Returning Unwanted Goods - CT Has the Worst Policies

[DavidLeR]

A topic that deserves its own thread is the Canadian Tire policies for the return of unwanted goods.

Note that this is NOT the same thing as a consumer returning:

- A defective product.
- A product that is not fit for its intended purpose.

(Defective and unfit products are discussed under existing threads.)

The first thing to note: in most provinces, if a customer changed their mind about an item, a store is not required (in that specific situation) to give a refund or exchange.

Reasons that a customer might change their mind include:

- They don’t like the item any more.
- They want a different colour, size of style.
- They decide it was too expensive.
- They found it cheaper elsewhere.

See Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA) - Common consumer questions for related information on general Canadian laws on unwanted goods.

Please note that consumer protection laws are under provincial jurisdictions, so it is important to check the laws in your province or territory.

It is worth repeating at this point that there are specific laws in various provinces and territories that cover defective goods, and goods that are not fit for the intended purpose.

That being said, most retailers allow the return of products if a customer is not satisfied with the product, as a courtesy to customers.

Costco:

Costco Canada’s policy says, “We guarantee your satisfaction on every product we sell and will refund your purchase price”. Of course, this includes outdoor power equipment. Here are some links describing their policies:

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-20.html#post3166

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-20.html#post3179

Note that Costco puts the restriction that the product must be “in the original packaging”, but the packaging does not need to be unopened, and the product does not need to be "unused”.

Walmart:

Walmart Canada has similar policies, as described in this posts:

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-21.html#post3238

One Walmart restriction is that, for gasoline-powered equipment, the gasoline should be drained before returning it for a refund. This is for safety reasons, and not some excuse to deny a refund.

Home Depot:

Home Depot Canada also has a “satisfaction guarantee”, and will provide refunds for at least 30 days on items such as pressure washers and lawn mowers, if the customer is unhappy – even if the customer used it, and even it if is gas-powered.

See https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-28.html#post3445 for details.

Canadian Tire:

And so, we come to the store we all love to hate, Crappy Tire.

As with so many of Canadian Tire’s other policies, these are far worse than those of other major retailers. Plus, they are not clearly stated.

Let’s look at the web page (Returns, Refunds & Exchanges | Canadian Tire) and at a receipt, to see what they say about unwanted goods.

“Easy returns: Save your receipt”

Sounds good - maybe things will be easy, if you just save your receipt, right? Wrong!

The site and the receipt both go on to state, “in its original condition and packaging”

That’s a pretty broad statement. It means that most items cannot be used, if doing so will change it from being in “original condition”, such as putting gas in the tank of a gas-powered machine.

Speaking of “unopened”, does that word appear on the receipt? No, it does not. On the web site? Only for specific products like ink, media and some beds/mattresses.

But what will befall the innocent consumer who brings in an opened (but unused, original condition) item for a refund, in accordance with the terms on the receipt and web site?

They will likely be told that they can't get a refund unless the package is still “sealed” or “unopened”, and maybe even that must be “unused” (which is redundant for anything that was in a package).

Surprise! CT has your money, and won’t be giving it back!

Conclusion:

Consumers have a choice: do their shopping at CT, or do it at any of the other major retailers, who are honest and open about their policies, stand behind what they sell, and offer refunds if the customer is not happy.

It is worth repeating that, if a consumer is not 100% sure they will continue to like the product, they should check the store’s policy for the return of unwanted goods before they buy.

It is also worth repeating that the store’s policy is irrelevant when it comes to a defective product, or to one that is not fit for its intended purpose. In those cases, check the legislation in your province or territory.

Recommendations:

- If you think you want to buy something from Crappy Tire, be sure to use 17-step process for “Easy Returns” (here: https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/personal-stories/32-return-policy-8.html#post3806).

- Always keep the original packaging, tags, etc., until you are certain you will not need to return the product for a refund or exchange, or (once the return period has elapsed) for warranty repairs.

