Forum Moderators: buckworks
We have received advanced notice today of the closure of the which web trader scheme at the end of january.
from their advanced notice:
"I am writing to give you advanced notice of an announcement that we will be
making on the afternoon of Monday January 6."
"I will be announcing that the Which? Web Trader scheme will be closing at
the end of January."
"During the three and a half years of the scheme we have received more than
8,000 applications, accepted 2,700 online traders and resolved more than
2,000 disputes on behalf of consumers. The scheme has succeeded in its aim
of increasing consumer confidence online and has promoted higher standards
in e-commerce."
"However, providing such an effective and well-monitored scheme costs a
significant amount each year and as a charity and campaigning organisation
we need to use our resources in the most efficient way possible."
This is an important scheme in the UK and has improved ecom consumer confidence & trust over the years.
Does anyone know of possible UK alternatives/replacements? our sites will seem a little naked without this trustmark!
had forgotten about it myself, but now remember the stink a year or so ago.
however i will still contend that a nationally understood trustmark is a useful thing.
a good thing perhaps would be a dti/trading standards/government initiative.
just needs a little logo that links to a page that says that the business is real, meets the current legislation, and what the customers rights are etc. methinks that little safety net would go a long way esp for the smaller startup webtraders.
[edited by: gibbon at 9:36 pm (utc) on Jan. 3, 2003]
Huh? I can't get anything out of the company (several hours wasted). I can't get anything out of Which Web Trader (more hours wasted). Now you want me to go to TrustUK - how many more hours wasted and why should I have to?
I wrote to Which Web and requested that they demand that the supplier removes the logo (which they may not do) and remove the supplier from the Which website (which they can do) before I will buy from any trader holding their logo again. Two years later and nothing has happened except that I do not buy from sites displaying their logo - they are there to protect you and they don't.
the interesting thing is, the Which? scheme *was* essentially a DTI scheme - that is, Trust UK was a DTI initiative, and the Which Scheme was one of the main partners in that scheme.
So ultimately perhaps we have the good old Labour government to blame for another failed initiative!
When this was introduced I checked with Which (member for 2 years) and their legal team agreed that I was exempt.
I dont sell a product. I sell statistics. If Joe Punter were to enforce the distance selling 7 day cancellation I'd be forced to close. Joe Punter could sign up, download all my statistics and then 7 days latter request a refund.
Where do I stand now? With Which out of the way can I still state that I can't offer refunds?
I'm really dissapointed Which Webtrader is closing. AFAIK my site is the only site to be certified by Which in the industry sector. In my industry, hustling, conning and cheating is rife. Being part of the Which Webtrader scheme really was a selling feature.
not quite frank. you've either been misadvised or you asked the wrong questions leading to incorrect advice or you've misunderstood the advice or whatever.
the right to cancel applies only to sales to consumers. business to business transactions are exempt. if you only ever sell to businesses, then no problem. BUT ... and this is a BIG BUT ...
if you run a website and make sales online, then you cannot guarantee that you will only ever make sales to businesses. therefore you are obliged to display consumer rights as per the distance selling regulations and you are obliged to provide refunds under the distance selling regulations.
read on ...
>>I dont sell a product. I sell statistics.
UK law says you either sell "goods" or "services". if the statistics you sell are like one download, then it'll be goods. if it's an ongoing thing like website statistics that are updated daily etc, then your statistics will be a service. this makes a difference to your position in law. as you provide downloads, your downloads are "goods".
>>If Joe Punter
>>were to enforce the distance selling 7 day cancellation
>>I'd be forced to close. Joe Punter could sign up,
>>download all my statistics and then 7 days latter request
>>a refund.
yes, a consumer could download your statistics and request a refund and you would be legally obliged to provide it within 30 days. your business is no different to any other that sells goods.
but it's downloads, so in reality, you lose nothing (except the transaction charges which is the same for every retailer). doesn't matter if one person or one million people download - it effectively costs you nothing as you have no manufacturing costs. therefore, there is no need to close your business.
what you could do to make consumers less liable to download is switch to tangibles - CD, printed statistics etc - and put them in the post. consumers would then have to return the products if they want a refund. just the same as any other UK business, you'll be obliged to give the refund whether or not they return the goods, and if they don't return them, you can take them to court. that's the way it works - nothing abnormal about it, just the way things are.
>>Where do I stand now? With Which out of the way can I
>>still state that I can't offer refunds?
the closure of which changes nothing. the law remains the same. you are almost certainly in breach of the law if you allow sales of goods to consumers and state that you do not provide refunds. if you can physically prevent sales to consumers then carry on as you are.
you can still obtain the advice you need through the proper channels, which are your local trading standards office and solicitors. you can find your local trading standards number in your phone book. their advice is free to both businesses and consumers. they'll happily send you free information leaflets etc as well.
take a look at the two links i posted above. there is an extremely good PDF guide to the distance selling regulations for businesses.
