"Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

[Angry CT Guy]

Refunds, Exchanges and Deposits

Ontario Ministry of Consumer Services....much more credible than the rantings of DavidLer and the unregistered name he posts his opinions under.

Refunds, Exchanges and Deposits

Interesting....by each province, but check out Ontario.

Refunds & Exchanges - BBB News Center

Apparently, in the opinion of losers who post here.....the Better Business Bureau is wrong and liars.

At least the legality of return policies has been put to rest given these losers (capturing all of Ler's personalities) ignored anything put in front of them. No one was fooled though....people can read for themselves.

 

[Guest-0477]

Fellow consumers:

Every once in a while, someone who thinks they represent Canadian Tire, does a little Googling, and thinks they've 'discovered' some new proof or other that consumers don't really have rights to refunds and exchanges.

If you've been following this tread for a while, you know that the first link provided by the CT Rep (and the 2nd one, too - they are identical), don't tell the whole story on this issue.

Regarding the BBB site, it has already been debunked, in this post:

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...efenders-post-so-many-lies-here.html#post3773

(I'm sure we'll see soon be seeing that same old link to an Industry Canada site on refunds, too).

For obvious reasons, DO NOT go by what the store rep's tell you (they clearly have an agenda, and it isn't finding the truth).

Indeed, read for yourself. No need to go by any opinions that are expressed here, including those who will benefit when consumers don't know their rights.

Reliable links to objective sites on Consumer Protection Legislation from reputable sources can be found here:

"https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...aints-chat/707-sale-goods-act-6.html#post3613"

Please contact your Consumers' Ministry regarding your specific case.

By the way, in case you are interested, a list of frequently told CT Lies can be found here:

"https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...y-do-ct-defenders-post-so-many-lies-here.html"

 

[Angry CT Guy]

Fellow consumers:

Every once in a while, someone who thinks they represent Canadian Tire, does a little Googling, and thinks they've 'discovered' some new proof or other that consumers don't really have rights to refunds and exchanges.

If you've been following this tread for a while, you know that the first link provided by the CT Rep (and the 2nd one, too - they are identical), don't tell the whole story on this issue.

Regarding the BBB site, it has already been debunked, in this post:

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...efenders-post-so-many-lies-here.html#post3773

(I'm sure we'll see soon be seeing that same old link to an Industry Canada site on refunds, too).

For obvious reasons, DO NOT go by what the store rep's tell you (they clearly have an agenda, and it isn't finding the truth).

Indeed, read for yourself. No need to go by any opinions that are expressed here, including those who will benefit when consumers don't know their rights.

Reliable links to objective sites on Consumer Protection Legislation from reputable sources can be found here:

"https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...aints-chat/707-sale-goods-act-6.html#post3613"

Please contact your Consumers' Ministry regarding your specific case.

By the way, in case you are interested, a list of frequently told CT Lies can be found here:

"https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...y-do-ct-defenders-post-so-many-lies-here.html"

Really? The Ministry Of Consumer Services, a government agency, is wrong? But your "opinion" is correct?
Really? You keep saying the BBB site is wrong, but that's still on their site (Ottawa's too). If it was wrong would they not have pulled it or corrected it?
And then of course the clincher.....you can't find even ONE example that states CTC's or any other retailer, for that matter has an illegal return policy.
Sorry, got to call it as I see it
Liar!

 

[Guest-0477]

Fellow Consumers:

The bottom line is this:

If you are being refused a refund or an exchange on a defective product, contact your provincial Consumer’s Ministry yourself, for advice on what your rights are, and how you may be able to obtain a remedy.

In Ontario, it’s the Ministry of Consumer Services at 1-800-889-9768.

If you are in need of serious legal advice, you would be wise to seek the advice of an expert. All the debate and banter on this site is fun, but nobody who has posted here (including me) can legitimately claim to be an expert on these topics.

On the other hand, if you are just curious about the laws in Ontario, you may wish to read from a variety of sources. The following post is intended to be a useful starting point:

"https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...aints-chat/707-sale-goods-act-6.html#post3613"

Also, the other posts on the “Sale Of Goods Act” thread cover a variety of topics. Just watch out for incorrect or inaccurate information posted by the self-appointed CT Representatives, who appear to have an agenda that does not align well with the truth.

