Posts Tagged ‘legality’

Despite little success last time I complainted to Sainsbury’s, I decided it was worth one more go when I had another complaint.

To whom it may concern:

Earlier today, I visited your branch located on The Headrow in Leeds.

Upon arriving at the tills and scanning my items I was asked to produce identification to complete my purchase. I have recently turned 25 and therefore was expecting not to be flagged by your Check 25 policy, given I have now been able to legally purchase alcohol for 8 years and nice as it is to think, there is no way I look 9 years younger than I actually am.

More to the point, however, is the fact that I was attempting to purchase non-alcoholic wine. It therefore baffles and frustrates me that I would have to produce identification to prove I am over the age of 18, for a product which is alcohol free.

I asked the assistant who approved the item for me why such a product would be classified as restricted, but she said she didn’t know.

I believe such a restriction should be removed from such items, to avoid further aggregation for your customers.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Best wishes,
Chris Worfolk

Luckily, this one was slightly more fruitful. Well, I say that, this time they said that it was indeed a problem and generally a bit silly, but there wasn’t exactly a promise to do much about it.

I contacted the store and spoke with Lisa, the Customer Service Manager, who advised the checkout automatically prompts colleagues to ask for identification when items are scanned. Lisa apologises if this has inconvenienced you and advised she will have your feedback logged for future reference.

We appreciate you taking the time to make us aware of this issue and look forward to seeing you in store again soon.

Still, better than nothing. And way better than Co-op who don’t even respond to your complaints.

A lot of people are using the internet to speak out against the companies that they object to. From the global protest sites such as www.stopesso.com to the small one man operations, protest sites are springing up all over the net. But can it be done without attracting a ball of law suites?

Starting these websites can be a problem on two fronts. The first problem is that if you start printing lies about the company they wouldn’t be happy about you bad mouthing them. The second is that if you register a domain such as www.xyzsucks.com are you breaking the trademark of xyz?

The first problem is easily to solve – don’t say anything unless you can prove it. First of all making up lies isn’t going to help the site as it will discredit it if it is discovered to be a lie and secondly it’s not really fair on the company. Which is why the can sue you if you start publishing lies. Stick to the truth of why you don’t like them though and they pretty much cannot touch you.

As for the second problem there is always the solution of not using the companies name in the website name but then how will people know the site is about that company? The good news is this is not a criminal act so even if the company does get angry, police are unlikely to come round knocking on your doors.

As huumor pointed out on one of my favourite web developer forums:

“if you hate McDonald’s and make a “hate” site called www.McDonaldsSucks.com – you are probably more likely going to be #”¤#&”¤-ed by McDonalds lawyers than if you would use www.CrapDonalds.com – with this domain name you’re not using the copyrighted McDonald’s in it…”

The problem is going to come from ICANN’s decisionon whether you can keep the domain or not. Some sites including www.walmartcanadasucks.com have been allowed to keep the names whereas a recent Reg Vardy protest site had its domain handed over to the company.

There is no clear rule on this one although running a search on The Register throws up some interesting results.