I'm sticking with the advice from Which Webtraders legal team. You may think they are a bunch of chumps. I believe what they say.
Common sense prevails here. You can't have a refund on something you have read on screen. If there was a process of erasing it from your memory then ok, but that doesnt exist!
Now, that would be an easy way to force your competitors into liquidation or to put their prices up.
I can understand wishing to return a pair of socks or a T.V. etc. but some 'things' have to be exempt.
I offer a 30 day subscription to the site. Whats stopping Joe Punter signing up, cancelling within 7 days, signing up, cancelling within 7 days......
is it a service then? if so, you need to state clearly (for consumers) that service provision begins as soon as they view the statistics and that from the moment they use the service, they have no right to cancel.
minor problem tho - you MUST provide your terms / refunds policy etc in a "durable medium" - a medium that they can keep and have unrestricted access to and you cannot alter and that they can present in court if required. the UK government has steered clear of specifying exactly what is and is not a "durable medium" (preferring this to be decided by case law). the goverment suggests fax and email *may* be durable mediums. they do not mention web pages. each EU country has distance selling regs and the german government has decided that web pages ARE a durable medium, probably because they can be printed.
for the time being, if you post your terms on your website you should be ok - if ever you end up in court you can say that the terms were there and you took every reasonable step to present those terms in accordance with UK law and that will normally be good enough. (if anyone has any reference to UK case law that sets out what is and is not a durable medium i'd apperciate the information).
>>I'm sticking with the advice from Which Webtraders legal
>>team. You may think they are a bunch of chumps. I believe
>>what they say.
ROFL! that's the way to end up in BIG trouble. have you read the regs? are you going to contact your local trading standards? if you're in business, you ought to take it a bit more seriously than you are doing.
>>Common sense prevails here. You can't have a refund on
>>something you have read on screen
wanna bet?
that would be customised or personalised goods. this is one of the exceptions to the right to cancel. it's all in the PDF file i mentioned on the link i gave.
I'm happy to take Which Webtrader's legal team advice thats all I'm saying. They spent sometime deliberating on it and concluded that services such as mine are exempt from the 7 day cooling off.
All the T&C are on the site. It does state that refunds are not available. I'll keep the T&C as is even when Which Webtrader has gone.
nothing - but you can prevent him doing so. you are under no obligation to provide a service to anyone if they don't pay you for it, so if someone starts abusing your service, don't let them sign up. try bans by IP, email address, cookies etc. add a termination clause - they'll get fed up with signing up and getting terminated and eventually go away.
you can't guarantee to stop anyone, but that's the nature of the business you have chosen. it's entirely up to you to deal with it.
I dont know how we got started on this. All I asked is what happens Which 'switches off', i.e. does any T&C which were applicable when WW was operational now not apply?
er...that's it
(Mods: just saying hello)
I've just had a change of heart!
Given that you are the Ironside of the Internet, how do *you* suggest that a small, honest, but young business proceeds on the Internet, and convinces its customers that they care.
We've had enough of the jibing and criticism, the ball is now in your court to make some useful comments.
You have discussed Trading Standards - is it possible to get your local Trading Standards Office to *verify* your online business?
Now please advise - that would be in the spirit of WebmasterWorld.
Kind regards
Quincy
they have been "updated", "supplemented" and "clarified" by the e-commerce directive which came out in august. worth reading both to see how they affect you.
>>All the T&C are on the site. It does state that refunds
>>are not available. I'll keep the T&C as is even when
>>Which Webtrader has gone.
that's fine by me, but remember that their legal advice will not hold up in court any more than mine or the bloke down the pub. the only thing that counts is what the law says.
as a business, it's your duty to find out what the law is and to abide by it.
that bit is up to you, but i'd suggest get your legal stuff correct, get advice from trading standards, maybe a solicitor, word your terms etc in a friendly way. nothing in law says you are not allowed to care.
>>We've had enough of the jibing and criticism, the ball is
>>now in your court to make some useful comments.
well i've pointed out some misconceptions and directed you to proper free business and legal advice (from the government no less) ... if that wasn't useful then it appears i wasted my time.