- Do not buy from CT, because they have the worst policies (including for returns of unwanted goods) among major Canadian retailers.

 

[Guest-0495]

A topic that deserves its own thread is the Canadian Tire policies for the return of unwanted goods.

Note that this is NOT the same thing as a consumer returning:

- A defective product.
- A product that is not fit for its intended purpose.

(Defective and unfit products are discussed under existing threads.)

The first thing to note: in most provinces, if a customer changed their mind about an item, a store is not required (in that specific situation) to give a refund or exchange.

Reasons that a customer might change their mind include:

- They don’t like the item any more.
- They want a different colour, size of style.
- They decide it was too expensive.
- They found it cheaper elsewhere.

See Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA) - Common consumer questions for related information on general Canadian laws on unwanted goods.

Please note that consumer protection laws are under provincial jurisdictions, so it is important to check the laws in your province or territory.

It is worth repeating at this point that there are specific laws in various provinces and territories that cover defective goods, and goods that are not fit for the intended purpose.

That being said, most retailers allow the return of products if a customer is not satisfied with the product, as a courtesy to customers.

Costco:

Costco Canada’s policy says, “We guarantee your satisfaction on every product we sell and will refund your purchase price”. Of course, this includes outdoor power equipment. Here are some links describing their policies:

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-20.html#post3166

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-20.html#post3179

Note that Costco puts the restriction that the product must be “in the original packaging”, but the packaging does not need to be unopened, and the product does not need to be "unused”.

Walmart:

Walmart Canada has similar policies, as described in this posts:

https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-21.html#post3238

One Walmart restriction is that, for gasoline-powered equipment, the gasoline should be drained before returning it for a refund. This is for safety reasons, and not some excuse to deny a refund.

Home Depot:

Home Depot Canada also has a “satisfaction guarantee”, and will provide refunds for at least 30 days on items such as pressure washers and lawn mowers, if the customer is unhappy – even if the customer used it, and even it if is gas-powered.

See https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/g...rranty-no-refund-no-exchange-28.html#post3445 for details.

Canadian Tire:

And so, we come to the store we all love to hate, Crappy Tire.

As with so many of Canadian Tire’s other policies, these are far worse than those of other major retailers. Plus, they are not clearly stated.

Let’s look at the web page (Returns, Refunds & Exchanges | Canadian Tire) and at a receipt, to see what they say about unwanted goods.

“Easy returns: Save your receipt”

Sounds good - maybe things will be easy, if you just save your receipt, right? Wrong!

The site and the receipt both go on to state, “in its original condition and packaging”

That’s a pretty broad statement. It means that most items cannot be used, if doing so will change it from being in “original condition”, such as putting gas in the tank of a gas-powered machine.

Speaking of “unopened”, does that word appear on the receipt? No, it does not. On the web site? Only for specific products like ink, media and some beds/mattresses.

But what will befall the innocent consumer who brings in an opened (but unused, original condition) item for a refund, in accordance with the terms on the receipt and web site?

They will likely be told that they can't get a refund unless the package is still “sealed” or “unopened”, and maybe even that must be “unused” (which is redundant for anything that was in a package).

Surprise! CT has your money, and won’t be giving it back!

Conclusion:

Consumers have a choice: do their shopping at CT, or do it at any of the other major retailers, who are honest and open about their policies, stand behind what they sell, and offer refunds if the customer is not happy.

It is worth repeating that, if a consumer is not 100% sure they will continue to like the product, they should check the store’s policy for the return of unwanted goods before they buy.

It is also worth repeating that the store’s policy is irrelevant when it comes to a defective product, or to one that is not fit for its intended purpose. In those cases, check the legislation in your province or territory.

Recommendations:

- If you think you want to buy something from Crappy Tire, be sure to use 17-step process for “Easy Returns” (here: https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/personal-stories/32-return-policy-8.html#post3806).