If you are at any point tempted to believe the statements of the CT Rep’s, have a look at the well-documented list of their many, frequently told lies:

"https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...y-do-ct-defenders-post-so-many-lies-here.html"

And always remember:

"Friends Don't Let Friends Shop At Canadian Tire"

 

[Guest-0477]

The following post is intended to be a useful starting point:

"https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...aints-chat/707-sale-goods-act-6.html#post3613"

"Friends Don't Let Friends Shop At Canadian Tire"

Sure, the CTers have come up with one or 2 sites that don't say this clearly "refund required', but that doesn't mean it isn't true!

But the post in the Sale of Goods thread has many, many links to experts in the field who've stated clearly that a refund is required under Ontario law.

Plus its what the Minstry told me over the phone. About pressure washers.

A CTer saying they called and were told that CT can insist on a repair is just plain crap.

So is a CTer saying that some random retailer's mis-quoted web site 'proves' that consumers aren't entitled to a refund is just plain crap.

Just like crappy tire itself.

 

[CT Me / Lawguy]

Funny that when you're arguing with us, you've got all the answers
When you're posting to the general public, youre so humble in not being an expert on the subjects covered here.
Finally you're correct, you are NOT an expert, or even an armchair expert in retail, consumer law or anything remotely involved here.

As far as being tempted to believe us "self appointed" CT reps, well you choose. Believe some loser idiots who are just pissed off consumers, who can't provide more then a few lines in a Government act... sounds like a good course of action.

Remember, just because you say it's a lie, doesn't make it a lie.

 

[CT Me / Lawguy]

Sure, the CTers have come up with one or 2 sites that don't say this clearly "refund required', but that doesn't mean it isn't true!

But the post in the Sale of Goods thread has many, many links to experts in the field who've stated clearly that a refund is required under Ontario law.

Plus its what the Minstry told me over the phone. About pressure washers.

A CTer saying they called and were told that CT can insist on a repair is just plain crap.

So is a CTer saying that some random retailer's mis-quoted web site 'proves' that consumers aren't entitled to a refund is just plain crap.

Just like crappy tire itself.

I have called the Ministry in 3 different Provinces and received the same answer from all 3. I asked the same question;
"I am a retailer. I have a customer with a gas pressure washer that is not functioning correctly. The warranty terms on the item are repair for x years by an authorized service center. The customer insists that I am bound by law to provide a refund. Am I required to give cash back by law or can the unit be repaired at the service center as per the terms of the warranty"

The answer was the same each time. As long as the retailer is following the warranty terms and warranty duration and "make good" on the defective unit, it is up to the retailer how they choose to handle it"

So you say you called, I did call.... why is there a discrepency? Perhaps you asked a question that guided them to the answer you wanted?
That's my thought.

 

[CT Challenger]

Fellow Consumers:

Well, if you want to, you can just accepts the accounts of the self-appointed CT Rep’s regarding consumer protection laws. Then you’ll be a “good customer”, not ask for a refund or exchange, and the very nice people at the store won’t issue a Trespass Order against you. After all, that link to the Future Shop policy on DVDs is very, very compelling.

On the other hand, you know you are probably being lied to by the CT Rep's, based on their track record on this site, and all the contrary evidence stacked against them. Still, it's an option. But one that might be 'leaving some money on the table', as they say, in your province.

Or, you can just accept the accounts of your fellow consumers, who have only your best interests at heart. If it really matters, though, I don't recommend that. Still, they have amassed a respectable volume of evidnence, which the CT Rep's seem none too happy about. Don't forget to check this web site, and others, for accounts of consumers how have succeeded in getting remedies through the legislation.

But in cases where it does really matter what the SOGA and the CPA say, it's a good idea to contact your Consumer's Ministry. Based on what I've heard from them with my own ears several times, you'll get a very different answer from what the CT Reps are claiming. Maybe it's because they asked about the legality of warranties? Maybe the Ministy is lying to consumers, but not to CT Rep's? Whatever the case, it's best to hear it for yourself.

Another idea is to read through the dozen-plus web sites written by reliable sources, that all say “refund for defective items”, and draw your own conclusions. The CT Rep’s would be ticked off at you, though. They only want you to look at the 1 or 2 sites that work to their benefit, even though those sites have incomplete and out-dated information. See the "Lies" list for details.

Now, if you are really interested, you might do some research on your own, and maybe even read the Acts yourself. The CT Rep’s have said ordinary consumers like us aren’t up to the task. But I think they are wrong about that, too.

