Talk about an expensive paperweight...

[wew]

The general rule of thumb for returns is that unless required by law, no business has to allow returns.

However, if you have a return policy you are required to follow it. Many companies allow for returns, with a variety of policies- some give only gift cards in exchange w/o a receipt; others refund according to the purchase type credit to credit, cash for cash, etc.; others put strict limitations on time limits.

In regards to Walmart, I worked as a CSM and dealt with returns. The proper policy is to open up an check the contents; if they don't match then you don't take it back. (unless customer complains enough to management and they override policy).

 

[John Picard]

Every time I buy auto parts, I open the box and inspect the contents. I do this because many years ago I bought spark plugs for my car and when I got home I discovered every box had a used spark plug in it. Luckily, I buy a lot of parts from this store, so they know I'm not going to cheat them. The counterman was surprised when I returned so quickly and then pissed when I showed him the used spark plugs.

Since that time, while I'm inspecting the parts and the contents of boxes to ensure all related materials are there, the employee will always give me a funny look, as if I don't trust them. Once I tell the "spark plug" story, said employee is quick to follow-up and be certain everything is 100% complete. I just went through this a couple of weeks ago with the u-joints for my truck. One box had a complete kit, and the other was missing a clip and there were signs someone opened the internal packing and then wrapped it all up. Only this time, the employee was a clueless kid who didn't understand why I wouldn't accept a part that was missing critical pieces.

 

[LaxScrutiny]

The general rule of thumb for returns is that unless required by law, no business has to allow returns.

However, if you have a return policy you are required to follow it. Many companies allow for returns, with a variety of policies- some give only gift cards in exchange w/o a receipt; others refund according to the purchase type credit to credit, cash for cash, etc.; others put strict limitations on time limits.

In regards to Walmart, I worked as a CSM and dealt with returns. The proper policy is to open up an check the contents; if they don't match then you don't take it back. (unless customer complains enough to management and they override policy).

The general rule for fraud is that if you say you are selling me a Nintendo and I get a box of rocks, I can sue your ass.

 

[John Picard]

The general rule of thumb for returns is that unless required by law, no business has to allow returns.

However, if you have a return policy you are required to follow it. Many companies allow for returns, with a variety of policies- some give only gift cards in exchange w/o a receipt; others refund according to the purchase type credit to credit, cash for cash, etc.; others put strict limitations on time limits.

In regards to Walmart, I worked as a CSM and dealt with returns. The proper policy is to open up an check the contents; if they don't match then you don't take it back. (unless customer complains enough to management and they override policy).

The general rule for fraud is that if you say you are selling me a Nintendo and I get a box of rocks, I can sue your ass.

Sorry, but if you walked out of the store with a Nintendo box and return later that day, or days later, with a box of rocks, I would be hard-pressed to believe you walked out of the store with a box of rocks.

 

[trekkiedane]

Sorry, but if you walked out of the store with a Nintendo box and return later that day, or days later, with a box of rocks, I would be hard-pressed to believe you walked out of the store with a box of rocks.

Indeed, caveat emptor, but aren't there laws protecting the consumer in place over there? -to me this seems like a pretty clear case of going back to the shop and getting a new box and an apology.

 

[John Picard]

Sorry, but if you walked out of the store with a Nintendo box and return later that day, or days later, with a box of rocks, I would be hard-pressed to believe you walked out of the store with a box of rocks.

Indeed, caveat emptor, but aren't there laws protecting the consumer in place over there? -to me this seems like a pretty clear case of going back to the shop and getting a new box and an apology.

There are, but put yourself in the store's shoes for a moment.

 

[trekkiedane]

Yeaqh, I know some people will go to extreme lengths in order to screw a business.

That's why you are made to sign a paper explaining your story and that you have received another product instead of the one you complained about. If in the future it becomes clear that you are a scammer you will feel the power of that business' lawyers.

 

[Captain Shaw]

Don't blame the store for the scam itself.

No, I blame them for putting a box full of rocks on a shelf and selling it for 140$, after it's been returned for being full of rocks by another disgruntled customer, and then sending this customer to Nintendo instead of dealing with it on their own.

I'm just blown away by the whole story. If I worked at Walmart, and a box of rocks was returned to me, I would THROW IT AWAY. How the hell did it end up back on the shelf?! Seriously! What genius at Walmart was given a box of rocks, taped it up, and put it back on the shelf? How the fuck does that even happen?

Wonder if someone got mixed up and throw a box with a DS that had been returned away and put the box with the rocks on the shelf

 

[CaptainHawk1]

Sorry, but if you walked out of the store with a Nintendo box and return later that day, or days later, with a box of rocks, I would be hard-pressed to believe you walked out of the store with a box of rocks.

Indeed, caveat emptor, but aren't there laws protecting the consumer in place over there? -to me this seems like a pretty clear case of going back to the shop and getting a new box and an apology.

Caveat emptor doesn't apply for a couple of reasons. First, it's a real estate concept, not a consumer product concept despite the fact the fact that it's been wrongly associated with sales of non-real goods for a good century now.