>>You have discussed Trading Standards - is it possible to
>>get your local Trading Standards Office to *verify* your
>>online business?
sort of. i guess it will depend on your local trading standards. you can ask them if your terms etc are ok and they'll discuss it with you - thats a definite. my local trading standards has internet access and they can log on to my terms and conditions etc to review them if they want to. you'll have to check if yours can and will do the same.
you are one damn fine Crazy Guy!
p.s. but have your local trading standards actually checked out your site?
when they check my terms, they talk sort of like a solicitor cross examining me except they're polite and friendly whereas a solicitor cross examining you in court would be rude and arrogant. they don't care what it says elsewhere on the site, only whats in my terms. they don't care about "assumptions", only what's stated clearly in your terms. know what i mean?
give them a call and say you're not sure if your terms / refunds policy are correct etc and see what they say - it's only a local phone call.
something else you can do is pretend you're a dissatisfied customer (or get a friend to do it. tell them XYZ.com won't give you a refund and so on. they might go check the terms themselves and tell you if you're entitled to a refund. it's only a local phone call. be warned tho, any complaints against a business may be recorded and if you get a few genuine complaints, trading standards could take legal action themselves.
Many traders are not as legally savvy as yourself, I for sure was not when we started in business. I would never have contemplated speaking to trading standards myself as initially i thought they were a body that helped consumers only. I for one was glad when my terms were scrutinsed by the which team, this gave me a sense of security for free.
Now after a couple of years of doing this i know the law and the ins and outs of the system, yet i do remember & value the advice the which team gave me when we first started and i was not as knowledgeable nor could afford legal advice.
From that perspective your comments do not alter my opinion of them. They helped us to become successful and for that I am grateful and will miss them.
And WebManager, you couldnt possibly be hinting that Labour governments damage our economy ;)
The forum is still great and I have got some good info from it so firstly, thanks!
For new traders it is advisable to contact Trading Standards in your local area and they will send you pack which contains all relevant information deatiling your obligations and customers rights as well as your rights as a trader
The distance selling regulations gives consumers a lot of rights which protect them but at first sight (when you are just starting trading) may appear to leave you as a retailer feeling vulnerable to being taken advantage of
After a discussion with a very helpful person at the DTI the following points were made
Customers who are returning goods must look after them if they intend to return them. They must be in the same condition you sent them out in, if used/misused/damaged in any way then they have not complied with your terms and conditions as you will have set out complying with the DSR
You may be able to minimise non-genuine faulty returns by checking/testing goods before sending, you can then clearly state that the goods were working, if someone is trying it on they may well back down.
To conclude and most importantly and from experience, 99% of customers are genuine and are not interested in ripping you off. Be polite but firm in restating your terms and conditions make the refund if need be, record the customers info and get on with selling your goods
Happy New Year
The local trading standards check is a good one. But here's a tricky question:
A companies registered office is in Newcastle. The proprietor lives in Nottingaham. The website is hosted in Newbury.
Which local trading standards office to call?!
I am soooooo glad I left in 1993 and set up shop in the US.
It is little wonder to me that Internet sales in the UK and Europe are so much lower than the US, all these restrictions must make life very hard for you guys!
The best way to protect the consumer is for the supplier to provide them with good service, quality product and reasonable payment conditions. That simply makes good business sense and doesn't need the government, or any consumer advocacy groups, to enforce.
On the odd occasion a consumer gets a "lemon" then a decent supplier will offer a refund or replacement, no questions asked. If they don't and the consumer paid by credit card there are always charge backs to rely on.
I don't see the need for all this "red tape" and consumer protection nonsense. It has to be hurting the marketplace.
One final thought, if those that think Which? Web Trader provided a valuable service, why not put your hands in your pockets and fund it, or something similar in nature?
There are many trade associations that look after the interests of consumers and suppliers equally and are funded by suppliers via membership fees. They exist because the suppliers who know they conform to higher ethical standards are prepared to pay for membership to keep the "riff-raff" out of the market.
I dont think that is a good idea. I'm sure Which? are in a bit of trouble at the moment.
They have recently started showing ads on TV to advertise the Which? range of magazines. The ads are using the last resort ploy of natural mating sells. (note, I've had too many threads here toasted by admin, I'm not saying the xxx word ;-) )
I think the beancounters realise they need to restructure. Webtrader was just not viable even though it did provide quite a bit of traffic to the site - by clicking the icon on traders site you were sent directly to the Which? magazine spiel.
The Which? magazine could be losing out to online reviews of products.
One thing question though. Where is the government on this? Surely it needs the 'e-envoy' to come and sort this out?
With people in the UK so reticent to buy online anyway, a little badge on a (possibly very unfamiliar) site saying 'we're not cowboys', I believe is useful to establish sites credibility.
Obviously it is no substitute for providing a good, honest, reliable service but if someone finds my site by chance, they're not going to know what my service is like.
I think there is a need for a replacement service, especially for the layman who may not know their consumer rights in detail, or know what they are looking for on a site to prove its credibility
But these regulations don't target the good supplier, as you say it's just the type of thing a good supplier will do.
