The Right To Return: Why Furniture Retail Is Becoming A Legal Obstacle Course
3rd March 2026
If you’ve worked in furniture retail for more than five minutes, you’ve heard at least one return request that made you question the future of civilisation. “The dining table feels too… dominant for my dining room” or “my pets do not like my new mattress and have stopped sleeping in my bed.”
Returns have always been a cost of doing business, but in the last year, the ground has shifted. The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (“DMCCA”) is tightening expectations around consumer rights and the furniture sector is feeling the tremors.
Let’s unpack what’s changing, what’s not, and how retailers can protect themselves without alienating consumers.
The Legal Starting Point: What Consumers Are Entitled To
Before looking at what has changed, let’s refresh our understanding of the existing statutory rights that govern consumer returns. These come primarily from the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“CRA”) and the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (“CCRs”).
Under these laws:
consumers have a 14‑day cancellation right for most distance and off‑premises purchases;
custom‑made or personalised goods are exempt from this cancellation right;
consumers may handle goods only to the extent necessary to inspect them; if they go beyond this, retailers may make deductions for diminished value;
goods must be of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose and as described -if not, consumers may be entitled to repair, replacement or refund.
These rights apply regardless of a retailer’s internal policy. DMCCA has not re-written these rules, but it has significantly increased the consequences of getting them wrong.
Why Furniture Returns Are So Complicated
Furniture is not a pair of trainers. It’s bulky, expensive to move, often made‑to‑order, and nearly impossible to resell at full value once it’s been unwrapped, sat on, or used as a temporary climbing frame by someone’s toddler.
The law recognises this - but consumers often do not. How are these differences best explained to consumers?
Bulky and expensive logistics
Returning a sofa is not the same as returning a pair of shoes. This is why CCRs allow retailers to require consumers to bear the cost of returning goods, provided this is clearly communicated before purchase. Many disputes arise because consumers assume returns are free, even when the law does not require this.
Made‑to‑order and customised items
Many furniture items fall within the CCR exemption for custom‑made goods. A sofa upholstered in a customer‑selected fabric or a dining table built to bespoke dimensions is not cancellable simply because the customer changes their mind. Retailers often struggle to enforce this exemption when customers insist that “customised” means only minor adjustments. Legally, if any change is made to the item to the consumer’s specifications, it distinguishes it from the regular unchanged item designed to be universally appealing to all consumers which may hinder its re-sale.
Diminished value and “reasonable inspection”
CCRs permit deductions where goods have been used beyond what is necessary to inspect them. In the furniture sector, this is particularly relevant. A mattress slept on for several nights, a sofa with pet hair embedded in the fabric, or a wardrobe assembled and dismantled all fall squarely within “use” rather than “inspection”. Retailers are entitled to reduce refunds accordingly - but customers often dispute the extent of the deduction.
Resale challenges
Even minimal use can dramatically reduce resale value. A dining table with surface scratches or a bed frame with assembly marks may still be functional, but it cannot be sold as new.
The law requires deductions to be proportionate, evidence‑based and linked to actual loss, not arbitrary fees.
Courts and regulators expect retailers to justify deductions with photographs, condition reports and resale data.
Industry practice typically sees deductions ranging from 10–70%, depending on the item and extent of use, but these are not legal standards. They are simply common benchmarks.
The defensible approach is always the same: notify consumers of your right to deduct early in the consumer journey and certainly before the purchase. Upon return, demonstrate the condition, demonstrate the resale impact and explain the calculation as clearly as possible.
What DMCCA Changes
While DMCCA does not alter the underlying consumer rights, it strengthens enforcement and introduces new penalties for non‑compliance. Three areas are particularly important for furniture retailers:
Misleading or unclear return policies
If a retailer’s returns policy is vague, contradictory, too legalistic, hard to “digest” or hidden away, this may constitute a misleading omission or misleading action under the DMCCA’s expanded unfair commercial practices regime. The Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) can now penalise offenders directly without taking the case to court.
Failure to provide mandatory pre‑contract information
While CCRs require retailers to give consumers specific information before the contract is concluded, including cancellation rights, return costs and any exemptions, DMCCA makes failure to provide this information an offence which may result in:
extended cancellation rights;
fines; and
orders to compensate affected consumers.
Unfair commercial practices
DMCCA strengthens the prohibition on practices that distort consumer decision making. In the context of returns, this includes:
discouraging legitimate returns;
imposing unreasonable procedural barriers;
using confusing or overly legalistic language;
failing to honour statutory rights; and
inconsistent or arbitrary decision‑making.
Penalties can reach up to 10% of the business’s global turnover - a level designed by the lawmakers to ensure board-level attention to consumer law compliance and swift deterrence “with teeth”.
The Rise Of “Creative” Return Requests
Retailers are reporting an increase in sophisticated but questionable claims, such as asserting that a sofa “causes back discomfort” after three months of use or “the mattress’s firmness feeling different after extended use”, when the product has clearly been slept on for the duration of the 90-day guarantee.
These claims are not automatically valid, but the DMCCA requires retailers to handle them fairly, transparently and consistently, documenting decisions and avoiding any suggestion of obstructing legitimate rights.
How Furniture Businesses Can Protect Themselves
Strengthen pre‑contractual information (in plain English)
“Pre‑contractual information” simply means everything a customer sees or is told about a product before buying, such as details on product pages, in‑store displays, sales conversations, checkout screens, terms and conditions links, finance information and answers from customer service.
Under the CCRs, pre-contractual information includes:
whether the item is custom‑made and therefore non‑cancellable;
the 14‑day cancellation right (if applicable);
who pays return costs;
what counts as reasonable inspection; and
when deductions may be made for diminished value.
This information must be clear, prominent and provided before checkout. If it is missing or unclear, the consumer may gain extended rights, and the retailer may face DMCCA penalties.
Photograph goods before dispatch
A simple but powerful tool for resolving disputes about damage or condition.
Use plain English
Policies should be accessible, not intimidating. The DMCCA treats confusing language as a potential unfair practice.
Train staff thoroughly
Teams should understand:
when returns must be accepted;
when they can be refused; and
how to explain decisions calmly and consistently.
Keep records
Documenting decisions is essential. If a return is refused or a deduction applied, record the rationale and evidence.
The Bottom Line
The right to return remains a cornerstone of consumer protection - but the cost of managing it is rising.
DMCCA has transformed unclear policies and inconsistent practices from operational headaches into potential regulatory liabilities.
For furniture retailers, the path forward is clear: invest in compliance, consistent practices and training. A well‑designed returns process not only protects against legal risk – it reduces disputes and strengthens customer relationships.
This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you would like legal advice concerning your business’s returns policy and practices, contact Natalia at natalia@interiordesignlawyer.co.uk.