Page 3 of 14 First 1234513 ... Last
Results 21 to 30 of 136

Thread: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

  1. #21
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    well clearly thats a retarded joke. lol thanks for the laugh.

    look dude, whoever you are, whatever you do, i simply don't care. please understand that fully. you're a guy on your end of the internet, i'm a guy on my end of the internet. i don't know if the problem is that your ego is too big, that you have been misinformed by someone else which could include the consumer advocate websites youve pointed out, which for the record may not be 100% correct all the time or that you are insecure and can't acccept that you have erred i your assesssment of the law. there's nothing more to it. you've looked in all the right places, you've cross referenced different acts and laws, in fact you've done all the research that i would and have done many times in dealing with consumer law. law is very very very gray. if it wasn't, OJ Simpson would not have walked free on murder.

    in reading the details, often vague, of said laws, i don't know how else i can put this except that you simply misunderstand in consumer law which contracts are valid depending on the type of transaction such as retail over the counter, order for future delivery and purchasing a service as well as when and who's warranties apply. i'm not here to make you look bad, i stumbled upon this site, did some reading and thought i'd pitch into an area that had clearly been steered off course.

    you can spend the rest of your day copying and pasting links that you've posted multiple times but it will not change the fact that what is contained in those links must be assessed correctly for them to carry any weight, and you assessed them incorrectly. so before you get your knickers in a knot, understand that i am on your side. as i mentioned, i deal in consumer law, more often then not defending clients who have been wronged by a seller who has broken the law. what you are workign with here, is not canadian tire breaking any laws. sorry man, i hate to be the bearer of bad news, but it's reality

  2. #22
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0276's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    690
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    Oh no, now we have some CT lifer in the returns department professing to be a consumer rights guru, super star lawyer. What ever. Another case of another minimum wage retail burnout over extending and over applying their shallow expertise. Funny that all you quote is the back side of a receipt but strangely silent on consumer law and the interpretations of noted firms.

    That's ok we already knew that you're nothing more than a toady-shill for CT and here to discourage people from getting they're money back.

  3. #23
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    lol do you guys just assume that anyone who disagrees with you must be working for canadian tire? really, i belong to a lot of forums and blogs in personal hobbies and areas of interest and i've never seen such one side, biased opinions in my life. you all must be perfect, i'm so impressed.

    i quote the back side of a receipt for a reason. it is the LEGAL contract you enter when you purchase an item. it is your right to return, or not return an item or get warranty, based on those terms that i copied from the receipt. there's nothing complex or hidden. have a receipt, within the period specified, product unused.. refund full amount. without receipt, refund or exchange at store discretion. defective = warranty, exchange or repair based on whatever that product carries in warranty terms.

    everyone seems to be looking for some legal solution, loophole or whatever to solve their displeasure. in my experience, MOST stores and managers willl work hard to find a solution for an unhappy customer, if you treat them politely, with respect and ask for their help rather then demanding x y and z. all of the acts and legislations that dler and others have posted are correct, thats where you get the information, but if you don't understand it, the information is not useful if you're trying to use as a legal matter.

    believe what you will and what you won't, just remember as a customer you don't have ultimate right to anything anytime just because you want it.

  4. #24
    Active Member DavidLeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    211
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    it is your right to ... not return an item
    Well, thank God I have to right to NOT return something! Imagine having CT come and take back my floor mats while it's still snowy out! ("Sorry, but you have no legal right to not return those; here's you money back ...")

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    i quote the back side of a receipt for a reason. it is the LEGAL contract you enter when you purchase an item.
    Earlier, I pointed out just how ridiculous this notion was. For some reason, you continue to push this concept, so I decided to explore it a bit further.

    Guess what I found out?

    (Wait for it ....)

    You're wrong!

    First of all, there's the small problem of illegal contracts being void. For instance, I can't make a deal to sell you a kilo of cocaine, then sue you for breach of contract when you couldn't come up with the money. A contract to do something illegal is void. The same would be true of a contract for the sale of goods that contained terms that were contrary to the law. I'm tempted to say that a retail contract with a term stating that the retailer would not be obligated to provide a refund (or even an exchange) on a defective product is an illegal contract, and therefore void. I seem to recall that you disagreed on some aspect of this, so let's just say that, in theory, any term that turned out to be contrary to any law would make the contract void. (Maybe collecting personal information?) If I remember my law courses correctly, a judge would set aside the entire contract, as a whole, because it would be impossible to pick and choose which terms remain in force, and which are to be rejected.