Second, the consumer has a legal expectation that what they paid for is what they got. They also have the expectation of merchantability, that is, that said product functions as it is intended for the purpose it was designed. The fact is, despite any disclaimer of a store not having a return policy, these basic principles always apply. It is unreasonable to expect a consumer to open a sealed electronics device in a store to make sure that the product is as described n the packing and receipt (although it probably wouldn't be a bad idea). In any retail store, the consumer automatically has the reasonable expectation that what it says on the box is what they are taking home.

I understand the argument of putting yourself in the store's position. It is tricky and how would they know that the consumer isn't trying to screw them. The short answer is that they don't. But that's a problem that Wal Mart and a lot of other retailers have in that they pay dog shit wages and employ the lowest common denominator which is exactly why shit like this happens. Honestly, Wal Mart should expect that one of their LCD employees screwed up and automatically assume the consumer didn't make it up and isn't trying to pull a fast one.

That should be their default position and for the most part, at the corporate level it, is from what I can tell. If you ever have a problem that the local Wal Mart store manager won't solve for you simply call the home office in Bentonville, AR and it will be solved immediately. I've had issues in the past that store managers have refused to fix for me but when I called Bentonville, they immediately conceded to my demands.

But seriously, this is exactly why I say always use a credit card.


BTW:

The general rule for fraud is that if you say you are selling me a Nintendo and I get a box of rocks, I can sue your ass.

No, not really. The general rule for fraud is that there has to be intent and foreknowledge by the allegedly fraudulent party to defraud. There's no evidence here that Wal Mart's intention was to defraud the customer or that they knew that the box was full of rocks. Wal Mart acted in good faith when the transaction took place just as the consumer did. This is what's called a material mistake, nothing more.

 

[trekkiedane]

Sorry, but if you walked out of the store with a Nintendo box and return later that day, or days later, with a box of rocks, I would be hard-pressed to believe you walked out of the store with a box of rocks.

Indeed, caveat emptor, but aren't there laws protecting the consumer in place over there? -to me this seems like a pretty clear case of going back to the shop and getting a new box and an apology.

Caveat emptor doesn't apply for a couple of reasons. First, it's a real estate concept, not a consumer product concept despite the fact the fact that it's been wrongly associated with sales of non-real goods for a good century now.

You speak like a lawyer!

I suppose caveat emptor has a special meaning in law, I was merely using the colloquial...

 

[RJDiogenes]

This strikes me as a good way to dispose of a body; cut it up and "return" it to a bunch of stores. Maybe we'll see it used in an episode of Bones or something.

Thanks for the idea

Oh, you write for TV?

 

[CaptainHawk1]

Indeed, caveat emptor, but aren't there laws protecting the consumer in place over there? -to me this seems like a pretty clear case of going back to the shop and getting a new box and an apology.

Caveat emptor doesn't apply for a couple of reasons. First, it's a real estate concept, not a consumer product concept despite the fact the fact that it's been wrongly associated with sales of non-real goods for a good century now.

You speak like a lawyer!

I suppose caveat emptor has a special meaning in law, I was merely using the colloquial...

I get the colloquialism but what I'm getting at is that unlike what the phrase implies, the buyer doesn't have to beware when it comes to purchasing consumer goods from established retailers. The standard for fitness for a particular purpose is much higher than it is for real estate. People assume because of that phrase that in the end they are SOL with their purchases if the merchant wants them to be. This is simply not the case.

Caveat Emptor is used in real estate because other than known major structural defects, it's nigh impossible for a seller to disclose every little problem that a property may have. it's meant to protect the seller from a buyer who decides that they want to cancel a real estate deal because after the purchase they found a loose brick in the chimney or missing shingle on the roof.

More seriously, say there was a crack in the foundation that the buyer was unaware of that wasn't caught until after insepction and after the sale.

Or taking it a step further, the crack is discovered but the buyer purchases anyway.

The seller can't be expected to be responsible for any of these things after the sale. Hence caveat emptor.

OTOH, customer buys a Wii from target, Target doesn't know that it's defective and doesn't work, Customer didn't inspect the unit and test it before purchasing customer only discovers the problem after they bring it home (or it only develops after 2 weeks of normal use), Target has to take it back.

Big difference in protection. Hence, why I don't like CE thrown around. Consumers have lots of rights. CE implies that they are generally screwed.

I'm not a lawyer but I have a 4 year Paralegal degree and I work at a Corporate Civil Defense firm.

 

[Samurai8472]

This strikes me as a good way to dispose of a body; cut it up and "return" it to a bunch of stores. Maybe we'll see it used in an episode of Bones or something.

Bones- The head was found at Lowe's in a $19 dollar lawn lamp box

 

[trekkiedane]

I get the colloquialism /.../

I get it; what you mean is: yes, there are laws protecting consumers in this situation.

Other posts in this thread had me wondering you see.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

I get the colloquialism /.../

I get it; what you mean is: yes, there are laws protecting consumers in this situation.

Other posts in this thread had me wondering you see.

