On 15/08/2013 10:25, Dave Baker wrote:

They clearly really annoyed the judge with their behaviour so I think you
have the moral victory.

The whole thing clearly annoyed the judge. Fancy taking goods back and
effectively giving no refund! So, he was obviously not going to let them
have any expenses. I thought that, in principle, they ought to have been
entitled to reasonable fares by public transport? Even if that was only
from the local store.