- Always keep the original packaging, tags, etc., until you are certain you will not need to return the product for a refund or exchange, or (once the return period has elapsed) for warranty repairs.

- Do not buy from CT, because they have the worst policies (including for returns of unwanted goods) among major Canadian retailers.

I actually love this post...goes back to one of my original comments that said "we are not the borrow it for the weekend" store. Thanks for pointing that out, yet again.
Just for the record, "original condition" does mean unused....but many stores, like mine actually put on the receipt "unopened and unused", just so there isn't any confusion. If you're looking to try something out to see if you like it, or borrow it for a project, or return a Christmas Tree on Jan. 2nd......then by all means, shop at the stores that let you. Here's a little eye opener for you though, we used to have a no questions asked policy on returns....but because people abused it....it no longer exists. Other retailers have been tightening their return policies as well (I'm sure Ler has read Ellen Roseman's commentary on the subject)....face it, it's not realistic and open to abuse. Then of course there are those people that decided that lying was a better option...."it's defective"....until we started to test out items.....and low and behold....we caught a lot of liars. They must shop elsewhere now.....good.

 

[CT Challenger]

According to the Industry Canada web site (Refund and Exchange - Entire Collection | Canadian Consumer Handbook

“While no legal obligation exists for businesses to accept returned items unless they are defective, retailers and other businesses generally agree that offering refunds or exchanges is a critical part of developing and maintaining good customer relations.”

(For more on the obligation of retailers to provide a customer a refund or exchange, see
the thread https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/general-canadian-tire-complaints-chat/707-sale-goods-act.html).

So, what can consumers infer from Crappy Tire’s policy to refuse a refund for unwanted goods that are not in the "original condition" or are not in "the original packaging"?

And what can be gleaned from CT's decision to make up additional conditions, once the customer arrives at the Customer Service desk, such as the "unopened" or "unused" terms (that aren't stated on the web site or most receipts)?

Clearly, the store cares very little about “developing and maintaining good customer relations”.

We see this reflected in the many reports, on this site and others, of ordinary Canadian consumers being treated as scammers and con artists, simply for attempting a return that would be a routine matter at any other major Canadian retailer.

We see this attitude spelled out clearly in a recent post by a self-appointed CT rep, who wrote, “If you're looking to … borrow it for a project...."

Yes, indeed. Canadian consumers are routinely viewed as thieves and liars by the staff and management of Crappy Tire, just for trying to return something.

We see this attitude summarized in the CT rep’s statement, “'we are not the borrow it for the weekend’ store".

Well, here's something that all honest Canadian consumers know: we never wanted CT to be the "borrow it for the weekend" store.

No, we are just wanted CT to be the “we care about our customers” store, and now know that they are not.

They thought CT would be the "we have similar policies to all the other major retailers” store, but they are not.

The “we stand behind what we sell” store. But instead, they are the "too bad, so sad" store.

Yes, the geniuses at CT have decided to be:

- The “Crappiest Policies in town” store.
- The “Treat everyone at the returns desk like a criminal” store.
- The “We don’t care about customer relations” store.

Lots of great slogan ideas right there.

But I still like, “So many reasons … to shop somewhere else”.

 

[CT Me / Lawguy]

According to the Industry Canada web site (Refund and Exchange - Entire Collection | Canadian Consumer Handbook

“While no legal obligation exists for businesses to accept returned items unless they are defective, retailers and other businesses generally agree that offering refunds or exchanges is a critical part of developing and maintaining good customer relations.”

(For more on the obligation of retailers to provide a customer a refund or exchange, see
the thread https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/general-canadian-tire-complaints-chat/707-sale-goods-act.html).

So, what can consumers infer from Crappy Tire’s policy to refuse a refund for unwanted goods that are not in the "original condition" or are not in "the original packaging"?

And what can be gleaned from CT's decision to make up additional conditions, once the customer arrives at the Customer Service desk, such as the "unopened" or "unused" terms (that aren't stated on the web site or most receipts)?

