I responded to a ‘pop-up’ offer on the internet for a sampleof face cream. I received pots with no contact information. After the 4th pot I received a despatch note, still with no information relating to derails of charges. The company charged £95.95 per pot, insisted I had agreed to contractual details that I had not received. On contacting them they told me to return one pot when I would received a refund minus a £20 stocking fee. From the bank, I spoke to the RVTL customer services, who refused to consider my statement that I had not agreed to the contractual details they were trying to apply retrospectively. Later, by email, I pointed out details on the small print of the box and the pot that appear to make exaggerated claims for the cream. For example, on the box it states that the cream ‘prevents damage caused by solar rays’. On the jar, however, is this instruction: ‘if used during the day, SPF must be applied’. If the cream contains no/insufficient sun protection factor, which ingredient(s) enable the cream to preent damage caused by solar rays, and ‘protect against and (may) repair UV damage like discolouration and fine lines’.? Notably, this is not marketed as a night cream; the box advises ‘daily application, morning and evening’. I emailed RVTL Customer Services with my questions and concerns. They ignored my questions and repeated their previous claims. Could it be argued that the cream is ‘not fit for purpose’, or ‘not as described’? I have reported the matter to Trading Standards and have copied the complaint made on websites for their information. I hope others take some sort of action and share it with the rest of us.
This review has been syndicated from Holy Smoke !
To read the full review, go to –