Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
BRIGHT DISCOUNT SIGNS, bulging rails and busy sales assistants can only mean one thing – summer sales season is upon us again. As we are all trying to get by on less these days, the sales season can be a really good time to snap up bargains, particularly on expensive items that you have been saving for.
But sales can lead to an increase in impulse spending too, when consumers stumble upon that “must have” item with 70 per cent off. As such, it’s really important to be aware of your consumer rights when buying reduced price items, either in person or online, so you can take action if your cheap deal turns out to be a damp squib.
The first point to note is that sales season does not affect your statutory rights. Signs such as “No Refunds” or “No Exchanges” can cause confusion, particularly as some shops display these signs prominently during sales season. However, as per the consumer legislation we have here in Ireland, if an item is faulty, you are entitled to a remedy whether that item is on sale or not.
In all cases, what you buy must be as it is described to you, fit for the intended purpose and be of satisfactory quality. Your rights do not change just because what you bought was on sale. However an important point to note is that if you were told about the defect before you bought the item, you may not have grounds for redress.
If you have a faulty product there are a number of options open to you, depending on the type of fault. These could include a full refund, repair, replacement or reduction in the price. Once you notice a fault with any item you have bought, you should return it as soon as possible to the seller, explain what has happened and show them proof of purchase. Proof of purchase can be your receipt, or a copy of your debit or credit card statement.
So what happens if you buy an item, discover a fault and return to the shop only to discover it’s been significantly reduced? Your consumer rights dictate that you are entitled to a refund of the full price or a replacement of the same value or a repair. You do not have to accept a refund of the lower sale price if the goods are faulty.
Now for the tricky bit. If you’ve bought something in a shop, in the sales or otherwise, and you simply change your mind about it, then you do not have any rights under consumer law and the shop does not have to offer you a refund or a replacement. This applies if you’ve bought something and discovered it doesn’t fit, doesn’t match, doesn’t suit you or simply doesn’t “look right”.
But, some shops do accept returns, typically with conditions about packaging and intact labels, and will give you an exchange or refund within a certain amount of time after the purchase. But this depends on shop policy and is a gesture of goodwill on their behalf. Some shops may only offer an exchange or refund on goods that were not on sale.
Again, unless there is something wrong with the goods, this is not breaking consumer law or infringing on your consumer rights. If the shop do agree to refund you, and the item you are returning is now reduced, you probably have to accept the lower price as the shop is allowing you to return the item as a gesture of goodwill.
Finally, more and more people are opting to avoid the crush of the high street and are trawling for bargains online. If you buy something from an EU-based website, you have seven working days, from the date you received your purchase, to cancel the order and return the goods. This applies if the item is at full price, on sale or even if you’ve simply changed your mind. However, if there is nothing wrong with the item, you, the consumer, are obliged to foot the bill to return it.
These rules only apply to EU based websites, so it’s important to remember that you don’t have the same level of protection when buying goods from further afield. As such, when thinking about purchasing from a website outside of the EU, be sure to read up on the returns policy and terms and conditions of the site, so you are fully informed before parting with your hard earned cash.
During summer sales season, and all year round in fact, it’s always best to check a retailer’s returns policy before you make a purchase and, crucially, to keep your receipts as proof of purchase and of the price you paid. Arming yourself with this and information about your consumer rights is the best way to ensure you can make the most of the Summer Sales.
Check out www.nca.ie for more information on your consumer rights.
Quick Reference Guide
| Faulty Goods? | Change Your Mind? |
| Return the goods to the retailer you bought them from. | Check to see what the retailer’s returns policy is and return the goods if you can. |
| The sooner you act the better. | The sooner you act the better. |
| You are entitled to a repair, replacement or refund. | You are not entitled to refund or exchange. However, some shops may have a refund/exchange policy if you change your mind. |
| *Need proof of purchase – a receipt or credit card/bank statement. | Dependant on shop policy, but best to have a receipt. |
* Proof of purchase– if the price of the item has been reduced, having proof of the price paid ensures that you get back the total amount you spent, or a replacement with an item to the value you spent but only if the product is faulty.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The others should stay off Facebook
@Batster: I think it’s reasonable for certain subpopulations. For example those at risk of pregnancy, planning a family, and those who have allergies. As long as most people are covered it will work.
@SC: Agree totally.
@Batster: imagine how smug they will feel, those that can take the vaccine but won’t. Letting everyone else take it to save them.
@SC: Journal article:
1)’Pregnant women can get Covid-19 vaccine if they fall into other priority groups’ January 13th 2021.
Also:’Covid-19 vaccine and pregnancy-HSE.ie
2) Covid-19 vaccines and Allergic Reactions-CDC 31/12/20
I have allergies but according to this article,I could still get vaccine and I’d have no hesitation to do so.
Hopefully vaccination can be ramped up asap!
@Nuala Mc Namara: it’s not fully tested for pregnancy,
It’s a ask your doctor, how can they know if no Trial data.
On allergies it’s a higher chance of a reaction if you have them.
Depending on your excess allergies and reactions you would want to check. Many people haven’t taken the second dose also due to this.