Clearly, the store cares very little about “developing and maintaining good customer relations”.

We see this reflected in the many reports, on this site and others, of ordinary Canadian consumers being treated as scammers and con artists, simply for attempting a return that would be a routine matter at any other major Canadian retailer.

We see this attitude spelled out clearly in a recent post by a self-appointed CT rep, who wrote, “If you're looking to … borrow it for a project...."

Yes, indeed. Canadian consumers are routinely viewed as thieves and liars by the staff and management of Crappy Tire, just for trying to return something.

We see this attitude summarized in the CT rep’s statement, “'we are not the borrow it for the weekend’ store".

Well, here's something that all honest Canadian consumers know: we never wanted CT to be the "borrow it for the weekend" store.

No, we are just wanted CT to be the “we care about our customers” store, and now know that they are not.

They thought CT would be the "we have similar policies to all the other major retailers” store, but they are not.

The “we stand behind what we sell” store. But instead, they are the "too bad, so sad" store.

Yes, the geniuses at CT have decided to be:

- The “Crappiest Policies in town” store.
- The “Treat everyone at the returns desk like a criminal” store.
- The “We don’t care about customer relations” store.

Lots of great slogan ideas right there.

But I still like, “So many reasons … to shop somewhere else”.

The way i read that is actually a retraction of previous statements made by ct haters. It has been stated over and over that "consumers are entitled to a refund by law" - and now thank you for posting the truth which is a retailer does NOT have to offer a refund by law. Thanks for your clarification and honesty. it's about time

It's unfortunate that shortly thereafter you've chosen to embelish some findings, and speculation
"Treat EVERYONE like a criminal" - yes every return at every store every day. --
"routinely viewed as liars by staff and Management" lol routinely? yes we put that in our employee handbooks. nobody is honest, treat them all like liars.
"borrow it for the weekend store" - Happens about twice a week in most stores. reality. Prime example a guy came in yesterday morning, bought a pipe wrench and a couple of fittings. Was back in 2 hours, said he didn't need the wrench to do the job and asked for his cash back. Despite the fact there was marks on the wrench including a bit of paint likely from the old pipe, and galvined shavings from what he had bought. - It happens and we protect ourselves from it. Don't blame us because roughly one in 1000 consumers does something crooked.

 

[CT Challenger]

The way i read that is actually a retraction of previous statements made by ct haters. It has been stated over and over that "consumers are entitled to a refund by law"

it might be tempting to conclude that the self-appointed ct rep simply can't read.

after all, the first post in this thread, from just a few days ago, says:

... the return of unwanted goods.

Note that this is NOT the same thing as a consumer returning:

- A defective product.

plus, in the "Sale of Goods Act" thread (for way back in November), the first post says:

... if you buy something, then find out that it doesn't work right, you are entitled to a refund, regardless of their "policy" about returns. They shouldn't have sold it to you in the first place.

yes, the self-appointed ct rep seems hardly able to comprehend the written language at all.

but is it safe to conclude that the rep is merely illiterate?

should that which can easily be attributed to stupidity, be instead attritubed to malice?

there is a long history of the ct liar mis-quoting consumers (as well as mis-stating their own store's policies, the policies of other stores, and the laws).

one need look no further than the following thread to see how frequently the ct rep posts basic lies on here:

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

but the following quote, attributed to a consumer posting on this site, is very telling:

"consumers are entitled to a refund by law"

this quote simply cannot be found on this site, prior to being written by a ct rep, and then falsely attributed to a consumer.

the self-appointed rep. simply typed up this sentence themselves, put quote marks around it, and then lied about who wrote it.

yes, the self-appointed ct rep is indeed a devious character.

