RetailADR

Really poor service and wished I had listened to the many negative reviews already posted. Arbitrator (ab) was particularly poor (in my opinion), said i had used the item for over 12 months when I had provided numerous email evidence that showed i had returned the item to the supplier after 10 month's (did they even take the time to review the case notes?). Stated I provided no evidence of poor quality (I had sent the item back to the supplier to witness how bad the quality was). I would never use this service again, totally one sided approach to sincere complaints.

Claim 12863Completely and utterly wasted months of my time! To be deceived and ignored. The adjudication succeeded my claim, but still enforced the resolution offered by SCS, which was the whole point for me using Retail ADR as I did not agree with SCS resolution and was disputing it!SCS failed to repair my sofa on 2 occasions and that is now an ongoing issue which becomes an untimely manner thus in breach of the consumer rights act. They dismissed that. SCS refused the refund which I would be entitled to under the consumer right act less wear and tear, once again Retail ADR also ignored that despite being written in the consumer right act.Retail ADR unprofessionally dismissed the physical and mental health affects of the ordeal and having to be at war with SCS, who have been utterly unprofessional. They failed to acknowledge any wrong doing of SCS despite succeeding my claim, so for what part they believe I win I do not know!Retail ADR clearly ignored the evidence I provided for loss of earnings at the fact I have had numerous people out to mysofa across numerous occasions and they want to continue with that! Because people can constantly afford to take time off work loose precious leave days! No, we can not but this was over looked. They refused any form of compensation for the utter service failures given by SCS!They only detailed their determination after SCS chased, that speaks volumes in itself that they followed SCS wishes! In my opinion under the anti - corruption act, believe there is corruption and bribery between the two companies and that is why consumers never win with ADR as companies can pay them off rather than the customer. My case is a clear demonstration of the corruption as they claimed to have agreed with my complaint yet only sided with SCS for the full resolution and literally have not settled my dispute at all.No point using them guys, you will just wait 3- 4 months for no outcome that resolves your dispute! They only live for the companies paying them and do not care about consumers, our rights or the detrimental effect this has on us! Unlike the ombudsman you do not even get the option to appeal the decision its basically shut up, put up and let the companies screw you over!Totally biased, totally unfair, totally unprofessional and beyond unacceptable! They themselves clearly need investigating to uphold a customer dispute yet side with the retailer still!

A complete waste of time, the case handler wouldn't understand the issue despite me explaining it in words of one syllable. I tried using the RetailADR complaints process in writing but they didn't write back, even after resending the paperwork by recorded delivery. Clearly this organisation is useless, Small Claims Court next stop.Strangely, after writing my original review, I got a reply and they are re-opening my case. We'll have to see what happens, either up to three stars or back down to one.Upon reappraisal a different case handler agreed with me completely and found in my favour, so up to three stars. Shame this couldn't have happened last year, might have been four or five.

If I could give them no stars then I would. Completely biased system with incompetent staff who completely fail to read and understand the information provided. Surprise surprise they ignore everything I say (backed up with evidence) and take everything the retailer says (with no evidence at all) as gospel. Also their system allows their adjudicators to ask questions of either party or request additional evidence but rather than actually do it, they simply decide in favour of the retailer citing lack of evidence provided". A complete stitch up. These companies pay the wages of Retail ADR so no surprise that they decide in their favour all of the time. Utter farce."

Slow response time, didn’t consider the abundance of evidence in favour of the consumer. Seek to apply a burden of proof of the consumer that is not in line with that which would apply on the courts. I doubt the independence of this service, it is a waste of time going to them and they set a dangerous precedent for retailers falling below the standard that should be required.I don’t understand how anyone could say that a badly installed dishwasher that leaked all over the electrics (which photos and engineer reports to confirm) causing the fuse to trip is not the case of the fuse tripping

The Retail ADR service gets provided by CDRL, I filed a complaint about ASOS because they permanently blocked my account for allegedly making too many returns.However throughout my customer lifetime I kept 33% of items from my orders, which I consider to be a perfectly reasonable purchase/return ratio for online distant shopping whereby items cannot be inspected first-hand prior to purchase.To my dismay, the adjudicator rejected my claim, upon reading the final determination, it seemed like the adjudicator was solely focused on reciting support for the respondent’s position whilst ignoring the merits of my case. The flaws in the respondent’s comments went unquestioned and the compelling evidence of my claim was neither tested let alone acknowledged.Also to make matters worse, the adjudicator refused to suggest any remedies, which left my dispute unresolved and feeling very one-sided. The result was of course unsurprising having seen the online reviews before making my complaint.

After six mo ths of messing about ADR retail have agreed with the retailer SCS which is ridiculous. I wasn't after money back from SCS or any compensation, I just wanted them to supply a sofa the same as we viewed in store and ordered. Are ADR retail financed by these retailers or something. Total waste of time and if your retailer referred you to make a complaint via ADR retail that's 100% because they side with the retailer and leave you the option of employing the services of your own solicitor if your not happy with the claim result. I wouldn't normally leave a review and when I read the reviews I bypassed them just thinking its disgruntled customers. Now I know it isn't and the one star (or zero) if that was an option are actually a true reflection of ADR retail and the impartial and/or independent" review they undertake. Total waste of time. The end result for me and a lesson learnt is to never purchase a sofa or any furniture/flooring or anything from SCS. Never again and that's the best advice I can give to anybody that reads this. I've only ever used DFS for sofas and never had an issue

I do not know whether I am the lucky one from all those who gave poor ratings to RetailADR but for me it worked quite well. I being a Russian citizen opened a dispute with on of the online retailers registered in UK. Not able to settle it directly with the retailer, I was directed to RetailADR as a proper organization to work on such cases. Procedure is truly all formal and official, you need to provide as much details and evidenced as you can. I even attached my case history summary with all explanations and calculations. The only thing that may be improved is timing. Case was opened in October 2019 and closed in February 2020 (4 months totally). However the person who made final determination thoroughly investigated all the evidences provided by both parties and made pure and clean conclusions based only on true facts. Finally I was entitled for the refund I was seeking for.

Everyone in these reviews are 100% right. Retail ADR are in the pockets of the companies they look at and even after showing pictures of mouldy food that made me ill from Poundland they found in Poundland's favour. So I will be going to the news/watchdog as I believe people will be interested to know about this and about people being treated unfairly.