Boost your immune system before taking it and hopefully it’s all good.
@Rory Mac Daibhéid: The reason why I put the HSE,CDC ,etc advice and data on my comment is to show expert advice,if you read it you will see that eg you can still have vaccine with some allergies and as pregnant women can have a more severe Covid-19 infection, vaccination is recommended for women in priority groups and it does specify when during pregnancy.
Subject of the survey aside, does anybody actually know anybody who’s been phoned and asked to take part in one of these surveys?
I’ve never known of anybody who has.
Also never never knew anybody who has won a Late Late Show competition but I have known National lottery jackpot winners.
Good news on the survey result though.
@JedBartlett: They had my number for a while, I did one survey, they kept saying “just a few more questions sir”, it took more than 30 mins. After that I politely told them to stop calling and to delete my number. They kept calling back, about once a week. Absolute curse.
@JedBartlett: I got called once. On my land-line. So maybe the results are skewed…not sure if they ring mobile phones LOL
@JedBartlett: got a call once, the questions cover a range of topics so my guess was that there was more than one survey happening
@JedBartlett: yep. It was a political opinion poll with a survey about gardening at the end. They often mash a few things together. They sadly don’t report them together. It would have been nice to know how many Shinners owned shovels for example. Or how many FG possessed neither front nor back gardens
@JedBartlett: late late shows are designed to collect names from those that have a TV. You have to be watching and in to get the call. This info is shared with An Post. Guaranteed.
@JedBartlett: my friend won a trip to NYC on the late late a few years back (they rang him live on the show)
@JedBartlett: I’ve never known any one who took one of these surveys but I have one friend who has won about half a dozen Late Late Show comps, lucky fecker. I used to work with a guy who won 2 million on the lottery. Never left the job but came to work in a much nicer car.
@Ger: yep, contacted on a mobile, it went on for ages, well over 20 mins. It would have taken 10 minutes to fill out online..
@JedBartlett: RedC surveys are online, you can sign up to participate via their Web page and the surveys are very regular and cover a range of topics
Yeah, I wonder how many of those ‘unsure’ or refusing the vaccine have willingly taken recreational drugs in the past…?
@Stuart Doherty: best comment! A girl I went to school with who took pills off anyone in our late teens and was fond of a line a coke until a few years ago says she won’t take the vaccine…as is a work colleague who gets Botox and lip fillers regularly!!
@Bleurgh: can’t fix stew-pid mate… ( spellings not that bad , just the journal thinks that word is ‘toxic’ ) …
I have had my first jab, no problem at all, have to say I feel that little bit safer going to work. And glad we are not following the UK by stretching it out.
It’s a new vaccine, so I can understand why people would be wary about getting it.
If I was offered a vaccine today, I’d have to think about it
In six months time when I’m likely to get it, there’ll hopefully be a lot more information about it which will make a decision easier.
@Kendra Jackson: So you don’t mind spending six months as a Covid-19 version of Typhoid Mary?
@Gary Kearney: it won’t be offered for a few months and you might’ Actually have good days and evidence by then on what the vaccine does and doesn’t do.
@Gary Kearney: I should have probably specified “when I’m likely to get offered it”.
Which is likely to be at least six months.
So it’s not exactly a question of whether i ‘mind’ or not.
So why does the Journal not do a poll on it ?. Think you will find its more than reported.
@Ken Bramley: let me guess, you and all of your mates are part of the 7%
@Mal Swan: You assume he means there would be more that wouldn’t take it. How do you know he doesn’t mean that more than 75% would take it?
If you don’t take the vaccine you are deciding to remain at risk from Covid-19, because those who are vaccinated have much lower risk of catching it or getting sick, but they could still give it to those who choose not to get it. Given the choice any sensible person will take the vaccine
@irisbeag: transmission hasn’t been identified as stooped by the vaccine so taking it doesn’t stop you being a risk to others unless that evidence changes.
You could well spread it worse because you believe you are ‘protected’.
Many 1st dose people already getting the virus. Let’s see about the second dose.
There is no real world effectiveness data on its Protection yet.
It’s sensible for older and vunerable people to want to take the vaccine as its potentially Protective.
This data and Evidence will come.
There is a lot of things that need to be improved for immune response also when taking a vaccine, exercise and vitamin D, good sleep before hand.
There is a possibility this vaccine effectiveness will be similar to a flu vaccine and sensible people will know believing that high Efficacy in a trial will protect people in the real world is very naive.
@Rory Mac Daibhéid: i posted my comment less than a minute ago and it was placed in the middle of the comment forum. Somehow your reply to my comment (which is word for word the same as replied to someone else) has 32 likes in 5 seconds?
I think there are a few bugs in the journals coding.
@EarthwormJim: sorry rory this thing is very glitchy, a moment ago it showed you made this reply to my comment. All the best.
If 70 per cent of people take it then that is enough to return everyday life to normal, or close to what normal was. That is the percentage figure I see mentioned all the time.
The attitude that anyone who says they may not or would not take the vaccine is an ignorant fool and a conspiracy theorist is neither accurate nor helpful.