But, if it really, really matters a lot, you should probably talk to a consumer rights lawyer. They can be expensive, but it can be worth it. Actually, there are several listed in the web sites. You know – the ones that say “refund for defective items’!

You have lots of choices – believing what the deceptive and deceitful CT Rep’s wrote is only one of them.

 

[Angry CT Guy]

Fellow Consumers:

Well, if you want to, you can just accepts the accounts of the self-appointed CT Rep’s regarding consumer protection laws. Then you’ll be a “good customer”, not ask for a refund or exchange, and the very nice people at the store won’t issue a Trespass Order against you. After all, that link to the Future Shop policy on DVDs is very, very compelling.

On the other hand, you know you are probably being lied to by the CT Rep's, based on their track record on this site, and all the contrary evidence stacked against them. Still, it's an option. But one that might be 'leaving some money on the table', as they say, in your province.

Or, you can just accept the accounts of your fellow consumers, who have only your best interests at heart. If it really matters, though, I don't recommend that. Still, they have amassed a respectable volume of evidnence, which the CT Rep's seem none too happy about. Don't forget to check this web site, and others, for accounts of consumers how have succeeded in getting remedies through the legislation.

But in cases where it does really matter what the SOGA and the CPA say, it's a good idea to contact your Consumer's Ministry. Based on what I've heard from them with my own ears several times, you'll get a very different answer from what the CT Reps are claiming. Maybe it's because they asked about the legality of warranties? Maybe the Ministy is lying to consumers, but not to CT Rep's? Whatever the case, it's best to hear it for yourself.

Another idea is to read through the dozen-plus web sites written by reliable sources, that all say “refund for defective items”, and draw your own conclusions. The CT Rep’s would be ticked off at you, though. They only want you to look at the 1 or 2 sites that work to their benefit, even though those sites have incomplete and out-dated information. See the "Lies" list for details.

Now, if you are really interested, you might do some research on your own, and maybe even read the Acts yourself. The CT Rep’s have said ordinary consumers like us aren’t up to the task. But I think they are wrong about that, too.

But, if it really, really matters a lot, you should probably talk to a consumer rights lawyer. They can be expensive, but it can be worth it. Actually, there are several listed in the web sites. You know – the ones that say “refund for defective items’!

You have lots of choices – believing what the deceptive and deceitful CT Rep’s wrote is only one of them.

Actually, the evidence is stacked against YOU. Not sure why you continue to lie or ignore facts....but there are all kinds out there.

 

[CT Me / Lawguy]

Fellow Consumers:

Well, if you want to, you can just accepts the accounts of the self-appointed CT Rep’s regarding consumer protection laws. Then you’ll be a “good customer”, not ask for a refund or exchange, and the very nice people at the store won’t issue a Trespass Order against you. After all, that link to the Future Shop policy on DVDs is very, very compelling.

On the other hand, you know you are probably being lied to by the CT Rep's, based on their track record on this site, and all the contrary evidence stacked against them. Still, it's an option. But one that might be 'leaving some money on the table', as they say, in your province.

Or, you can just accept the accounts of your fellow consumers, who have only your best interests at heart. If it really matters, though, I don't recommend that. Still, they have amassed a respectable volume of evidnence, which the CT Rep's seem none too happy about. Don't forget to check this web site, and others, for accounts of consumers how have succeeded in getting remedies through the legislation.

But in cases where it does really matter what the SOGA and the CPA say, it's a good idea to contact your Consumer's Ministry. Based on what I've heard from them with my own ears several times, you'll get a very different answer from what the CT Reps are claiming. Maybe it's because they asked about the legality of warranties? Maybe the Ministy is lying to consumers, but not to CT Rep's? Whatever the case, it's best to hear it for yourself.

Another idea is to read through the dozen-plus web sites written by reliable sources, that all say “refund for defective items”, and draw your own conclusions. The CT Rep’s would be ticked off at you, though. They only want you to look at the 1 or 2 sites that work to their benefit, even though those sites have incomplete and out-dated information. See the "Lies" list for details.

Now, if you are really interested, you might do some research on your own, and maybe even read the Acts yourself. The CT Rep’s have said ordinary consumers like us aren’t up to the task. But I think they are wrong about that, too.

But, if it really, really matters a lot, you should probably talk to a consumer rights lawyer. They can be expensive, but it can be worth it. Actually, there are several listed in the web sites. You know – the ones that say “refund for defective items’!

