The Smell of Bullshit, part 28: Lush and the 10% off vouchers again

As you can see from this post, a little while ago Lush announced that they will no longer accept their 10% off vouchers after the end of October this year, even though the vouchers do not have an expiry date on them. Numerous customers have complained about this on the Lush forum, pointing out that the vouchers were offered as an inducement to buy Lush gift boxes and, as already stated, the vouchers don’t have expiry dates on them. Some of the customers have taken advice from CAB who have confirmed that as the vouchers have no expiry date and no conditions printed on them (other than that they are not accepted during December), it would be unlawful for Lush to refuse to accept them.

Let’s have a look at what The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1992 says (and thanks to selfheal on the Lush forum for doing the work on finding this!) In the indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair, Schedule 2 says

(g)enabling the seller or supplier to terminate a contract of indeterminate duration without reasonable notice except where there are serious grounds for doing so;

Paragraph (g) is without hindrance to terms by which a supplier of financial services reserves the right to terminate unilaterally a contract of indeterminate duration without notice where there is a valid reason, provided that the supplier is required to inform the other contracting party or parties thereof immediately.

(j)enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract;

(k)enabling the seller or supplier to alter unilaterally without a valid reason any characteristics of the product or service to be provided;


and this is what applies in these circumstances. Lush made no statement reserving their rights to change the terms and conditions relating to the vouchers, either in the shops, on the website, in the Lush Times or on the vouchers themselves. And even if they had made such a statement, they do not have reasonable grounds to stop accepting the vouchers – “we don’t want to accept them any more” isn’t reasonable grounds, and they haven’t given reasonable notice.

Unlike many companies, Lush charge more for a gift box of products than it would cost to buy the products separately and they excused this by saying “yes, but you get a 10% voucher in every gift box.” They tried to say that this made the gift boxes worth buying because the money customers save when they redeem the vouchers more than makes up for the cost of the gift box. If the price of the gift box is more than the cost of the individual products, then customers are paying for the packaging and the voucher, and the voucher becomes part of the contract of the sale.

Lush are unlawfully unilaterally changing the terms of the contract (and the new terms are unlawful and unfair), and Lush have not notiified – would not be able to notify – every customer with whom they have such a contract.

Lush are refusing to accept this. Their latest statement appeared on the forum today, from dplusw, and it is

Hi folks,
We’ve been discussing this matter internally at length and we’re really keen to clarify the situation. We do not believe that we are above the law – we need to be legally compliant at all times and we have made a just commercial decision to revoke the 10% discount vouchers as of 1st Nov 2013. If there are any issues after that date, please give us a call directly to discuss further, as we’re here to help. 01202 641006

Nowhere in that statement does it say “we have taken legal advice.” The statement says “we talked about it ourselves.” (I would remind you hear that Mark Constantine has said openly on the forum several times that he doesn’t see why Lush should have to abide by employment law – perhaps he feels the same about consumer law). The statement says it’s a commercial decision – it doesn’t say it’s a lawful decision. Lush have ignored tweets about it and they have ignored the posts from people who have taken legal advice about it.

I don’t have any vouchers because I stopped buying Lush gift vouchers years ago because the quality was at best inconsistent and more often than not appalling. But if you do, and you want to use them after 31/10, do not be put off by what Lush are telling you. Get advice from CAB and/or Trading Standards and if Lush refuse to accept the voucher, consider a small claims court action for the cost of the gift you purchased, the 10% discount you are owed, and your court costs. If every single person around the country with a voucher did a small claims court action, Lush would have to respond to every one, would lose every one, and would have to stop behaving unlawfully with regards to the vouchers. Plus, they’d have to respond to each and every court where an action was lodged – whether that was in Truro or Carlisle or Orkney. Small claims court actions are relatively easy to start – I’ve done one myself in the past – and I think you can do most of the paperwork online now. Think about it. Lush are happy to rip their customers off by unlawfully refusing to accept the vouchers – why should they get away with it? Go to court, stand up for your legal rights.


6 thoughts on “The Smell of Bullshit, part 28: Lush and the 10% off vouchers again

  1. Oh Mark, you’ll be fizzing about all this, won’t you? You are so horribly in the wrong. It would be nice if you would learn some lessons for a change. And stop being a dick.

    Don’t I sound awful?

    Oh no, wait a minute. I’m the nice guy and you’re the twat.

    Yours, in anticipation of a thrilling media frenzy,

    L’homme botanique

  2. No doubt they have a mate who has all the box sets for Prime Suspect and therefore knows a bit about the legal system so they asked them. Why pay a trained expert when you can get free stuff from a mate or second cousin.

  3. I have a feeling that the people running Lush aren’t very bright. They’re not cosmetic scientists (otherwise we wouldn’t have mouldy product/product that caused thrush/burning skin/rashes/perfume that smells like pig slurry from a pig that’s been on a curry/beer binge, mixed with olive brine mixed with the urine of a dehydrated lion), they’re not good retailers or sound business operators (because, well, would they be doing something as disastrous as this and myriad other things if they were?), and they (in my opinion) don’t appear to be lawful or exemplary employers either, according to accounts submitted both here and all over the internet (allegedly etc etc). It’s almost fitting that they are called ‘Lush’, isn’t it? I give you Google definitions:

    adjective. luxuriant – rank – succulent – rich – exuberant – juicy
    noun. drunkard – boozer – liquor
    verb. drink

    Well the products present themselves as ‘luxuriant’ (some may think they’re ‘rank’ via the other definition); we certainly know the founders are rich – Paul Smith suits and swimming pools, anyone?; drunkard – well I make no suggestion that anyone in Lush is anything other than a moderate drinker (because I have no evidence to the contrary) but some of the stunts they pull certainly seem to be the actions of someone not quite ‘compos mentis’. There has to be some reason for the SHEER STUPIDITY because as an ex-customer looking at this whole debacle from a safe distance, the entire UK business looks like a slow-motion collapse. It’s heading for destruction.

    Well, let them self destruct. They don’t deserve the custom they get when they treat their customers with such contempt.

  4. A few years ago we added up the price of the components of a Lush Legends (the 100 quid holy grail of Lush gift boxes) and it meant that you actually paid 16.00 on top just for the box! That was kind of ok if that’s what you really really wanted. And you got a 10% voucher in the box so that if you spent 160 quid on other Lush stuff you could sort of justify that extra 16.00 on a bit of ribbon and a dented box that came from China (on a boat – let’s not use use any carbon) and costs about 25p.

    Even the tiny Christmas gifts that contain 2 products costs at least an extra 2.00 each and still they leak and go manky.

    Lush justify charging for gift wrapping by saying that it costs them to buy the boxes from ethical sources, pack them by hand, wrap them, label them and ship them out to stores. Well the small and medium gift boxes are not wrapped by hand, a machine does it. I’ve seen the machine, they have several. Another bit of false advertising on Lush’s part.

    If they are so keen for customers to not buy gift boxes because of the damage that the extra packaging does to the planet then why make them in the first place? Oh yes, because they make millions of pounds from them. Well millions + 10% anyway.

  5. Pingback: The Smell of Bullshit, part 35: more voucher based fuddery | Mitherings from Morningside

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s