Asos customers banned for being ‘serial returners' say it is ‘deeply concerning'
Shoppers using the online retailer Asos have complained about having their accounts closed and being accused of breaching a 'fair use' policy on returns.
Asos updated its terms and conditions last September, introducing charges for shoppers who frequently returned large numbers of goods in attempts to crack down on 'serial returners'.
In the past few days some customers have reported receiving emails saying their accounts would be deactivated.
One shopper, Tskenya-Sarah Frazer, said she had been contacted to say her account had been closed because she had made too many returns.
'As a tall, plus-sized, neurodivergent customer I find Asos's decision to deactivate accounts without warning deeply concerning,' she said.
'For people like me, online shopping isn't just a preference, it's a necessity. The high street often doesn't cater to our body types or sensory needs, and the physical act of shopping can be overwhelming … We rely on online retailers to try clothes in the safety and comfort of our own homes.'
Frazer, whose video sharing her experience has had 150,000 views on TikTok, said one of the reasons for the returns was inconsistent sizing.
'To now be penalised for returning items that don't fit after being forced to order multiple sizes due to inconsistent sizing is not only unfair, it's discriminatory,' she said. 'There was no explanation, no transparency, and no chance to appeal.'
On X (formerly Twitter) another user posted a picture of two bodysuits which were both labelled as medium but appeared to be different sizes.
I'm a size 8-10. I mostly wear a size S. The bodysuit on the left is M (too small). The bodysuit on the right is also M (too big). But ASOS are closing my account because I return things 😂 @ASOS_news pic.twitter.com/2CLGY2YtSJ
They said: 'I'm a size eight to 10. I mostly wear a size small. The bodysuit on the left is a medium (too small). The body suit on the right is also medium (too big). But Asos are closing my account because I return things.'
Sign up to Business Today
Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning
after newsletter promotion
Asos said: 'We recently closed the accounts of a small group of customers whose shopping activity has consistently fallen outside our fair use policy. This helps us maintain our commitment to offering free returns to all customers across all core markets.'
Gary Rycroft, a consumer lawyer at Joseph A Jones & Co solicitors, said it was lawful for a business to decide it did not wish to conduct business with a certain group of customers, as long as the decision was based on commercial data and not discriminatory.
'Asos have imposed a threshold on returns and that's fine for them to change their terms and conditions and as long as other statutory protections for consumers are not breached,' he said.
Such a change in terms and conditions should not affect the right of consumers to return goods that are faulty or not as described, he added.Not matching a retailer's published measurements for particular sizes could be said to be 'not as described'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
41 minutes ago
- The Sun
Mercedes ramp up sensational Max Verstappen swoop despite bad blood with F1 rival George Russell
MERCEDES are ramping up their pursuit to sign Max Verstappen to form a dream team with George Russell. Toto Wolff confirmed today that there had been behind closed doors talks with the four-time world champion and that Mercedes were 'exploring' their future plans. 5 5 Russell, who is out of contract next year, also said that his team have been talking to Verstappen about signing a deal for 2026. The Brit, 27, also suggested on Thursday that his contract talks with Wolff had been delayed by the ongoing talks with Verstappen. Wolff said: "There is no delay in George's contract negotiations because it's pretty clear, since a long time, what our timings were and are. "We have known each other for such a long time, so there is no such thing as a delay. "As team principal of the best car brand in the world, it's clear you explore what a four-time world champion will do in the future, "That could be long into the future. That has no effect on us putting a signature on George's contract." Four-time world champion Verstappen has a contract with Red Bull until 2028 which is said to have a break clause which could be triggered to prompt an exit. 'That's not how it is and how it works. And I come back to my previous question. 'I want to just have the conversations behind closed doors not in town halls. And we have two drivers that have been in our programme since a long time. 'Drivers that I'm perfectly happy to have. Drivers that will do great in the future of the team. So it's a bit of a different situation.' Wolff suggested that Russell had been weighing up his options outside of Mercedes as well. The legendary Austrian boss added: 'We are going into territory that I don't want to discuss out here, but people talk, people explore. 'The most important thing is that in our organisation, we are transparent. But it doesn't change a millimetre of my opinion of George, his abilities or anything else. 'I like what George says and I'm always supportive of the driver. There is no such thing as saying things I wouldn't want him to say. 'We are very transparent in the team of what we do, what we plan. 'We've been like that since I was being put in charge of that. So that's not the issue. At the moment clearly, you need to explore what's happening in the future.' Eyebrows have been raised over whether Verstappen and Russell could fit in a team together with the duo having a history of bad blood. 5 The most recent incident involved Verstappen ramming into the British driver at the Spanish Grand Prix three-weeks ago. When asked if the pair could drive together at Mercedes, Wolff added: 'I can imagine every line-up. 'Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton fighting for a world championship, so everything else afterwards is easy. 'There's pros and cons of having two drivers fighting each other hard. We've seen examples where that functioned and other examples where it didn't. 'When it comes to the contract situation, you know, our sport is pressure, constant pressure, whether you're in the car, outside of the car, you just need to cope with that. 'George knows that, like any other driver.' Earlier this year Wolff said zero negotiations had been held with Verstappen and that they were not 'flirting' with the prospect of signing him. He said: 'There is no flirt (with Verstappen) in that sense. You can flirt or you have conversations. 'It is in the nature of the sport that you talk about people, whether they're in the car or in the factory or in the racetrack. 'Most important thing is to stay true to your values. And for me, that is being integral and humble about the situation, respectful of the people. 'That's what we are trying to do in the team. I've been in situations like this before. Some of the conversations are more difficult than others.' Russell himself made it clear he was aware of Mercedes' interest in Verstappen, hinting that it could be delaying his contract renewal due at the end of the season. The Brit, 27, told Sky: "It's only normal that conversations with the likes of Verstappen are ongoing. "But from my side, if I'm performing as I'm doing, what have I got to be concerned about? There are two seats in every Formula 1 team. Toto has made it clear to me that how I'm performing is as good as anybody. "There is only one driver that you can debate in terms of performance. These are his words and not my words, and that is why I have no concern about my future. "But there are two seats to every team and I guess he needs to think who are those two drivers."