You have lots of choices – believing what the deceptive and deceitful CT Rep’s wrote is only one of them.

The only thing stacked against us is your OPINIONS, and a couple of lines out of two very large comprehensive Acts.
Those amount to a hill of beans

On the other hand, the facts we have provided and the missing facts to back up your claims are stacked mountainous against YOU!

 

[CT Challenger]

The only thing stacked against us is your OPINIONS, and a couple of lines out of two very large comprehensive Acts.

These should probably be added to the list of Official CT Lies.

It is a lie to say that consumers who read this site are only offered the opinions or interpretations of other consumers on this site. There are many reputable sources available online that say an Ontario consumer is entitled to a refund for a defective item. A partial list of those sources can be found here: "https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...aints-chat/707-sale-goods-act-6.html#post3613"

It is also a lie to say that the Canadian Tire representatives who post here have provided any reliable evidence at all that Ontario consumers are not entitled to a refund, or even an exchange (if they wish). The links the rep's have provided have been shown to be either incomplete, or to contain out-dated information. Reports of calls to government agencies are not verifiable, and consistently conflict with reports from consumers. Links to the sites of other stores, or to manufacturer's warranty statements are irrelevant.

 

[Guest-0504]

just a quick question

the canadian tire people seem to know a lot about laws and rules and stuff

isn’t something illegal if theres a law against it?

I mean isnt that what illegal means - against the law?

so if theres a law saying someone has to do something, isnt it illegal for them not to do it?

or are these some laws that nobody has to follow?

how do we know if it will be illegal to not follow a particular law?

and how do we know if its legal to NOT do what a law says we have to do?

just trying to understand how this all works.

thank you ct people!

 

[Angry CT Guy]

just a quick question

the canadian tire people seem to know a lot about laws and rules and stuff

isn’t something illegal if theres a law against it?

I mean isnt that what illegal means - against the law?

so if theres a law saying someone has to do something, isnt it illegal for them not to do it?

or are these some laws that nobody has to follow?

how do we know if it will be illegal to not follow a particular law?

and how do we know if its legal to NOT do what a law says we have to do?

just trying to understand how this all works.

thank you ct people!

just because a couple of raving lunatics on here say something is illegal, doesn't mean it's illegal...they will be quick to point out they aren't lawyers or experts. Let me know when you find some expert that says Canadian Tire specifically, or any other retailer, for that matter, has an illegal policy....good luck with that, and p.s......how many personalities are you going to post under today?

 

[Guest-0504]

just because a couple of raving lunatics on here say something is illegal, doesn't mean it's illegal...they will be quick to point out they aren't lawyers or experts. Let me know when you find some expert that says Canadian Tire specifically, or any other retailer, for that matter, has an illegal policy....good luck with that, and p.s......how many personalities are you going to post under today?

yeah that's exactly what i mean.

i dont want to rely on any lunatics or people who arent experts.

the ct people say they know all about rules and laws and stuff.

so i was kind of hoping for an answer - not a bunch more questions for me, lol.

anyway, i'm hoping someone from ct can tell me.

is something illegal if theres a law against it?
doesn't illegal mean against the law?
if theres a law saying someone has to do something, isnt it illegal for them not to do it?
how do we know if it will be illegal to not follow a particular law?
and how do we know if its legal to NOT do what a law says we have to do?

oh, and now im also wondering

do the laws apply to some groups, but not to others? im thinking say, the laws of a particular province. can some people in that province ignore some of the laws? is that legal?

also do we have to say, like, 'murder is illegal for guys named paul' and then 'murder is illegal for guys named robert', and so on for everybody individually?

or, can we just say, 'murder is illegal' and that goes for everybody'?

just trying to understand how this all works!

thanks in advance for your answers!

 

[CT Me / Lawguy]

yeah that's exactly what i mean.

i dont want to rely on any lunatics or people who arent experts.

the ct people say they know all about rules and laws and stuff.

so i was kind of hoping for an answer - not a bunch more questions for me, lol.

anyway, i'm hoping someone from ct can tell me.

is something illegal if theres a law against it?
doesn't illegal mean against the law?
if theres a law saying someone has to do something, isnt it illegal for them not to do it?
how do we know if it will be illegal to not follow a particular law?
and how do we know if its legal to NOT do what a law says we have to do?

oh, and now im also wondering

do the laws apply to some groups, but not to others? im thinking say, the laws of a particular province. can some people in that province ignore some of the laws? is that legal?

also do we have to say, like, 'murder is illegal for guys named paul' and then 'murder is illegal for guys named robert', and so on for everybody individually?

or, can we just say, 'murder is illegal' and that goes for everybody'?

just trying to understand how this all works!

thanks in advance for your answers!

