@thecatspjs wrote:
In the Australian consumer legislation there are a particular provisions that apply to return of goods (including faulty and misrepresented) purchased from an Australian business.
My read of it is that consumers are generally responsible for all costs to return goods, unless the cost of doing is excessive in comparison to the value of the goods purchased, then the Australian business must organise the collection of the goods.
Yes, but if the goods are found to be faulty, the seller is supposed to compensate the buyer for the cost of return.
"When you return goods to a seller, you must pay postage or shipping costs.
The seller must outline how much it will cost you to return the goods. You can then choose whether to pay the return costs, or keep the goods.
If you cannot easily return the goods to the seller, or return costs are significant – for example, if you were returning a wide screen TV or bed – the seller must pay for postage or collect the goods themselves. However, this only applies to goods with a major fault.
Once the seller has the goods, they will assess the fault and provide you with the appropriate remedy. If the goods have a major or minor fault, you have the right to recover the return costs in the form of compensation from the seller. If you have not paid return costs already and the goods are faulty, the seller should waive these costs."
http://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/shopping/refunds-and-returns/online-purchases
What isn't clear, however, is whether the buyer is meant to be compensated for the cost to send the item to them in the first place. I understand it's considered "the right thing" to do, but if you look at it from the perspective that buyer purchases goods, pays extra for the service of postage, the goods might be faulty but the postage service was still provided. The policy to refund full, original payment may just be the trade-off.
