A growing trend among major retail brands, including teen fashion favorite Brandy Melville, UK supermarkets Sainsbury’s and Tesco, and US thrift giant Goodwill, involves the closure of in-store fitting rooms. This move, driven by a desire to cut operational costs, combat theft, and optimize selling space, has sparked significant debate and backlash from consumers and industry experts alike. While some retailers view it as a necessary adjustment in a challenging economic climate for brick-and-mortar stores, others warn of detrimental effects on customer satisfaction, a surge in product returns, and increased environmental waste.

The Evolving Retail Landscape: The Rise of Fitting Room Closures

In recent weeks, customers across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada have noticed the disappearance of fitting rooms in Brandy Melville stores, a brand known for its “one-size-fits-all” policy that often translates to smaller sizes. This has led to widespread frustration, exacerbated by the brand's strict exchange-only return policy. Staff members have reportedly confirmed these closures, attributing them to various factors, including vandalism and renovation efforts. Similarly, Sainsbury’s announced fitting room closures in February 2025 to “simplify and reduce tasks in stores,” while Goodwill regions, such as the Valleys in central, southwest, and south Virginia, have cited staffing and maintenance costs, alongside rising theft, as primary reasons.

This trend emerges during a difficult period for physical retail. In 2025, the UK saw 57 major business failures, impacting thousands of stores and employees, according to the Center of Retail Research. The US experienced over 8,200 store closures in the same year, a 12% increase from 2024, as reported by Coresight Research. In this climate, retailers are actively seeking ways to reduce expenses, and utilizing floor space more efficiently is a key consideration. However, industry experts caution that while closing fitting rooms may offer short-term financial gains by reducing operational costs, it could negatively affect long-term profitability and sustainability.

The impact on customer experience is a major concern. Many shoppers express unwillingness to purchase clothing they cannot try on, with some suggesting boycotting brands that implement such policies. The absence of fitting rooms can also lead to increased online returns, which are significantly higher than in-store returns (30% online vs. 10% in-store, according to the British Fashion Council’s Institute of Positive Fashion). This surge in returns contributes to “reverse logistics” costs, including transportation, warehousing, repackaging, and potential disposal, all of which have substantial environmental implications. For instance, the IPF estimated that returns handling in the UK generated 750,000 tons of CO2 in 2022. Moreover, a significant portion of returned items, particularly those bought online, often end up in landfills. Some retailers, like Son of a Tailor, a premium Danish menswear brand, are taking an opposing approach, investing in spacious, private fitting rooms and personalized service to enhance the in-store experience and reduce returns.

As retailers grapple with the complexities of the modern retail landscape, the decision to eliminate fitting rooms highlights a critical balancing act between cost-cutting measures and maintaining a positive customer experience, with potential far-reaching consequences for both business sustainability and environmental impact.