Thanks for your clarification and honesty. it's about time

in the context of the self-appointed rep's continuing lies, any mention of "honesty" by them is indeed disgusting.

there are several ct lies just in that one sentence - a very crafty liar indeed.

but there is no 'new' clarification by the consumers who post here.

and the 'honesty' of the consumers who post information on this topic has been consistent:

- for defective goods, a refund is required by law in Ontario (and other provinces and territories).
- for unwanted goods, no refund is required.

yes, the lies of the self-declared ct rep continue unabated.

luckily they are easily disproven.

 

[Angry CT Guy]

it might be tempting to conclude that the self-appointed ct rep simply can't read.

after all, the first post in this thread, from just a few days ago, says:



plus, in the "Sale of Goods Act" thread (for way back in November), the first post says:



yes, the self-appointed ct rep seems hardly able to comprehend the written language at all.

but is it safe to conclude that the rep is merely illiterate?

should that which can easily be attributed to stupidity, be instead attritubed to malice?

there is a long history of the ct liar mis-quoting consumers (as well as mis-stating their own store's policies, the policies of other stores, and the laws).

one need look no further than the following thread to see how frequently the ct rep posts basic lies on here:

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

but the following quote, attributed to a consumer posting on this site, is very telling:



this quote simply cannot be found on this site, prior to being written by a ct rep, and then falsely attributed to a consumer.

the self-appointed rep. simply typed up this sentence themselves, put quote marks around it, and then lied about who wrote it.

yes, the self-appointed ct rep is indeed a devious character.



in the context of the self-appointed rep's continuing lies, any mention of "honesty" by them is indeed disgusting.

there are several ct lies just in that one sentence - a very crafty liar indeed.

but there is no 'new' clarification by the consumers who post here.

and the 'honesty' of the consumers who post information on this topic has been consistent:

- for defective goods, a refund is required by law in Ontario (and other provinces and territories).
- for unwanted goods, no refund is required.

yes, the lies of the self-declared ct rep continue unabated.

luckily they are easily disproven.

Really? Can I have that just ONE example that CTC's return policy or ANY other retailer has a return policy that contravenes CPA or SOGA rules? Still waiting....it's only been 6 years....surely there would be at least one example?

Talk about easily disproven....the faker advocate (even when he uses multiple personalities to post), has been called on his lies....each and every day. She must not like it, cause the lies get louder each day.....but they're still lies.
It must really stick in your craw that

 

[CT Challenger]

Can I have that just ONE example that CTC's return policy or ANY other retailer has a return policy that contravenes CPA or SOGA rules?

It's so simple, you'd think even a self-appointed ct rep (and Faker CT Advocate) could figure it out.

Issues regarding defective items have long ago been addressed in the "Sale of Goods" thread.

Here: let me draw them a map:

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

[Oh, by the way, just to refresh everyone's memory: it's the "exchange only" policy and the "repair only policies" that contravene the CPA and SOGA laws (not "rules"). How many times must the CT Reps / Faker Advocate be provided with the same information???]

....the faker advocate .... has been called on his lies....each and every day.

Anyone else notice how the Self-Appointed Faker CT Advocate/Rep keeps saying this, yet can never come up with a single example of a lie?

You'd think there's be, you know, one or two that can be mentioned specifically, and maybe with some proof that they are lies.

Yet all the consumers have to go on, is an almost-daily repetition of the same vague claims, with no actual proof.

Oh, wait: the Faker CT Advocate/Rep doesn't NEED proof - they just have to make the claim, and consumers are supposed to BELIEVE it automatically! LOL Hilarious!

It must really stick in your craw that

Geez, first they can't read ... now they can't type!

(And are they calling the consumer "he" or "she"? Can't even make up their mind, LOL!)

 

[Angry CT Guy]

It's so simple, you'd think even a self-appointed ct rep (and Faker CT Advocate) could figure it out.

Issues regarding defective items have long ago been addressed in the "Sale of Goods" thread.

Here: let me draw them a map:

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

[Oh, by the way, just to refresh everyone's memory: it's the "exchange only" policy and the "repair only policies" that contravene the CPA and SOGA laws (not "rules"). How many times must the CT Reps / Faker Advocate be provided with the same information???]