It's to target those suppliers that are not good - the ones that will send faulty good out, or things that are not as stated and won't refund or try to claim it's nothing to do with them.
And your telling us that in the good ole US of A nothing like that ever happens, so they don't need consumer protection?
The US has its rogues also, I know that is hard to believe with quality management and companies like Enron and Worldcom, etc, etc. ;)
But the solutions are not typically to go running to a consumer protection group. There are other remedies:
1. The Credit Card charge back...that fixes most of them. If the supplier is a real rogue with many charge backs the credit card processor will either put up their fees to rediculouse levels or simply stop processing for them. The rogue is out of business if they keep that practice up for long.
2. The FTC, Fair Trading Commission - Typically a waste of time unless the activities are so outragous there is no question whatsoever of guilt.
3. The State Attorney General - Also typically a waste of time because the red tape is so long the bad supplier is probably out of business by the time a resolution is forthcoming.
4. The good old fashioned law suit - Only worth applying if you are 99%+ certain of winning, and not worth defending if you are 99%+ sure of losing.
Number 1 is by far the best solution and as most online sales are by Credit Card it applies in the majority of cases. I don't see why it doesn't apply in Europe, does the charge back system there not apply in the same way?
2 & 3 are Government based solutions, they have there uses, but are not effective in a typical online commercial situation. I believe any Government run scheme in Europe would fall foul of the same problems.
Number 4 works, but is of little use for low ticket items.
In the vast majority of cases the supplier will give the refund if they think the consumer has anything close to a valid case, if the supplier refuses they know the charge back is most likely to occur and that is going to damage them anyway (more than the refund). Occassionally the consumer doesn't even ask for a refund, they simply go straight for the charge back. That is a great way to increase the level of service of all suppliers....the charge back is feared at all times and suppliers simply want to avoid them by offering good products and service.
It appears to me that putting something like a Which? Web Trader logo on your site is saying to consumers we know the Internet is a dangerous place to shop, but we are honest and this logo proves it.
But, in doing that you are increasing the consumers "fear factor" about the Internet generally. That leads to many people becoming paranoid that the Internet is simply unsafe and in turn leads to less people who are even willing to consider it as an option.
With only a very small minority supporting the Which? Web Trader concept are you not saying that the majority are in fact crooks....of course this is probably an unintentional statement about your competition, but how do consumers see it?
I personally believe the best way to increase the size of the marketplace is to make consumers feel confident that they are safe when shopping, not that only my site is safe, but the vast majority are safe. Then you can start to worry about how much of the much larger cake you get to eat and less about whether anyone will get to eat at all. :)
Generally (99.99%+ of the time) it is very safe to shop online in the US, and I suspect the same is true in Europe. But I suspect the average American is more willing to try it because they have less fear than the average European, even though the two markets probably exhibit similar levels of risk.
Consumer advocacy groups serve to warn people of those risks, but don't you think the tendancy is to get those warnings completely out of perspective and hurt the overall marketplace?
There is a charge back type of facility for credit cards, but there are rules to it - The main thing is that items have to be over £50 in value, it has to be a "faulty" item, not just a change of mind etc. Although the credit card companies don't make it easy to to cliam back.
But the fact is companies will try to get away with doing the least possible. If that means making it hard for a someone to get a refund on a faulty item , or to get money back on an item they decide they don't want - ever tried returning software? - then they will do it, and if it's easy to get away with the more likely they will do it.
The acts that have been implemented are there to stop traders doing this, in fact a lot of them are having to be put into new acts because some internet traders try to claim that the normal rules don't apply to them.
Of course, all the good companies shouldn't be bothered about these rules - they are just things that should be done anyway for example some of the rules are
* You must supply the end user with full contact detail of your business
* You must supply clear indications of price including delivery and tax charges
* Details of how to conclude a contract online
Pretty basic eh? So why do some sites not bother with them then?
Surely it needs the 'e-envoy' to come and sort this out?
They are to busy helping the government squander £6 billion of the taxpayers money in the next 3 years on ICT projects "to transform Government services" to quote the e-minister.
percentages hit the nail on the head
The best way to protect the consumer is for the supplier to provide them with good service, quality product and reasonable payment conditions. That simply makes good business sense and doesn't need the government, or any consumer advocacy groups, to enforce.
For small businesses there are so many regulations now here in the UK (with more to come) that I used to spend a day a week implementing them. That was time which could have been spent growing the business, instead of which I was working for the government. Couple this with the governments increased spending (wastage) plans and out of control increases in taxation we are heading towards a uniquely British solution - in a few years there won’t be any consumers who can afford to buy anything.....
