Raft have had my money for 11 months Nearly a year ago I bought a chest of drawers from Raft furniture for £1700. I chose them because they match the cube bed and side tables I had also bought from Raft. I made the trip to the store to pay for the drawers because I wanted to see them in person to be sure I loved them rather than buying them online and not seeing them physically, since they were a high price item. While purchasing, I paid and gave them my address for delivery, which is in a basement flat as clearly stated in my address. Delivery was arranged and I stayed home from work to wait for it. When the delivery drivers arrived, they said they weren't able to complete delivery because it was too dangerous to carry down the 8 stairs to the entrance, and they left saying that someone would be in touch about another delivery service. I didn't hear from them. After a few weeks I assumed they weren't going to redeliver the item and I had family coming to stay and so I purchased a different set of drawers from a different retailer online, which was delivered next day, as I needed something quickly. There were no issues delivering the item. I then called Raft a few days later to ask for a refund for the undelivered drawers. Not only had they failed to deliver them, but they'd also failed to follow up with any kind of communication or refund. They said I wasn't allowed a refund because I had purchased the item in store (I would have been allowed a refund had I purchased online). I asked them to look at an exception because not only do I not have the item, nor have I had any correspondence from them about attempting to get it to me, but because they failed to deliver I had bought a different item and no longer needed their piece. They continued to refuse, saying that it was my responsibility to ensure that the item could be delivered safely and to flag if there were any considerations about access. They cited a note on their website which says, 'It is the customers responsibility to make sure ordered goods will fit along the delivery route and into the designated area. If the issue of access is not raised during the order process and the item does not fit into the delivery address, we are not obliged to take to item back'. I have fulfilled all of these obligations. The goods WOULD fit along the delivery route and into the designated area (they chose not to try) and I told the company when I bought the item that I lived in a basement flat down 8 steps. I have also had all of my other household furniture delivered via this entrance- the Raft cube bed, a large corner sofa (larger than the chest of drawers), a stone bath from Lusso that not only is as large as the chest of drawers but is also heavier at 150kg, a wardrobe, stone garden table and so on. The point being, two removals men who moved me into the flat managed to deliver items of similar size and weight and I've had deliveries from lusso, soho home and other retailers, also with no issues. So in terms of my obligation to make sure the item could be delivered, I had no reason to believe it couldn't based on my prior experience of deliveries to the flat. Therefore, I've fulfilled my obligation as per the note on their website. They have chosen not to deliver. Which I fully respect. But that's their choice and I shouldn't be penalised for their choice. I sought legal advice, who advised that I fulfilled my obligation per their term e.g. if their online clause said 'if our delivery drivers deem it unsafe to deliver to your property you will not be eligible for a refund' and I agreed to that, I wouldn't be able to get my money back. But that's not what it says, it says it's my responsibility to ensure orders can fit along the route, which they can, and into the designated area, which they can. The term also ends with "we are not obliged to take them back". However the delivery company did take the furniture back. Again, their choice. But they are withholding my money, which they have now had for nearly a year, and they failed to deliver any goods. The CRA 2015 updated the unfair contract terms and a term in a consumer contract is unfair if contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer. The clause here would probably be regarded as unfair in court. Fairness would be the retailer just charging for a failed delivery and restocking and refunding. I also contacted my bank to help with a S75/CB months ago and the bank say that Raft are evading their communication so there is not outcome there. I'm thoroughly disappointed that this seemingly reputable company have kept my money for so long, stalled correspondence, had a lack of any kind of customer service or understanding and are hiding behind a clause that doesn't hold any substance legally. I'm at a loss as to what to do. read more