Anyone else notice how the Self-Appointed Faker CT Advocate/Rep keeps saying this, yet can never come up with a single example of a lie?

You'd think there's be, you know, one or two that can be mentioned specifically, and maybe with some proof that they are lies.

Yet all the consumers have to go on, is an almost-daily repetition of the same vague claims, with no actual proof.

Oh, wait: the Faker CT Advocate/Rep doesn't NEED proof - they just have to make the claim, and consumers are supposed to BELIEVE it automatically! LOL Hilarious!



Geez, first they can't read ... now they can't type!

(And are they calling the consumer "he" or "she"? Can't even make up their mind, LOL!)

Who has said that CT or ANY other retailer has an illegal policy....I just can't find anyone that puts illegal policy and ANY retailer's policy in the same sentence. Unless you think that you are credible, and your lies carry weight.....they don't....you're a loser with mental issues.
Don't forget to donate to any of the 600+ sucks.com sites.

 

[CT Challenger]

I see the ct liar has further misquoted consumers in that same recent post.

Generally, they have simply dropping a key word of two from something a consumer wrote, to change the context.

For instance, a consumer wrote:

“Treat everyone at the returns desk like a criminal.”

The CT Liar decided to misquote this as:

“Treat EVERYONE like a criminal".

In another example, the consumer wrote:

“by the staff and management of Crappy Tire, just for trying to return something”

The CT liar again changed the meaning by quoting only, “by staff and Management”.

Yes, the CT Liar can’t even be trusted to tell the truth about what’s just be written by others, let along give honest information about store polices, “rule” or laws.

The CT Liar also wrote, “Don't blame us because roughly one in 1000 consumers does something crooked”.

Well, no consumers have “blamed” CT for this, so that’s yet another lie.

But the consumers do hold CT accountable for:

- the lies that the self-appointed CT rep posts here.
- the lies that are told to consumers in stores.
- having the worst policies for returns of unwanted items among major Canadian retailers.
- The many reported cases of customers being treated badly when making a routine return.
- Adding additional requirements at the time of returns (i.e., unopened).
- Not following their own policy.

It is also worth noting that consumers have not been suggesting that it’s ok for a customer to “borrow” (or “rent”) items from a store - this is something that has been implied, but is yet another lie.

If the store has evidence that an item is not defective and is not “in original condition”, then they should follow their own voluntary crappy policy, and not give the return.

It’s really pretty simple when you think about it.

Just be honest and open about it in the first place, and not spring this on unsuspecting customers AFTER the transaction is complete. Then, the other 999 consumers can make an informed decision on where to shop.

(Oh, and for discussions regarding the legality of CT's other policies, don't forget to check out the appropriate thread!)

Also, don’t forget to check out the “Donate” button on the Jumpstart site. According to the self-apppointed CT rep, the button makes it a Faker Advocate site, and the CT Reps are Faker Advocates, LOL!

 

[Angry CT Guy]

The above unregistered poster sure whines alot and he talks to himself alot too

 

[Guest-0500]

The above unregistered poster sure whines alot and he talks to himself alot too

typical ct response.

no matter how badly they handle things, ct can always find someone else to blame it on.

we see this over and over again.

today they got caught telling more lies. but do they apologize to consumers, or issue a retraction?

nope - the consumer who caught them just "whines a lot".

so typical of what we see here and in the stores every day.

 

[Angry CT Guy]

typical ct response.

no matter how badly they handle things, ct can always find someone else to blame it on.

we see this over and over again.

today they got caught telling more lies. but do they apologize to consumers, or issue a retraction?

nope - the consumer who caught them just "whines a lot".

so typical of what we see here and in the stores every day.

You call everyone a liar it seems. You must know a lot about lying.

 

[Angry CT Guy]

You call everyone a liar it seems. You must know a lot about lying.