    Another hole in your theory is 'offer and acceptance'. A person cannot accept terms that they do not know exist. There is no "meeting of the minds", and thus a contract cannot be formed that includes those terms. If a customer were handed a page of terms and conditions, and asked to sign it before the sale was completed, then there would be an argument that it was part of the contract. However, if the customer is handed a receipt with a policy statement on the back, then this has occurred after the sale has been completed. A contract cannot be formed first, and then additional contract terms magically imposed a few moments later. An offer was made, it was accepted, and that's it - no more terms. You might be tempted to overlook this by saying, "Well, the terms are available at Customer Service" (or on a web site, etc.) However, this is not sufficient. The terms must be communicated to the purchaser in advance. One cannot agree to a contract without first being told what the terms are. The sale, therefore, does not include any store policy.

    Another point to consider. If the retailer has the discretion to completely ignore the 'terms' (i.e., the policy), then it has no actual benefit to the other party. It is an "illusory promise". Therefore, there is no contract. One cannot say, "Give me a dollar now, and maybe I'll do something nice for you some day", and think this is a binding contract. The store policy is just one, big "Maybe".

    Switching from the theoretical to the practical, this is just not how stores operate. They do not treat their policies as though they are legally binding (at least, not on the part of the store). For instance, they frequently refuse to provide refunds or exchanges on unopened items, despite their policies stating that they will. They refuse price adjusments. It would be great for the customers if the retailers were legally bound to fulfill their policies, because many more customers would be getting refunds and exchanges, etc.

    Taking this a step further, if there really were a contract which obligated the store to provide a refund (say, for an unopened package), and the store refused to provide the refund, then the customer could rescind the contract, in which case the store would be required by contract law to provide a refund. Seems like a good deal for the customer who, well, just wanted a refund.

    In summary, store policies are merely non-binding offers do something gratuitously, with no true obligation to actually do it, in order to induce customers to purchase from their store, rather than from a competitor. If you can't sue for a breach of the promise, then it wasn't a contractual term.

    If you need some links to references, to help you work your way through what I've written, I'll gladly provide them.

    I can even steer you towards some good introductory law books, if you are interested in really learning about this "law" stuff.

    But, I have a strong sense that you will once more just completely ignore what I wrote, repeat pretty much everything you've already written, then resort to calling me names, saying I'm insecure, etc.


    The only thing that would truly surprise me, is if you responded in a thoughful and meaningful way to anything I'd written. Or even (gasp!) quoted some references!

  5. #25
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    so let me get this right.... you're claim now is that a retail purchase does NOT involve any legally binding agreement or contract?

  6. #26
    Active Member DavidLeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    211
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    so let me get this right.... you're claim now is that a retail purchase does NOT involve any legally binding agreement or contract?
    No, not quite.

    Keep in mind: I'm offering this up for discussion. I'm not an expert, and I haven't found clear-cut references for this (except for the SGA and CPA parts).

    (If you follow the "Sale of Goods Act" thread, you'll see the I started with a call out for information, and my opinion solidified gradually over time, as more information was discovered. That's why I've become less reluctant to accept unsubstantiated claims that are spouted off by people who appear to be uninformed).

    But, here's my take on it:

    - There is a contract. You are agreeing to purchase the item at the agreed-upon price (obviously).

    - The manufacturer may or may not offer an "express" warranty that must be honoured. You can ask to see this ahead of time.

    - In addition, the store must honour the "implied condition that the goods will be of merchantable quality" from the SGA, no matter what their policy says. (Please: don't make me quote all that twice in one day!)

    - A policy that you only learn about after the sale is completed can't be retroactively piggy-backed onto an already-completed contract.

    - Just because the store has a "policy", that doesn't mean it automatically becomes part of your sales contract; it has to be communicated to the buyer ahead of time.

    - Even if the policy statement was part of the contract, if it has illegal terms, then the entire contract would be void.

    - A term that says the store doesn't have to do anything has no legal effect, so it is not part of a contract.

    - Even if these terms got included in your sales contract, as soon as the store failed to live up to it's obligations, the contract would be rescindable.

    - There is no reason to believe (unless someone can provide one) that store policies constitute contractual terms that the buyer (or the store) are bound to.

    I'm looking forward to some useful input.

  7. #27
    Active Member DavidLeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    211
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    I would like to add a couple of things:

    - My 4:41 post of yesterday was worded fairly strongly, in part as a 'shot' at Mr. LawGuy, but I am open to thoughful discussion.
    - Except for defective items, the terms of all retail sales in Ontario are by default 'final', with no returns, exchanges are refunds.
    - Stores voluntarily offer return policies to attract customers.
    - Under the CPA, a store failing to honour its policy could be engaging in an Unfair Practice, and the sales contract could be rescinded by the customer.

