Tesco accused me of fraud !

jor el

P. Breathnach wrote: »

There is an important point that seems to in danger of being overlooked because of all the noise in this discussion: the fact that OP might have been defamed by the manner in which the cashier refused the voucher.

Maybe, but I do think the OP is exaggerating in subsequent posts. In the first post, it's claimed the cashier said the voucher was a photocopy, nothing more. This is just a mistake, not defamation. The OP added that the cashier effectively accused him of forging the voucher in an illegal manner. The manner in which this is described, using the word effectively, leads me to believe that this didn't happen, but rather the OP has read more into what happened, and is coming to false conclusions.

The only issue that I can see is that the voucher was perfectly valid and should have been accepted, but it was not. This is due to a lack of staff education on these types of vouchers, nothing more.

jd83

It would be great if my biggest problems were getting a discount on Moy Parks new range of chicken products. God you wrote them a letter they didnt get back to you so if your still unhappy vote with your feet and dont go back there, im sure they will be delighted not to have to see you again!

yoyo

Thinking back now my local Tesco accepted the printed voucher getting The Moy Park Chicken without any problems, Tesco Jervis fwiw

Nick

rubadub

Walshes foods used to have vouchers out years ago with no expiry date on them, so I picked up loads at the time. I went in about 2 years later with one and when the guy scanned it he said it was not showing up on his system. I just said I don't want the product so and paid for the rest.

dudara

rubadub Please - this is not After Hours

dudara

rubadub

Fair enough, sorry, post edited. The first bit is true about the voucher being refused though, and it didn't bother me in the slightest. When going in with printed out vouchers I am always thinking it is likely to be refused.

cgarvey

dublin99 wrote: »

You are incorrect, CGarvey. Firstly the voucher in question stated it was redeemable at Tesco Stores. Tesco had entered into a contract with the manufacturer, Moy Park, and therefore has an obligation to honour them.

Whether or not Tesco entered in to a contract with Moy Park makes no difference to any perceived obligation to accept the vouchers from a consumer. From my retail experience, however limited, Tesco would be lucky to have been notified of the vouchers in a general circular email/newsletter, nevermind having entered in to any sort of contract. There is no way any retailer would enter in to a contract enforcing them to accept anything other than legal tender as payment; especially one the size of Tesco (with everything so centrally controlled). The voucher can state what it likes.

Agreed with your points about staff training, handling it better, and managing your complaint better.

However, I still think you're blowing it completely out of proportion. I'm all for the Irish reversing the stereotype of laying down and accepting poor service, but this is the other extreme (my USA reference). I'd love to hear the sales assistant's side of the story!

dublin99 wrote: »

I hope I do not need to explain what a forgery is – but by definition it is associated with an underlying intent to defraud.

Did he/she accused you of forging it (or just of photocopying it)? I mean, did they accuse you directly of what you're implying they accused you of, or are you just buttering up something like "Sorry, sir, I can't accept that as it appears to be a photocopy"?

dublin99 wrote: »

I am a customer with Consumer Rights and I expect a reasonable standard of customer service in a store

What consumer rights have been breached?

dublin99 wrote: »

It is not a matter of a supermarket cashier "reasonably" questioning the validilty of the voucher. It is a matter of declaring it a "photocopy" (and hence a forged document) without proof which was defamatory.

I still don't see that at all, from what you've said. Declaring something as a photocopy is not accusing you of forgery (or fraud). Did he/she ALSO directly accuse you of the latter?

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I consider this response to be offensive

There's a report post button underneath the post, if you do. Use it so a moderator can review my post and edit it accordingly (or more drastic action like banning me). I've reviewed it, and stand by everything I've said in there.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

On what basis do you make this conclusive judgement?

ON the basis of previous retail management experience (including handling vouchers), dealing with many different wholesalers & producers handing out vouchers, dealings with industry representative body's advice on same, my limited non-professional interpretation of consumer law, and some basic common business sense. If you need more details, you can research me online.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

People often shop in their own neighbourhood, and being publicly accused of dishonesty in front of one's neighbours could be quite significant. And actionable.

Actionable, yes. Actionable because anything is. The OP can claim whatever he/she likes and take whoever to court based on that claim. So actionable doesn't imply they'd succeed in such action. I've yet to see evidence that he was "publicly accused of dishonesty". For example, I've often refused out of date vouchers (and sometimes accepted them on good will terms). That doesn't mean that I've accused a customer of dishonest/forgery/fraud. Even if I think they were chancing their arm (or something more deliberate), I wouldn't accuse them of that.

So consumer rights out the window (because nobody suggests any were breached), we're back to a defamation-type case. If OP wants to go ahead and sue, based on that, good luck to him/her. Certainly, that's their right. I'm not sure he/she'll get very far, and based on what he/she said here, and based on that I think this is all very US-styled litigation over completely blown out of all proportion nonsense.