Lol....don't pay much attention to the loser faker advocate....he's been on his rant forever....also posts under DavidLer and CTH8er....been called on his lies so often, he can't even keep his personalities straight.

 

[Guest-0500]

I see the ct liar has further misquoted consumers in that same recent post.

this is actually a good sign for consumers.

it confirms that the posted information is correct.

had there been something inaccurate, there's not doubt the ct rep would pounce right on it.

since it's all good, they are forced to make stuff up, in order to have something to complain about.

seeing a lot of insults from the ct side is also a good sign - it means they've run out of ways to dispute the content of the message.

then ct calls this activity 'giving both sides of the story'!

yes, very useful for consumers to know the real policies of the store. thanks!

 

[Angry CT Guy]

this is actually a good sign for consumers.

it confirms that the posted information is correct.

had there been something inaccurate, there's not doubt the ct rep would pounce right on it.

since it's all good, they are forced to make stuff up, in order to have something to complain about.

seeing a lot of insults from the ct side is also a good sign - it means they've run out of ways to dispute the content of the message.

then ct calls this activity 'giving both sides of the story'!

yes, very useful for consumers to know the real policies of the store. thanks!

We're just tired of arguing with a loser. You actually had to give up calling the return policy illegal because you couldn't find any examples that said it was.
You already know you're wrong, but continue to be an ass....usually indicates a mental illness, so post away to yourself with your delusions.

 

[Guest-0500]

seeing a lot of insults from the ct side is also a good sign - it means they've run out of ways to dispute the content of the message.

well, at least the CT Liars are moving ahead with their process, and are moving on to the dumb insults ...

 

[Guest-0477]

The site and the receipt both go on to state, “in its original condition and packaging” … But what will befall the innocent consumer who brings in an opened (but unused, original condition) item for a refund, in accordance with the terms on the receipt and web site? They will likely be told that they can't get a refund unless the package is still “sealed” or “unopened”, and maybe even that must be “unused” (which is redundant for anything that was in a package).

Surprise! CT has your money, and won’t be giving it back!

It’s interesting that CT’s own site seems to contradict this in-store rule.

From Returns, Refunds & Exchanges | Canadian Tire

“ink cartridges, media, and memory cards, books, DVDs, CDs, mattresses and portable beds may only be returned if unopened”

Why would CT even have a list of special item that have an “unopened” rule, if the rule actually applies to everything in the store?

CT certainly has the right to set their own return policies for unwanted goods.

(And of course they need to follow the law for defective goods, or those that don't meet their intended purpose.)

But CT also has an obligation to state clearly what that policy is, and to follow it.

They should at least be open and honest about their own policies.

If the "unopened" rule applies to everything in the stores, then the web site should say that. Instead, they trick consumers by only listing a few products, which suggest that the rule does not apply to all products they sell.

And, there should be signs in the store warning the public about these unique CT policies - since consumers might still be unaware of just how crappy CT's policies have become.

Of course the receipts should also accurately and truthfully describe the store's true policies, and not some deceptive statements that the store has no intention of following.

Then again, there's the option for the stores to actually follow Canadian Tire's own written policies - but I guess we can't expect that level of honesty from them.

No, instead the stores hide their actual policies, then spring these extra rules on innocent customers at the last minute.

It certainly does seem like an unfair practice.

 

[CT Me / Lawguy]

It’s interesting that CT’s own site seems to contradict this in-store rule.

From Returns, Refunds & Exchanges | Canadian Tire

“ink cartridges, media, and memory cards, books, DVDs, CDs, mattresses and portable beds may only be returned if unopened”

Why would CT even have a list of special item that have an “unopened” rule, if the rule actually applies to everything in the store?

CT certainly has the right to set their own return policies for unwanted goods.

(And of course they need to follow the law for defective goods, or those that don't meet their intended purpose.)

But CT also has an obligation to state clearly what that policy is, and to follow it.

