In late October, I placed an online order with John Lewis for £260 in Japanese Yen, intending to collect the cash before a trip to Japan. What should have been a straightforward transaction turned into a revealing lesson in how corporate policy can drift away from fairness, common sense, and the law.
When I arrived at the Leicester store to collect my order, I presented my UK Provisional photocard driving licence – a government-issued form of ID that has always been accepted in similar transactions. The staff refused to release my currency, insisting that only a full driving licence or a passport would be acceptable. They claimed this was a legal requirement, and that it was the policy of their third-party provider. I explained that my Provisional Licence had been accepted by every other currency exchange service I’d used in the past year, but I was dismissed. When I asked to cancel the transaction, I was told that I would need to contact the third-party provider myself. My reminder that my contract was with John Lewis, not their supplier, was ignored.
Pressed for time, I had no choice but to return home, collect my passport, and make a second trip to the store. When I returned, I was told there was a discrepancy between “Rob” and “Robert” on my documents. Eventually, the staff phoned the provider and then used my Provisional Licence to verify my address before releasing the cash. The same document that had been deemed unacceptable was now apparently fine.
After I lodged a complaint, John Lewis initially maintained that their policy was in line with anti-money laundering regulations. However, after several exchanges, they finally admitted that the requirement to produce either a full driving licence or a passport was a company policy, not a legal requirement. This admission directly contradicted the explanations I had been given both in-store and in earlier correspondence.
What concerned me most was the tone of their final reply. It suggested that I was seeking compensation in bad faith, an insinuation I found deeply offensive. My complaint was never about money – it was about principle, legality, and proportionality. The company apologised only for the time I had spent pursuing the issue, not for misleading me about the law or imposing a disproportionate ID requirement that had no legal basis.
I have since closed my John Lewis account and instructed the company to erase all personal data they hold about me under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018. I expect confirmation that this will be completed within 30 days, as the law requires. Should this not happen, I will make a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
This episode has fundamentally changed my view of John Lewis. A company once trusted for fairness and integrity has allowed rigid internal policy, poor training, and managerial defensiveness to undermine its reputation. I will not shop with John Lewis again and will advise others to consider how corporate “policy” can sometimes mask poor judgment and misapplied regulation.
Leave a Reply