Illegal is illegal. against a law, is illegal. You are correct in your interpretation of the term.
keep in mind we are not dealing with criminal offences, we are dealing with retail laws and governing regulations.
The governing laws are only applicable in the geographic region in which the purchase was made. they are very similar from province to province except that Quebec has some rules regarding transfer of warranty from original purchaser to next owner that no other province has.

In any event here's where the disputes have come into play on this website. There are two of us on here regularly that are CT owners. we are quite versed in what rules govern the businesses that we own. It would be too risky for us NOT to understand what we do for a living.
There are many CT haters on here who have read the laws and rules in detail. They have a different interpretation of what constitutes illegal and legal in terms of our policices. The main one being around gas powered equipment that we do not accept as a return, if they break they go for warranty repair. haters claim this is illegal. Us owners are convinced confidently otherwise that it's perfectly within the rules to offer a repair as a remedy for items.

We continually challenge the haters to find examples where CT has been found guilty, charged or otherwise in violation of any law rule or regulation. No examples have been brought forth.
It's turned into a lot of mud slinging and very little progress or understanding. We continue to operate our stores the same way as we did before coming to this website. If a regulating body shows up and says we're violating a law, i will follow suit. Until then, the cows will come home and we will continue business as usual

Hope that helps

 

[Guest-0477]

ok now we are getting somewhere.

i asked, is something illegal if theres a law against it? doesnt illegal mean against the law?

im hearing from the ct people that yes, something can be called illegal just because of the law – ‘against a law is illegal’.

i also asked, if theres a law saying someone has to do something, isnt it illegal for them not to do it? and how do we know if its legal to NOT do what a law says we have to do?

so if im understanding the ct people right, if a law says someone has to do something, then its illegal if they don’t do it. is that right?

i also asked about which laws apply to who. im interested mainly in ontario.

im hearing that there are retail laws and governing regulations in each province, so ontario has their own.

so would the ct people say that the sales of goods act and the cp act count? or would you say these don’t apply to retailers in ontario?

ok - just one more question.

i guess it would be very convincing if there had been charges or a guilty verdict or something.

but if theres a law that all ontario retailers have to follow, and a retailer isnt following the law, then isnt that enough to say its illegal? cause ‘against a law is illegal’?

i mean does it really matter whether or not ct or any other retailer had been found guilty of anything with these acts and laws and regulations?

but like i said it would be very convincing if there were cases like that.

again, just trying to understand how this works.

thanks for the answers so far.

 

[Angry CT Guy]

ok now we are getting somewhere.

i asked, is something illegal if theres a law against it? doesnt illegal mean against the law?

im hearing from the ct people that yes, something can be called illegal just because of the law – ‘against a law is illegal’.

i also asked, if theres a law saying someone has to do something, isnt it illegal for them not to do it? and how do we know if its legal to NOT do what a law says we have to do?

so if im understanding the ct people right, if a law says someone has to do something, then its illegal if they don’t do it. is that right?

i also asked about which laws apply to who. im interested mainly in ontario.

im hearing that there are retail laws and governing regulations in each province, so ontario has their own.

so would the ct people say that the sales of goods act and the cp act count? or would you say these don’t apply to retailers in ontario?

ok - just one more question.

i guess it would be very convincing if there had been charges or a guilty verdict or something.

but if theres a law that all ontario retailers have to follow, and a retailer isnt following the law, then isnt that enough to say its illegal? cause ‘against a law is illegal’?

i mean does it really matter whether or not ct or any other retailer had been found guilty of anything with these acts and laws and regulations?

but like i said it would be very convincing if there were cases like that.

again, just trying to understand how this works.

thanks for the answers so far.

It would be very convincing if CT or any other retailer had been found guilty of having an illegal policy. I'm quite sure that in the last 6 years since the last CPA changes, there would have been someone, somewhere that would have challenged an illegal policy, had there been one....but of course, it's not illegal....we all know that. If you want further clarification, call the ministry of consumer affairs and they will concur. Best to ask the professionals and not yourself under one of your personalities.