They should at least be open and honest about their own policies.

If the "unopened" rule applies to everything in the stores, then the web site should say that. Instead, they trick consumers by only listing a few products, which suggest that the rule does not apply to all products they sell.

And, there should be signs in the store warning the public about these unique CT policies - since consumers might still be unaware of just how crappy CT's policies have become.

Of course the receipts should also accurately and truthfully describe the store's true policies, and not some deceptive statements that the store has no intention of following.

Then again, there's the option for the stores to actually follow Canadian Tire's own written policies - but I guess we can't expect that level of honesty from them.

No, instead the stores hide their actual policies, then spring these extra rules on innocent customers at the last minute.

It certainly does seem like an unfair practice.

The standard return policy states "In it's original packaging, and original condition" it does not state Unopened. those are two totally different terms.

Your request to have things posted in the store is not realistic in that with 10's of thousands of products, there'd be more signs then anyone would be able to read. That's why exceptions such as gas powered have warnings right in the box.

 

[Angry CT Guy]

It’s interesting that CT’s own site seems to contradict this in-store rule.

From Returns, Refunds & Exchanges | Canadian Tire

“ink cartridges, media, and memory cards, books, DVDs, CDs, mattresses and portable beds may only be returned if unopened”

Why would CT even have a list of special item that have an “unopened” rule, if the rule actually applies to everything in the store?

CT certainly has the right to set their own return policies for unwanted goods.

(And of course they need to follow the law for defective goods, or those that don't meet their intended purpose.)

But CT also has an obligation to state clearly what that policy is, and to follow it.

They should at least be open and honest about their own policies.

If the "unopened" rule applies to everything in the stores, then the web site should say that. Instead, they trick consumers by only listing a few products, which suggest that the rule does not apply to all products they sell.

And, there should be signs in the store warning the public about these unique CT policies - since consumers might still be unaware of just how crappy CT's policies have become.

Of course the receipts should also accurately and truthfully describe the store's true policies, and not some deceptive statements that the store has no intention of following.

Then again, there's the option for the stores to actually follow Canadian Tire's own written policies - but I guess we can't expect that level of honesty from them.

No, instead the stores hide their actual policies, then spring these extra rules on innocent customers at the last minute.

It certainly does seem like an unfair practice.

*Exceptions include but are not limited to the following:

I guess you missed that line right before Ink cartridges were mentioned.

Customers should ask what a return policy is before they buy something. Saves a lot of hassle later.

 

[CT Challenger]

The standard return policy states "In it's original packaging, and original condition" it does not state Unopened. those are two totally different terms.

The CT rep seems to have developed a strong sense of the obvious, and has decided to re-type what consumers have already written.

Well, at least there's consensus: those stores that insist on an unopened package, are not following CT policy.

Ideally, the stores would follow the official policy.

But if they are going to break ranks, and not do what's stated on the web site and on the receipts, they should at least try just being truthful and honest with the public, and warn innocent customers that the store will add the "unopened" requirement.

Your request to have things posted in the store is not realistic in that with 10's of thousands of products, there'd be more signs then anyone would be able to read. That's why exceptions such as gas powered have warnings right in the box.

Ok, now we are getting into the area of CT lies, again.

Nobody said anything about putting a sign on each item in the store.

But, heck, if the stores want to do so, then I won't stand in their way, LOL.

If the "unopened" rule applies to everything in the store, then I'd suggest putting up just a couple of signs. But, you know, that's just me. CT can do whatever, as long as they are truthful, honest and follows the laws. That's not too much for consumers to ask, now is it?

But, if there are only a few items in the entire store that a specific retailer is going to designate as having the break-away "unopened" requirement, I'm sure the geniuses at CT could tackle that one. Maybe like the signs for fireworks, undergarments, ammunition, and "as-is" items. Just a thought to help CT along, you know.

So, Good Luck in your noble persuit of integrity, CT!