It’s not unreasonable for a person to weigh up their chances of dying from Covid with the opportunity to not take the quickest-developed vaccine in history.
As a reasonably young and healthy person I have almost zero risk of dying of Covid for a long time. I have never taken a flu vaccine for the same reason. That is not to say I won’t take the flu vaccine when I am older.
Separately, I would also like to see every elderly person, every front line medical worker, every worker who is dealing with the public, including teachers, shop workers, etc, every person with health concerns being offered this vaccine ahead of me.
@Jim Lingk: You have not got near zero risk of catching the virus. There is a chance of dying a a much larger chance of getting long covid.
So you “I alright” “I wont be too bad” attitudes are part of the problem.
If you caught it and spread it others could die.
Or do others not count in your narcissistic world.
@Gary Kearney: who said the vaccine stops the virus spreading?
Nobody yet so that’s that an argument.
The same principles of Protection still apply until there is Evidence.
Currently the vaccine is approved as stopping covid illness from developing, severe covid. From the data there’s no evidence of spread being stopped.
So your non scientific attitude is part of the problem.
You must think this is a magical thing that’s stop everyone spreading it and getting sick, there’s no evidence of that from the trail. There’s evidence it offers a higher potential Protection than not having it.
The focus on the vaccine as a solution is a bit misguided and shortsighted.
It should be only thought of as another potential Protection against developing severe covid.
@Gary Kearney: I did not say I had no or little chance of catching it.
I did not say I have no chance of dying of covid. I said I have almost zero chance of dying of covid. Which I do, statistically.
Long covid, perhaps. There really isn’t enough data on this, there hasn’t been enough time passed and there isn’t even a medical definition for what it means.
If the vulnerable people get the vaccine (and they will be offered it before I am) and a minority of people don’t then things should be back to normal.
I’ll have two then
So population wise, that equates to 1 million people who don’t want to get the vaccine?
I hope not!
@Jonathan Nolan: or 350,000 people……(7% of 4.9 million, give or take)
I thought it would have been higher than 75%. Mid 80′s maybe.
Here I am vaccine
I will take the vaccine, but I will not support a new normal. I am taking the vaccine because I want the life I had to return. I hope I am not alone in thinking this.
It is a bit concerning to me when I read Oliver O’Connor of the IPHA saying that even after we are vaccinated that we may only return to some version of what we call normal. I understand that he is not a member of our government and it is only his opinion. I just wonder what has led him to make that speculation, is it perhaps that he has knowledge of what is coming down the line.
@EarthwormJim: got ya. Yes.
I’m not happy with what’s considered normal now and thinking fining people for exercising, cycling and hill walking is somehow making people safer or reducing risk. That’s not acceptable to me and people should be allowed go to fresh open air natural areas and enjoy it at no risk.
In regards the vaccine, it seems to be the solution to allowing the government control.
I don’t agree with the control in first place and everyone has to be responsible for themselves and family and close contacts.
I don’t think the vaccine is going to eradicate the virus or be 90% Protective so how it can be used as a solution to end Lockdowns is beyond me.
It should be used as it’s potential to stop severe covid, 1 case in traii versus 9 in placebo is good result, no idea how that will translate to real world.
We should have a strategy now for living with covid with or without a vaccine. This new normal isn’t normal or good for anyone.
The virus peaked because of Christmas and unfortunately to that’s cause significant illness but it’s not a case for cancelling society. Society by and large can be responsible for itself without having Garda at beaches and hills.
They raided a pub the other which is one risky activity and that’s acceptable policing and fair enough to be hard on risky behaviour.
@EarthwormJim: The masks are here to stay, I am very sure of that at least.
Going on online comments it seems that 70% won’t get it. Some of those online folk commenting are telling porkies me thinks.
@Jason Walsh: FB has a strong and often Conspiracy type and often non Irish based anti vaccine following.
On the journal it’s majority vaccine support.
Ideally we can get some realism about the real world effectiveness and transmission evidence soon as there is a bit of a magical unicorn belief in this Vaccine so far by the media and that’s not based on any evidence or reality yet.
The vaccine met both primary efficacy end points, with more than a 99.99% probability of a true vaccine efficacy greater than 30%. These results met our prespecified success criteria, which were to establish a probability above 98.6% of true vaccine efficacy being greater than 30%, and greatly exceeded the minimum FDA criteria for authorization.
What % is it isn’t known yet.
@Jason Walsh: this has come up in work and social chat plenty of times since Christmas and in my experience 90%+ are saying they will get it. I’m sure a small number of them are unsure and just saying it.but neatly everyone is decided already, it’s not even a question in their minds.
@Jim Lingk: very data driven evidence there.
Not even 90% of doctors said they would take it without evidence.
Almost 600 responded, with 78% saying yes without any reservations. Just 5.4% said they would not take the vaccine but 16.3% said they had some queries for now with less than 1% commenting without choosing an option.
This is what’s not answered>
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-modernas-95-effective-vaccines-we-need-more-details-and-the-raw-data/
Fair play to ye lads
have your say