  8. #28
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    hold on here, davidler don't take this as a shot, i am trying to engage in the discussion reasonably

    up until your last post you have maintained that the law entitles a customer to a refund.

    is it correct in understanding that you are now saying that the sellers policy is what stands, and their right to refund, exchange etc.. is in fact determined by the store policy and the law/acts involvement is when that store breaks the terms they set out themself?

  9. #29
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0276's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    690
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by lawguy View Post
    hold on here, davidler don't take this as a shot, i am trying to engage in the discussion reasonably

    up until your last post you have maintained that the law entitles a customer to a refund.

    is it correct in understanding that you are now saying that the sellers policy is what stands, and their right to refund, exchange etc.. is in fact determined by the store policy and the law/acts involvement is when that store breaks the terms they set out themself?
    Ugh...you are joking right? And you call yourself a lawyer right? Did you get your degree from one of those stamps ? Round and round this goes. From reading some of these threads I've come to the conclusion that CT retailer lacky losers are:

    * frequent bullshiters and fakers. Take CT Me, CT Manager, echo and the latest douchebag above. They mostly claim to have superior knowledge and experience on a wide range of retail areas crossing over into law and business. But when challenged they have nothing more (intelligent) to say and even get basic valuations wrong from a supposedly, experienced business educated guru. Now we have a part-time retail clerk/full-time imaginary lawyer who derives the embodiment of contract law all from the back of the receipt, or maybe from a CT policy folder - yet can't quite ascertain the opinions of his peers from quoted lawfirms firms.

  10. #30
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0276's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    690
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: EVOLVE TREADMILL,TEMPO -Canadian Tire ,3516 8th ave NE Calgary - CAN'T BE RETURNED!!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    lol do you guys just assume that anyone who disagrees with you must be working for canadian tire?
    What you've said is complete rubbish. Your stupidity and anti-customer attitude makes you easy to spot.

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post

    really, i belong to a lot of forums and blogs in personal hobbies and areas of interest
    So what? Why are you here? You obviously know what this forum is about. Why don't you offer something useful if you're so quick on your feet with 'the law'. Do you get a kick from screwing people out of a rightful return? Or how about intimidating them to the point where they just leave and give up on the issue?

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    i quote the back side of a receipt for a reason. it is the LEGAL contract ....
    what ever buddy. Too bad that's not what the law says. Good thing not everyone grew up on that kool-aid.

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    everyone seems to be looking for some legal solution, loophole or whatever to solve their displeasure.
    CT hasn't spared any effort in this area, we all know that. More and more people are finding out what an awful place CT is to shop at, ditto for cars.

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    in my experience, MOST stores and managers willl work hard to find a solution for an unhappy customer, if you treat them politely, with respect
    ya ya we've all heard that bullshit before.
    That used to be the case with CT and that was back in the 80's. Not now. Now they work just as hard coming up with stupid policies to screw people over.

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    all of the acts and legislations that dler and others have posted are correct, thats where you get the information, but if you don't understand it, the information is not useful if you're trying to use as a legal matter.
    I don't know about everyone else but I can read those links just fine and what the law says is way different than what you and CT would like it to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by law guy View Post
    believe what you will and what you won't, just remember as a customer you don't have ultimate right to anything anytime just because you want it.
    This is what being a consumer has come down to. Get screwed over a rightful return and live with the bad product. And what's your last recourse at getting the issue resolved as we all know CT head office sure as hell won't do the right thing. Why won't CT do the right thing? Why won't they honor returns and give great service and stop giving customers a hard time?

    Canadian Tire store sells questionable repairs - British Columbia - CBC News

    You have to waste time and energy suing them. I can't speak for most folks out there, but I do sue. It's called small claims court forms 8A, 18B, 20A -20E. The maximum amount you can sue for in small claims is 25K.I have no problem kicking it up to Divisional if I have to. Unlike law douchebag, I won't make spectacular claims about myself but I can certainly research and apply what I've learned and yes I have won cases representing myself.

Page 3 of 14 First 1234513 ... Last

Similar Threads

  1. Returned goods put back on shelf to be resold (to me)
    By Guest-0291 in forum General Canadian Tire Complaints / Chat
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: June 20th, 2014, 09:02 PM
  2. How do you rate 3516 8TH Ave. N.E., Calgary, AB store?
    By Admin in forum Canadian Tire 3516 8TH Ave. N.E., Calgary, AB
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: June 21st, 2011, 05:55 AM
  3. Tempo 620 - Warranty Line does not answer
    By Guest-0249 in forum General Canadian Tire Complaints / Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 11th, 2010, 11:20 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions