18:23
    -5

    Did I miss something? Why wouldn't you accept a refund to your debit card, what happened to it?

    • spackbace on 18/12/2024 - 18:25
      +20

      You did miss it. Tshirt was bought by OP's aunty

      • JimmyF on 19/12/2024 - 09:28
        +8

        aunty gave receipt for exchange if wrong size, not a refund.

  • ihfree on 18/12/2024 - 18:24
    +3

    This is pretty typical for the reason mentioned above.

    I've been in the same situation with a item purchased through Amazon and just got store credit issued instead.

    • Mintee on 19/12/2024 - 07:49
      +1

      https://www.amazon.com.au/gp/help/customer/display.html?ref_…

      They have a whole table outlining the refund method

      • ihfree on 19/12/2024 - 08:12

        For some reason they don't mention card ownership in the table.

        • Mintee on 19/12/2024 - 10:29
          +1

          'Most refunds are issued based on the payment method used at the time of purchase.'

          • ihfree on 19/12/2024 - 11:18
            +2

            @Mintee: Would you be happy if yd had that line in a policy document somewhere that they could point to?

            • Mintee on 19/12/2024 - 11:32
              +1

              @ihfree: Yes, then I wouldn't have even expected it from the start. Preferably on their website where the refund policy is

              • ihfree on 19/12/2024 - 11:48
                +1

                @Mintee: You wouldn't have argued the "most"? or would you also expect a clear list of exceptions?

                • Mintee on 19/12/2024 - 16:48

                  @ihfree: If it said under their policy 'Change of mind refunds will only be provided as in store credit' then I would have been fine and accepted that outcome

                  • ihfree on 19/12/2024 - 17:07
                    +1

                    @Mintee: AFAIK, you'd have issues with any return regardless of reason going back to a different payment method.

                  • Eeples on 20/12/2024 - 06:48

                    @Mintee: But that is less generous than what they currently have for change of mind.

                    Ie. They will refund to the card used for the purchase.

                    Why would you ‘be happy’ if they made it so others could not get a refund back to their card?

  • scrimshaw on 18/12/2024 - 18:25
    +21

    Having worked in retail before, it's an anti-fraud or anti money laundering regulation, which the bank or payment processor typically enforces.

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/350859
    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/481252

    • spackbace on 18/12/2024 - 18:26
      +23

      it's an anti-fraud

      .

      In the end I went to another store, played stupid, that I got my card stolen and got my refund on another card

      Rejected due to anti-fraud, so OP performs a fraudulent act

      • pjetson on 19/12/2024 - 08:29
        +11

        And admitted to it in public.

  • Sye on 18/12/2024 - 18:27
    +17

    I tried on the shirt and it was genuinely too small

    Just cut back on the KFC and McDonald's

    • Mintee on 18/12/2024 - 18:33
      -2

      Well played.

    • kiitos on 19/12/2024 - 09:40
      +6

      Maybe that's what Aunty was trying to hint at!

    • Agret on 19/12/2024 - 15:33

      Cut back on the fast food? Hand in your ozbargain membership card sir.

    • Chandler on 19/12/2024 - 17:56

      Hit the lawyer, delete the gym and Facebook up!

  • MS Paint on 18/12/2024 - 18:49

    Probably due to being over efficient or too many shifting errors.

  • Protractor on 18/12/2024 - 19:10
    +2

    Regift to your skinnier cousin.

  • Ocker on 18/12/2024 - 19:10
    +10

    "should I have been given a refund?" - no
    Your Aunty - Yes

    • spackbace on 18/12/2024 - 20:01
      +10

      https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/problem-with-a-product-or-…

      Refunds should be provided in the same form as the original payment, unless the business and consumer agree otherwise.

      And yes that's covered under Australian Consumer Law

      • Mintee on 18/12/2024 - 20:21
        -1

        That's not law… that's an available solution by ACCC

      • Flying Ace on 18/12/2024 - 22:28

        "Should"

        • Chandler on 19/12/2024 - 17:57
          +3

          And

          unless the business and consumer agree otherwise

          In this case, the business does not agree…

        • JungliChilli on 20/12/2024 - 06:18
          +2

          My take on this…'Should' means for best practice and not compulsory. If it was a compulsory requirement ACCC would have used 'must' instead.

      • dm02 on 19/12/2024 - 00:57
        +3

        In the same form. As in, if you pay with cash, they can't give you store credit.

        Also, that's under Australian Consumer Law. OP was returning the item in accordance with the store's policy, not ACL.

      • johnfuller on 20/12/2024 - 11:44

        no, the customer is above the law and they want it according to their own policy they decided moments ago

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 19/12/2024 - 12:15
      +4

      Imagine being so dumb, you do your own research and still miss the fact the retailer's policy and T&Cs don't apply to you. It applies to you aunt, who contracted with the retailer.

  • mrkorrupt on 18/12/2024 - 19:23
    +10

    mate they didn't refuse you, you refused to give them to the same card.

    Imagine the paper trail, Item is bought with Credit Card A and then a new credit card unassociated with that item has a reverse charge.

    where as the transaction refunded to the original card will check out.

  • apsilon on 18/12/2024 - 19:24
    +8

    Why didn't you just exchange it for the correct size given that was the issue?

    • Jimothy Wongingtons on 18/12/2024 - 19:53

      According to op

      Which I didn't want for numerous reasons (doesn't generally fit well, being rushed in a time constraint etc etc)

      • apsilon on 18/12/2024 - 20:07
        +9

        If they didn't want the gift they should've just returned it to their aunt and told them they don't want it.

    • Mintee on 18/12/2024 - 20:23
      -3

      Its not just the size, its the cut…. I cant fit into a slim fit. Yd generally only stock slim fits

  • Ughhh on 18/12/2024 - 19:51
    +8

    Pretty common policy in retail.

    • McFly on 19/12/2024 - 11:49
      +2

      They are entitled to have that policy, the problem is they don't put that on their policy page.

      • dyziplen on 19/12/2024 - 18:13
        +1

        OP didn't actually buy anything though. The sales contract was between YD and his auntie. His Auntie is entitled to a refund. Not him.

  • hasher22 on 18/12/2024 - 19:55
    +6

    Unfortunately, while you can debate it's not law, it's policy with nearly all retailers to refund back to the same card or payment method.

    There will be rare cases where a cash refund may be issued in the discretion of the store.

    I used to work for Optus retail and the amount of people trying to scam Optus retail with chargebacks and giving the excuse the next day their card has been switched to another bank and wanting a cash refund is crazy.

    • Mintee on 18/12/2024 - 20:22
      +1

      Thank you.

  • Edeena on 18/12/2024 - 20:35
    +4

    You could have just dragged your aunty along or ask her to get the refund. Why bother calling head office and all for a shirt.

      • Edeena on 18/12/2024 - 20:51
        +14

        If it's me, I would be more upset that my nephew got a refund for my gift without my knowledge but told me the gift was good… I rather him tell me honestly the gift was not suitable and get a refund myself, then I can get nephew a more suitable gift.

        • MS Paint on 18/12/2024 - 21:34
          +6

          I'm betting mintee gets another yd slim fit shirt next Christmas as well.

      • spackbace on 18/12/2024 - 22:01
        +2

        If she gave you the receipt, she would want to know what you got if you returned it…

      • JimmyF on 19/12/2024 - 09:12
        +5

        You think she wouldn't notice you not wearing the shirt?

  • BewareOfThe Dog on 18/12/2024 - 20:41

    Quite often, a business can only refund to the original card to the prevent fraud. This is the case where you pay from your phone, but your physical card is different, despite being the same account. Yes, it's stupid.

    • dyziplen on 19/12/2024 - 18:16

      You can check if its the same card in the wallet.

      iPhone: Go to the actual wallet app. Select the card, go to the three dots, open card numbers.
      Android: Go to the actual wallet app. Select the card, go to the three dots, and there are the real and virtual numbers.

  • AdamFury on 18/12/2024 - 20:48
    +5

    You should have just exchanged it for the size up. Now your aunty is going to be wondering why you aren't wearing your spiffy new shirt at Christmas lunch.

  • elgrande on 18/12/2024 - 21:14
    +10

    I'm part of the YD anti fraud, corruption and money laundering team (YDFCML). I am also an automotive paint specialist, specialising in percentage calculations for insurance claims (but thats a topic for another day).

    Our team currently have Aunty in custody, she is being questioned in relation to the transaction. This information has been useful and will inform the remainder of the interrogation. We still suspect she was in on this act.

    • McFly on 19/12/2024 - 11:52
      +4

      Hilarious how they thought they could get away with the old shirt switcheroo refund scam.

      • Eeples on 20/12/2024 - 06:54
        +2

        He did get away with it by lying. Ie. A deception ie. fraud.

  • coffeeinmyveins on 18/12/2024 - 21:19
    +7

    I was offered an exchange or store credit.

    Stopped reading here. This is all you're going to get from 99% of retailers.

    And you know why? It's to prevent people from buying something like a "shirt their aunt bought them" and returning it after using it for a wedding or something.

    Ok I read more.

    I called head office as I was not happy with this outcome in store,

    You did all this for a shirt you didn't pay for?

    Yikes

    • digitalbath on 19/12/2024 - 08:15
      +4

      Stopped after "Brought"

      • MS Paint on 19/12/2024 - 10:20
        +3

        Technically his Aunt did bring it to him.

        • digitalbath on 19/12/2024 - 10:49
          +1

          True. But OP isn't bright enough to know that.

    • McFly on 19/12/2024 - 11:56
      +2

      It's to prevent people from buying something like a "shirt their aunt bought them" and returning it after using it

      (Not) requiring the refund to be to the same card makes no difference in that scenario.

    • Agret on 19/12/2024 - 15:36

      It's to prevent people from buying something like a "shirt their aunt bought them" and returning it after using it for a wedding or something.

      No, they were happy to refund the balance to the original card used. If you bought it for a wedding you'd be able to return it as long as the tags were kept in place.

    • JungliChilli on 20/12/2024 - 06:21

      I don't see how one cannot buy something using their own card, use it at a wedding and then return it with their own card…

  • mapax on 18/12/2024 - 21:27
    +3

    Classic Mintee thread…

    • MS Paint on 18/12/2024 - 21:35
      +2

      ADACMFS

    • Paul Atreides on 18/12/2024 - 22:09
      +1

      whys jv in the penalty box again?

      • smartazz104 on 19/12/2024 - 09:03
        +5

        Mods are trying to stifle his 20-comment-a-day posting habit.

        • Mintee on 20/12/2024 - 18:22

          Cant win with you guys aye, one post ago it was I wasnt replying to comments and this time its too much geeze!

        • McFly on 20/12/2024 - 19:56

          her

          • Agret on 20/12/2024 - 20:27

            @McFly: jv identifies as a woman now?

    • chickendog on 19/12/2024 - 13:32
      +4

      Seems like Mintee is a Phatee.

  • Any thing on 18/12/2024 - 21:43
    +1

    I’ve been in a similar situation before. I was gifted something that I would never wear, the person that gave it to me also gave me the receipt and said they were told that I could return it if I didn’t like it. When the store argued that it had to be refunded on the same card I argued that that was never mentioned at the point of sale and the purchaser was told it just needed to be unworn and with the receipt and that they would have paid cash if they had been told about the card. The sales person didn’t want to refund but they did ring their manager to check and they agreed to refund. I believe the store now has a clearer policy and it’s displayed in store as well now which is probably because of me.

    • Mintee on 18/12/2024 - 21:49
      +2

      This was my argument to head office when I called them that it does not outline that on their refund policy despite them saying its policy

    • dyziplen on 19/12/2024 - 18:20
      +1

      I believe the store now has a clearer policy and it’s displayed in store as well now which is probably because of me.

      Lol no. It ain't you.

      Front line staff is there to enforce the policy. The manager is to kick you out of the store in the nicest way possible. They gave you the refund because they just want to get rid of you. We ain't paid enough to deal with Karens all day long.

  • SmiTTy on 19/12/2024 - 00:44

    Kmart do this as well as well as a few other smaller stores in my experience. It's annoying but I feel its sort of the norm these days

  • JimmyF on 19/12/2024 - 09:11

    The refund was denied as I did NOT have the card that was documented on the receipt. I was offered an exchange or store credit. Which I didn't want for numerous reasons (doesn't generally fit well, being rushed in a time constraint etc etc)

    This is standard practice across the board and part of the wider terms for banking etc, refunds to the same method of purchase. Paid in cash, get cash back. Paid on card, refund to card. Paid via gift card, refund via gift card.

    Why? Put simply to reduce theft/money laundering. It stops someone coming in with a stolen credit card, buying stuff, then returning it for 'cash' before the transaction can be flagged etc.

    While painful for you if you really want the money back, then your aunty could have just went in and did the refund, then giving you money.

    In the end I went to another store, played stupid, that I got my card stolen and got my refund on another card

    But I see you went this route instead.

  • 2esc on 19/12/2024 - 09:34
    +2

    The excuse is anti fraud but reality is its really to force you to keep that sale but on a different item within that store.

    • JimmyF on 19/12/2024 - 10:37
      +2

      That makes no sense, as if you are the original purchases, you can easily get a refund back to your card.

      • ihfree on 19/12/2024 - 11:16
        +1

        puts on tinfoil hat

        They leak your card details after purchase so you're stuck with their products.

        • JimmyF on 19/12/2024 - 17:58

          So I should pay cash? That way they leak cash back to me?

    • ripesashimi on 19/12/2024 - 10:48
      +1

      You can just provide the original method of payment. You can play fraud but its unreasonable to force them to be part of it.

  • KaTst3R on 19/12/2024 - 10:08
    +3

    I tried on the shirt
    it was unworn

    These two events are contradictory.

    • upsidedownlemon on 20/12/2024 - 00:34

      Just like when people sell “lightly used” brand new items…

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join