‘I’ve been banned from PrettyLittleThing and I won’t be going back’

“Hey Chloe,” it said. “In accordance with our terms and conditions, following a review of your account activity and the unusual high returns activity, we have reached a decision to deactivate your account.

“This will mean you cannot place any further orders. We’re sorry if this causes you any inconvenience. If you still need to make a valid return, please do so through our returns portal.” 

I checked out the sender address thinking it had to be some sort of scam but no, it was from the legitimate PLT customer care email address. A quick search on X (the site formerly known as Twitter) confirmed I was one of many former and current customers who have been banished from PLT indefinitely.

Confused by the email, I opened the PLT app to review my order history. It confirmed that I’ve not placed an order with the company, let alone returned anything, for more than seven months.

Surely an attempt to entice me in with an offer or a bespoke marketing email based on my order history would have been a better first attempt at cracking down on returns and encouraging me to make a new purchase?

Effectively banning me from shopping with the retailer seems a drastic way to cut back on returns.

What makes the move all the more confusing is that there are proven ways that retailers can address repeat returners. Oh Polly’s new policy, for example, calculates the cost of returns based on the amount of the order being sent back.

Unsurprisingly, I’m not alone in my bewilderment. Fellow banned PLT shoppers have been flocking to social media to express their confusion and rage.

One angry former customer called the brand’s latest move “a joke”, while another said PLT has “lost its mind” and a third said it has “royally f**ked it”.

Even more bizarrely, PLT’s ‘royalty customers’ – who pay a premium for unlimited UK delivery annually – have also reportedly been binned. These are people who pay £9.99 a year for free deliveries and returns.

Ironically, many customers who have been trying to actively process returns have also been banned. PrettyLittleThing? More like petty little thing.

In what looks like an attempt to soften the blow, PLT took to X this morning to tell “UK dolls” (or, customers) that it will be including Cadbury chocolate bar samples in parcels “for a limited time only”.

I’m not sure that will be enough to win over what appears to be thousands of shoppers the retailer has left in limbo – unable to return orders or make new ones. 

“Charging for returns has been commonplace for fashion retailers for some time but PLT only jumped on this bandwagon at the start of the month”

One of the issues that I have had with PLT over the years is its inconsistent sizing. Maybe this is something the business should be looking at instead, to curb its rocketing return rates.

It’s frustrating to have to order multiple sizes of the same dress because you’re not sure which one will fit. From a retailer’s perspective, it’s creating high returns and bad habits among shoppers who can’t rely on size guides in the way that they should be able to.

It’s an obvious problem facing many fashion retailers but PLT’s competitors are making headway in this department.

H&M was one of the first to admit it needs to do more to improve sizing consistencies at the end of last year, joined by the likes of Boohoo (which owns PLT) and Asos that have also spoken out about addressing issues and educating customers.

Charging for returns has been relatively commonplace for fashion retailers for some time but PLT only jumped on this bandwagon at the start of the month. The fact it is so far behind in introducing fees in comparison to competitors, combined with the latest mishap, suggests it hasn’t nailed its strategy in this department.

As my recent transaction history shows, I’ve not been a PLT customer for a while. After this experience, I won’t be going back to shopping with them any time soon.