I totally get it, dude and what's worse, corporate America has us convinced that we're powerless against them in general and I'm just trying to set the record straight.

Forget Wal Mart, try returning something at Target with or without a receipt.

 

[wew]

When I worked at Walmart the returns policies were extremely liberal, in fact they were usually some of the most liberal among all retailers.

I worked at Target and an individual came in stating that folding chairs he had bought were defective. At first glance he was correct, the chairs were in horrible shape. Unfortunately for him I was called to assist customer service since I was working in housewares. I knew the guy, he owned a store and those were chairs he had in his store for several years, and this Target had opened up only 2 months earlier.

I knew he was lying through his teeth about the chairs, fortunately the color scheme for the chairs did not exist in Target's inventory. So we didn't give him any money (he had no reciept). Later when I saw him at the comic store business he owned I asked about the chairs; he said he took them to Walmart and he said they gave him money for them.

When I worked for Walmart, had a lady bring in swimwear in February with a receipt dated nine months earlier since it was after 90 days she was only supposed to get the last price which was about 2.00 (it had gone on clearance) she wanted and got management to approve a full refund of the original price- despite the fact that state law prohibits returns of certain types of clothing. It was claimed out and destroyed.

Actually if you really wanted to go after Walmart, I argue that they are sometimes selling returned items as if they were new, rather than used.

 

[John Picard]

When I worked at Walmart the returns policies were extremely liberal, in fact they were usually some of the most liberal among all retailers.

I worked at Target and an individual came in stating that folding chairs he had bought were defective. At first glance he was correct, the chairs were in horrible shape. Unfortunately for him I was called to assist customer service since I was working in housewares. I knew the guy, he owned a store and those were chairs he had in his store for several years, and this Target had opened up only 2 months earlier.

I knew he was lying through his teeth about the chairs, fortunately the color scheme for the chairs did not exist in Target's inventory. So we didn't give him any money (he had no reciept). Later when I saw him at the comic store business he owned I asked about the chairs; he said he took them to Walmart and he said they gave him money for them.

When I worked for Walmart, had a lady bring in swimwear in February with a receipt dated nine months earlier since it was after 90 days she was only supposed to get the last price which was about 2.00 (it had gone on clearance) she wanted and got management to approve a full refund of the original price- despite the fact that state law prohibits returns of certain types of clothing. It was claimed out and destroyed.

Actually if you really wanted to go after Walmart, I argue that they are sometimes selling returned items as if they were new, rather than used.

I don't doubt that one bit. When I was married, we went through three toasters in a two-week period before getting one that was decent, at best. Then again, my ex-wife is the kind who thinks Wal Mart and Dollar General make good sense for purchases. After we got divorced, I spent good money at Best Buy and got a toaster than can also toast bagels. Nine years and still going strong, as it should.

 

[Franklin]

The general rule of thumb for returns is that unless required by law, no business has to allow returns.

However, if you have a return policy you are required to follow it. Many companies allow for returns, with a variety of policies- some give only gift cards in exchange w/o a receipt; others refund according to the purchase type credit to credit, cash for cash, etc.; others put strict limitations on time limits.

In regards to Walmart, I worked as a CSM and dealt with returns. The proper policy is to open up an check the contents; if they don't match then you don't take it back. (unless customer complains enough to management and they override policy).

I had a student who worked for what was then Famous Barr (now Macy's). They had a very liberal return policy. Anything bought in the store could be returned for a refund for any reason. No questions asked. The student had worked in shoes, and he said women would return shoes all skuffed up and worn and say, "I got these home and decided I didn't like them," or, "I wore them around the house for an hour and they didn't fit like I hoped." Just lies. The shoes were even sometimes from the previous year's line.
He said folks would sometimes bring in shoes or a suit, obviously having worn it a few times, returning it claiming it "didn't work out," for some reason. A receipt wasn't even necessary if it was obviously a product sold in the store.
When such incidents occurred, they were told to be quiet and politely return the customer's money. The logic? If you made a stink, there may be several good customers in line who get put off, or think the store doesn't want to accept returns and doesn't believe its customers. It also showed the good customers they'd stand by their product, and if a suit you bought there actually did rip or fray or something a few months after you bought it, you could take it back and they'd make it right.

Good stores know that you may have to eat a few sales in order to have good customers for life. Famous Barr didn't want you to start shopping at Dillard's. The unfortunate thing about chains as big as Wal-Mart is they don't need to be afraid to piss off the occasional customer. Ten more will follow that one. I hate going anywhere that doesn't act like they want my business.

 

[Captain Shaw]

I knew someone who worked for marks and Spencer and this women used to used the same credit note over and over again.
She would buy a party dress and then return it a few days later she must have cost M&S fortune.
I would ban the women from the store.

 

[MANT!]

Scams I personally have seen at Radio Shack..

The DVD player returned in the box inoperative is not the same player on the outside of the box..

Old universal remotes returned in the same packaging as the new one purchased.

each time I refused to accept the return, the "customer" would get irate and threaten me...and I would tell them to leave..