 

[CT Me / Lawguy]

ok now we are getting somewhere.

i asked, is something illegal if theres a law against it? doesnt illegal mean against the law?

im hearing from the ct people that yes, something can be called illegal just because of the law – ‘against a law is illegal’.

i also asked, if theres a law saying someone has to do something, isnt it illegal for them not to do it? and how do we know if its legal to NOT do what a law says we have to do?

so if im understanding the ct people right, if a law says someone has to do something, then its illegal if they don’t do it. is that right?

i also asked about which laws apply to who. im interested mainly in ontario.

im hearing that there are retail laws and governing regulations in each province, so ontario has their own.

so would the ct people say that the sales of goods act and the cp act count? or would you say these don’t apply to retailers in ontario?

ok - just one more question.

i guess it would be very convincing if there had been charges or a guilty verdict or something.

but if theres a law that all ontario retailers have to follow, and a retailer isnt following the law, then isnt that enough to say its illegal? cause ‘against a law is illegal’?

i mean does it really matter whether or not ct or any other retailer had been found guilty of anything with these acts and laws and regulations?

but like i said it would be very convincing if there were cases like that.

again, just trying to understand how this works.

thanks for the answers so far.

This is shaping up to be a case of you're going to take a few words of ct owners regarding legalities, twist them around a bit and say hahah got you....you admitted to breaking the law. Silly tactic, and not very effective. You've already got your pre-determined outcome in mind and are clearly trying to ask yes or no questions to bring to your decided upon conclusion.

Allow me to speed up the process for you. Yes illegal is against the law and therefore subject to penalty. In regards to retailers and selling of items:

The SGA & CPA does NOT specify anywhere that a defective good MUST refunded for cash. The only thing it specifies is that a seller must offer a remedy within the terms of the warranty of the defective item. Those terms are available at the retailer at time of purchase. Sometimes they will also be included in the box. If a buyer chooses not to ask for them or read them, well that's their option, though not a very smart one. In my store if you buy a chainsaw as an example you get handed a sheet that says 7 day over the counter exchange for a new one if yours is defective. Depending on the manufacturer, a predetermined length of term for parts and labour on manufacturers defects following those 7 days.

5 days in, the motor seizes, you get a new one. (not your cash back)
5 months in, the pull start recoil breaks, you go to an authorized repair depot, they repair it, you get it back.
As long as a remedy is offered and of course acted upon, nothing illegal has happened.

IF - after 5 months it broke due to a manufacturers defect and a seller said tough shit, you own it. No warranty.. that's in violation of the terms and conditions agreed upon at time of sale.

 

[CT Challenger]

It would be very convincing if CT or any other retailer had been found guilty of having an illegal policy.

I supposed in some people's opinion, a court case would be "convincing".

But that's not at all necessary, according to the CT Rep, who claims to be "quite versed" in these matters.

"Against the law is illegal", they confirmed. Yes, a law is indeed needed - but a court case is not.

(After all, there are myriad reasons why such a case has not yet been referenced on this humble forum. The lack of a suitable law is just one hypothetical reason.)

Yes, such a case would merely be 'icing on the cake', so to speak. Nice to have, but not required.

So, where (or, where?) might we find some law or other, to compare against CT's policies???

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/general-canadian-tire-complaints-chat/707-sale-goods-act.html

 

[Angry CT Guy]

I supposed in some people's opinion, a court case would be "convincing".

But that's not at all necessary, according to the CT Rep, who claims to be "quite versed" in these matters.

"Against the law is illegal", they confirmed. Yes, a law is indeed needed - but a court case is not.

(After all, there are myriad reasons why such a case has not yet been referenced on this humble forum. The lack of a suitable law is just one hypothetical reason.)

Yes, such a case would merely be 'icing on the cake', so to speak. Nice to have, but not required.

So, where (or, where?) might we find some law or other, to compare against CT's policies???

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/general-canadian-tire-complaints-chat/707-sale-goods-act.html

Of course it's required otherwise it's various interpretations and opinions....but not true. You've tried this on other forums as well....no consensus. Certainly someone would have legally challenged CT or any other retailer for an illegal policy....but that hasn't happened. Common sense dictates here, and you've already proven you have none. Keep trying though, it's become comical (especially when you write fake posts, under fake personalities). Yes, a loser, a true loser.