Build a Clear Faulty-Goods Returns Workflow

A practical decision workflow helps UK ecommerce teams separate faulty-goods remedies from ordinary change-of-mind returns and record each outcome consistently.

Separate the reason before choosing the route

A customer saying that an item is unsuitable, unwanted or faulty may appear to be starting the same returns process, but the operational and legal questions are different. A change-of-mind cancellation, a voluntary returns promise and a claim that goods do not conform to the contract should not be collapsed into one generic reason code. If they are, staff may apply the wrong deadline, ask the customer to pay an inappropriate return cost or offer a remedy that does not match the case.

Section 19 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 identifies the remedies available where goods do not conform to the contract, including the short-term right to reject, repair or replacement, and a price reduction or final right to reject. It also contains specific provisions about when goods that fail within six months are taken not to have conformed on delivery, subject to stated exceptions. A returns portal should capture the facts needed for a trained decision, rather than announcing an outcome from the age of the order alone.

Use an initial triage record containing the order, product, delivery date, customer's description of the problem, when it appeared, the requested outcome and any relevant installation event. Keep this factual and allow a customer to describe a problem without choosing a legal category. Route unclear or unusual cases for review. This is a practical control, not legal advice, and retailers should obtain appropriate advice on their products, contracts and individual disputes.

Record the short-term rejection clock accurately

Section 22 normally sets the time limit for the short-term right to reject at 30 days, beginning with the first day after ownership or possession has transferred, the goods have been delivered, and any trader action required to enable use has been completed and notified. Goods reasonably expected to perish sooner are treated differently. That makes a simple calculation from the order date unreliable, particularly where delivery, installation and notification happened on different days.

The same section says that the period stops running while the consumer waits after requesting or agreeing to a repair or replacement. If the goods supplied in response still do not conform, the Act provides a further timing rule. Store the request date, the selected remedy and the day the customer receives the repaired or replacement goods. Do not overwrite the original delivery event when a replacement is dispatched, because both events may be needed to understand the sequence.

Section 20 explains how a right to reject is exercised and the duties that follow. It says the consumer's indication must be clear enough for the trader to understand, but it may be something the consumer says or does. Preserve the customer's communication and the time received, then record when entitlement was agreed. The section requires a refund without undue delay and within 14 days beginning with that agreement, using the same payment means unless the consumer expressly agrees otherwise, with no refund fee.

Control repair and replacement as tracked outcomes

Where repair or replacement is the applicable route, section 23 requires the trader to provide it within a reasonable time, without significant inconvenience to the consumer, and to bear necessary costs including labour, materials and postage. It also deals with cases where one remedy is impossible or disproportionate compared with the other. A support script should therefore avoid promising that every product will always be repaired, or that replacement is automatically the only available option.

Create a remedy record rather than treating the returned parcel as the complete case. Include the remedy requested, the decision, reasons for any alternative, collection or postage arrangement, service target, supplier or repair reference, completion date and delivery evidence. The nature of the goods and the purpose for which they were acquired are relevant to reasonable time and significant inconvenience under section 23, so a single internal turnaround target should not be presented as resolving every case.

Keep the customer informed when dates or arrangements change, and make exceptions visible before they become abandoned tickets. A warehouse scan can confirm that goods arrived, but it cannot show that a repair was completed, a replacement reached the customer or the remedy avoided significant inconvenience. Link warehouse, support and fulfilment events through one case reference, with a named owner responsible for progressing the outcome rather than merely closing the return authorisation.

Escalate failed remedies without losing the history

Section 24 sets out when a consumer may move to a price reduction or the final right to reject. The situations include goods that still do not conform after one repair or replacement, cases where neither remedy can be required because it is impossible or disproportionate, and cases where the trader has not provided the remedy within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience. The consumer may exercise a price reduction or final rejection where available, but not both.

Build an escalation flag from the actual remedy history. It should show what the customer requested or agreed to, what the trader supplied, when it was made available, whether the reported problem remains and whether deadlines or inconvenience require review. Avoid resetting the case to a fresh generic return after a failed repair. That erases the sequence on which the next decision depends and can force the customer to repeat evidence already held by the retailer.

If final rejection is accepted, section 24 contains detailed rules about possible deductions for use, including protections during the first six months and specific treatment for motor vehicles. Do not convert those provisions into a blanket depreciation percentage. Send any proposed deduction to an authorised reviewer with the product type, dates, usage evidence and applicable statutory basis recorded. Finish each case with the remedy, refund or reduction, return-cost outcome, stock disposition and customer notification linked together, then sample closed cases for inconsistent routing or unexplained delays.

Practical next steps