The New Shippong Policy - Page 2

Lynnj · ‎03-21-2010

On 2/20/2015 CouponQueen said:
I am stumped why people think they SHOULD receive shipping back on a item that they do not want, did not like or no longer want etc?

It is one thing if the item is defective in some way - but to routinely order a bunch of things and then change your mind and think the retailer should foot the bill on the shipping? Why should that be?

People order mulitple sizes and colors of things..to try on..and send back etc and got their shipping back..that should not be ..it only increases prices and shipping for others..as the company is going to build that loss in somehow.

I don't get it..

As for the issue that the above poster had with the sheets. I am not sure that it is the company's problem. It seems like you ordered the wrong pocket size, so no I wouldn't think they would offer to pay for return shipping at all. The item is not defective - you received what you ordered, if you made the mistake then you should foot the bill..not them. I am missing how that is their problem and they should of paid?

You are welcome to your opinion on whether I should have received my original shipping back on my sheet order. But...I've been buying sheets for 40+ years, and this was the first I learned that different pocket sizes are available to choose from. The current bed is 10 years old, and I've been purchasing sheet sets for this bed for years. Never needed to pay attention to special pocket size, as standard size seems to fit just fine. Obviously, this company does not manufacture their fitted sheets per industry standards. They should note that on their website.

I have a problem with this company thinking that it is fine that I shelled out $24 in shipping for an item that I now physically do not have. I might as well take $24 and throw it in the trash, because that is what it was. As another poster said, its a courtesy to a customer.

Too bad for them, the sheets were $60. They lost that money in profit from me. Then add another $12 for original shipping to a replacement order + the $24 I shelled out previously for absolutely nothing. Who knows how many $100s I would have spent with them, and the profit they would have made from that, had they viewed returning original shipping costs as a courtesy to the customer. Especially since my intent was to exchange for size, and profit would be made on the exchanged set.

I shop with businesses that provide good (if not excellent) customer service and are efficient in their transactions. When I have an experience that doesn't offer me those things, I chose to spend my money elsewhere. I will not tolerate anything less. Putting the customer first, above and beyond profit, actually makes more profit. Want my money, provide a fair product at a fair price, processes the transaction efficiently and treat me with respect!

Deb1010again · ‎05-28-2013

The bottom line is shipping is a cost to the business that needs to be recovered somehow. A higher end retailer has increased margins built into the prices it charges, so that can offset the shipping. A retailer who is trying to compete on price (like QVC) is watching every penny, so they have to recover the shipping costs somehow.

QVC just changed their methods to get people to return less, and then those who return items will now have to cover that expense rather than spreading it among the entire customer base. Someone like me who rarely returns will make out since my shipping costs (now generally $3 or $5) are lower.

In some of the examples above, I would argue it was defective merchandise so QVC should absorb the original shipping costs. I would call irregular sizing (one item of same labeled size is different), not living up to sales hype, etc... as defective -- I would call QVC customer service and take it up with them and get the shipping costs reimbursed.

milly1 · ‎03-09-2010

I won't be ordering any shoes in the future. Too iffy whether they will fit. I don't return much but I will be thinking twice before ordering any clothing. I haven't ordered much since the 1st of the year. I probably order more home goods anyway. And it's rare I return anything unless it's defective in this area.

Plaid Pants · ‎11-03-2014

I wonder how many people flat out LIE on the return label, by saying the item is "defective", when in truth, it isn't, just because they don't want to have to pay the original shipping?

milly1 · ‎03-09-2010

There will be more defective merchandise than QVC faced in the past. Maybe the new letter will read ""you have too many defective returns"".

Plaid Pants · ‎11-03-2014

On 2/20/2015 milly said: There will be more defective merchandise than QVC faced in the past. Maybe the new letter will read "you have too many defective returns".

That's what I'm trying to get at.

They will have more packages returned as "defective", when, in fact, the item isn't defective.

And the ONLY reason the person marked it as "defective", was because they wanted their original shipping back.

In other words, the customer LIES, on the form.

I wonder how often that happens?

divine · ‎03-09-2010

On 2/20/2015 Deb1010again said:
The bottom line is shipping is a cost to the business that needs to be recovered somehow. A higher end retailer has increased margins built into the prices it charges, so that can offset the shipping. A retailer who is trying to compete on price (like QVC) is watching every penny, so they have to recover the shipping costs somehow.

QVC just changed their methods to get people to return less, and then those who return items will now have to cover that expense rather than spreading it among the entire customer base. Someone like me who rarely returns will make out since my shipping costs (now generally $3 or $5) are lower.

In some of the examples above, I would argue it was defective merchandise so QVC should absorb the original shipping costs. I would call irregular sizing (one item of same labeled size is different), not living up to sales hype, etc... as defective -- I would call QVC customer service and take it up with them and get the shipping costs reimbursed.

The problem is that the Q has also raised their prices on many, many items. I had to return 2 tops that didn't fit. Now the shipping is $3, but they have raised the price by $3, and now I don't get my original shipping back. I don't think this is such a great deal. So I'm not reordering these tops.

I rarely need to return an item unless it's because of inconsistent sizing. I doubt they will consider that as defective.

Member Since 11/20/2008