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Tax hikes Reeves could impose after the £3bn benefits U-turn
Households are on alert for further potential tax hikes in autumn after Keir Starmer handed major concessions to rebels in a bid to salvage flagship legislation on health and disability benefits. On Friday, the government confirmed a U-turn on its cuts to disability benefits in order to avert a rebellion by more than 120 Labour backbenchers. The reversal leaves a £3billion hole in Chancellor Rachel Reeves ' financial plans, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Meanwhile, the Resolution Foundation warned that tax rises may be needed for her to now meet her fiscal rules. The initial benefit reforms would have saved the government £5.5billion by the end of the Parliament. The planned cut to personal independence payments eligibility was set to raise the bulk of this saving, £4.5billion. However, according to the IFS, the revised package of reforms will save only £2.5billion, so will cost the government £3billion relative to their previous plans. Under the change in tack, people who currently receive personal independence payments (PIP), or the health element of universal credit, will continue to do so. Instead, planned cuts will now only hit future claimants. Liz Kendall, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, said: 'We have listened to people, we are in a good place now'. Most economists and think tanks think tax rises in the Autumn Budget 2025 are now inevitable. Tom Waters, an associate director at IFS, said: 'These changes more than halve the saving of the package of reforms as a whole, making the Chancellor's already difficult Budget balancing act that much harder. 'The decision is to protect existing health-related benefit claimants from the reforms, thereby making the savings entirely from new claimants to these benefits. 'This will create big differences – thousands of pounds a year, for many years in some cases – between similar people with similar health conditions who happen to have applied at a slightly different time.' Samuel Mather-Holgate, an independent financial adviser at Mather and Murray Financial told Newspage: 'With Starmer doing more U-turns than someone doing the bleep test, taxes are going up. 'There's no way that other departments can mitigate these changes to their budget.' Which taxes could be increased? Reeves has ruled out taxes on the working people, including income tax , National Insurance for employees, VAT and corporation tax. Other taxes will be in her sights. Capital gains tax Higher capital gains tax could be one option for Reeves. Capital gains tax is levied on profits from assets ranging from shares to second homes, buy-to-let properties and personal possessions. The rates for stocks and shares gains were hiked in the 2024 Autumn Budget to 18 per cent for basic rate taxpayers and to 24 per cent for those paying higher rates of tax. The profits from assets like sharers tend to come from people taking a risk, whether an entrepreneurial one or an investment one, making capital gains tax a likely target for hikes. Inheritance tax Reeves could have inheritance tax in her sights again It is a growing money-spinner for the government, with the number of households falling in scope for it rising. In the 2024 Autumn Budget, Reeves capped the availability of Business Relief and Agricultural Relief, and halved the relief available on Alternative Investment Market shares. Reeves also unveiled plans to bring pensions into the scope of inheritance tax from 2027. Further tweaks and amendments could happen. Pensions Pensions are a major source of wealth for many people, making them a prime target for Reeves. Last year, while Reeves dragged unused pension assets into the inheritance tax net from April 2027, she did not go as far as some experts feared. That is not to say that she will not meddle with pensions later this year. HMRC recently announced a consultation on salary sacrifice - when people forgo a pay rise or bonus and add to their pension instead, which helps avoid higher marginal tax rates. It has prompted speculation that Reeves could introduce a cap on the amount of salary sacrifice people can use. There is also speculation about the reintroduction of the pensions lifetime allowance. The Chancellor could also look at reforming income tax relief on pension contributions. Tax thresholds freeze The freeze on certain tax thresholds since 2021 has created a huge stealth tax raid in recent years. The frozen basic rate threshold, currently £12,570, drags more people into paying income tax and means that the real value - adjusted for inflation - of the tax-free allowance has been diminished. Stalling the higher rate threshold at £50,270 has shifted more people and a greater slice of earnings into the 40 per cent bracket. John Woolfitt, a director at Atlantic Capital Markets, told Newspage: 'A "stealth tax" manoeuvre will be high on the cards. 'Income tax allowance and the higher-rate threshold currently rise with inflation . Freezing or delaying future increases effectively raises income tax, without officially having to announce a hike.' He added: 'Targeting high earners and wealth transfers could also be seen and a populist move as the government tries to sure up support from the broader electorate.' According to the Resolution Foundation, extending the freeze in personal tax threshold by one year will save £4billion a year, 'though further consolidation is likely to be needed in the Budget this Autumn.' Property Businesses Higher employer national insurance contributions are already hammering businesses across Britain. However, under growing pressure to boost the Treasury's coffers, Reeves could set her signs on corporation taxes, VAT exemptions or other duties. 'This would really impact the already fragile business confidence in the UK', Woolfitt said. Wealth tax Some campaigners believe Reeves should impose a wealth tax to boost the tax-take and quash inequality. Tax Justice UK is calling on more taxes for the super-rich to be introduced by the current Government. It wants to see a 2 per cent wealth tax on assets over £10million, which it says will raise up to £24 billion a year. It also wants to apply national insurance to investment income, close inheritance tax and non-dom loopholes, and introduce a 4 per cent tax on share buybacks. It remains unclear whether a wealth tax is on Reeves' agenda and how it would work in practice. An unprecedented 16,500 wealthy Britons are predicted to leave this year amid higher taxes and a gloomy economic outlook.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Welfare concessions 'common sense', says PM - as he defends U-turn
Sir Keir Starmer said changes to his welfare bill "strike the right balance" after making concessions to his backbench MPs. The prime minister described the U-turn as "common sense" and said it means "we can now get on with the job". Sir Keir faced a significant rebellion over plans to cut sickness and disability benefits as part of a package he said would shave £5bn off the welfare bill and get more people into work. Speaking to reporters on Friday, he stood by his position that the welfare system needs reform as "it doesn't work, and it traps people". He added: "We need to get it right. That's why we've been talking to colleagues and having a constructive discussion. "We've now arrived at a package that delivers on the principles with some adjustments, and that's the right reform, and I'm really pleased now that we're able to take this forward. "For me, getting that package adjusted in that way is the right thing to do, it means it's the right balance, it's common sense that we can now get on with it." The concessions include exempting existing Personal Independence Payment claimants (PIP) from the stricter new criteria, while the universal credit health top-up will only be cut and frozen for new applications. 5:45 More money will also be front-loaded into helping people find jobs, though it is not clear how much beyond the £1bn already announced. The changes came after 127 Labour MPs signed an amendment calling for the cuts to be delayed and consulted on with disabled people. Rebels feared the reforms wouldn't actually help people find work while pushing thousands of disabled people and children into poverty, as per the government's own impact assessment. The discontent threatened to derail the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill when it comes before the Commons for a vote on Tuesday, on the week that marks a year of Starmer in government. Asked what he would do about a "hole" in the public finances that the changes are said to leave, Sir Keir said the funding will be set out in the autumn budget "in the usual way". The concessions on PIP alone will protect an estimated 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were set to lose out following reassessment. Economists at the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Resolution Foundation have both suggested that the changes could reduce savings intended in the original package by up to £3bn. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is also under pressure to find money to pay for the U-turn on cuts to winter fuel, which followed a drubbing at the local elections in May. Asked about the series of U-turns, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall earlier said: "Sometimes there's strength in listening. "I really believe that to be the case, that you end up in the right position when you talk to all of those with knowledge and experience and actually, if you want decisions to be the right ones and to last for generations to come, I believe that's how you make the right changes." However, she would not guarantee the bill will pass next week. Some 83 Labour MPs would need to rebel for the government to be defeated. 0:43 Last night Dame Meg Hillier, one of the leading rebel voices, hailed the concessions as "massive changes" to protect vulnerable people and involve disabled people in the design of future reforms. However, not all the rebels have been satisfied with the changes, with several suggesting they would create a "two-tier system". Sky News is aware of at least 20 MPs who currently intend to still vote against. Many others are undecided. The concessions came after Downing Street publicly stuck to its guns while engaging in a frantic ring-around to get rebels onside, which further angered MPs. Many have called for a reset in relations with Downing Street, as the fallout from the rebellion threatens to cause lasting damage. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch criticised the U-turn, saying the government's failure to make "minor savings" on welfare showed they were unable to deal with major issues.
