Page 49 of 88 First ... 39474849505159 ... Last
Results 481 to 490 of 877

Thread: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

  1. #481

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    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.....
    Well played!

    Having spotted their colleague's faux paus, in admitting a reasonable definition of "illegal", the self-appointed CT Rep has attempted a pre-emptive "pre-denial" of things that were yet to be posted!

    In some circles, this is called, "bleedingy before you are shot" - a very apt metaphor, as the theory of 'a court case is required' takes one in the heart. Ha-ha-ha! Nice try!

  2. #482
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Well, fellow consumers, how do you see this playing out?

    Will the original "quite versed" CT Rep recant, and join his/her (ex)colleagues in circling the wagons around the "case required" camp?

    Or will the QVCTR stick to their guns, and insist that on reasonable definition of "illegal"?

    Then again, we may never hear from the QVCTR ever again ...

  3. #483
    Posted by an unregistered user Angry CT Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    933
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Well, fellow consumers, how do you see this playing out?

    Will the original "quite versed" CT Rep recant, and join his/her (ex)colleagues in circling the wagons around the "case required" camp?

    Or will the QVCTR stick to their guns, and insist that on reasonable definition of "illegal"?

    Then again, we may never hear from the QVCTR ever again ...

    Or better yet, are you going to believe the rantings of a mentally ill faker advocate or will you call the ministry of consumer affairs and get a truthful answer?....easy choice.

  4. #484
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Well played!

    Having spotted their colleague's faux paus, in admitting a reasonable definition of "illegal", the self-appointed CT Rep has attempted a pre-emptive "pre-denial" of things that were yet to be posted!

    In some circles, this is called, "bleedingy before you are shot" - a very apt metaphor, as the theory of 'a court case is required' takes one in the heart. Ha-ha-ha! Nice try!
    Actually it was MY definition of illegal, not my collegaues. The definition of illegal is fairly black and white. If a law states you can/can't do something, then you can/can't do that.
    So find me a law that says the seller of an item can not send it for repair under warranty and must refund the tender.
    or
    a law that says a consumer gets to select how a warranty item is dealt with.

    Something, anything along those lines.

    In regards to court cases, we live in a take take take world. Shady consumers and theives are always looking for a way to get stuff they are not entitled to and lawyers are quick to sniff out opportunities for big cases that can pad their pocket books. If a multi billion dollar retailer, ranked highly and known by everyone in Canada had been illegally keeping money from customers, violating laws that they are governed by etc.... why hasn't a lawyer sniffed this out and opened up a massive case against Canadian Tire?
    Is it because lawyers are honest and don't seek such justice?
    Maybe Canadian Tire pays off every lawyer in Canada not to go after them?
    A Canadian conspiracy not to allow th

    I grant you that the absence of a court case does not render something as legal...... it sure as hell paints an interesting picture and begs a lot of questions...why don't retailers get in trouble for repair warranties on defective items? the answer my friends is simple. Because it's NOT illegal and despite your claims, Home Depot, John Deere, Rona and Walmart all have the same repair policy for gas powered items. Additionally , the Ministry that governs all of the acts you keep referencing has confirmed the same to me in multiple provinces that as long as the seller of an item follows the warranty terms that were in place at time of purchase, all is well and good.

    How many times are you losers going to try and spin this a different way, with a different personality to make us believe we are violating a law? For real, you're barking up the wrong tree. If you have an issue, file an official complaint with your trusted Ministry or with Canadian Tire Home Office. I invite, if not challenge you to do so.
    I can confidently say, your efforts will produce zero, except continued anger and frustration, except now your anger won't be with CT, it will be with yourself and the likes of DAVIDLER who has led you to believe that you're right when really, you're wrong.

  5. #485
    Active Member DavidLeR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    211
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Fellow consumers:

    The “Sale of Goods Act” thread has links to 15 reliable source of information on the Ontario Sale of Goods Act and the Consumer Protection Act.

    Most of those sources state that an Ontario consumer is entitled by law to a refund for a defective product, if they want one. The consumer might also choose to settle for an exchange for a working product, if they desire. It is not necessary to settle for only a repair.

    These links can be found here:

    "https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/ge....html#post3613"

    There is also a new link that a consumer recently posted to the Industry Canada site:

    #16 – Industry Canada

    http://www.consumerhandbook.ca/en/topics/products-and-services/refund-and-exchange

    Since this is a Canada-wide site, and each province/territory has specific rules, the Industry Canada site does get into detailes, but it does say, “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.”

    Yes, for a product that is defective, the rules for returns are different. Note that repairs aren't even mentioned.


    Consumers are encouraged to check the other 15 links, and to contact their Consumers' Ministry regarding their specific case.

  6. #486
    Posted by an unregistered user Angry CT Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    933
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidLeR View Post
    Fellow consumers:

    The “Sale of Goods Act” thread has links to 15 reliable source of information on the Ontario Sale of Goods Act and the Consumer Protection Act.

    Most of those sources state that an Ontario consumer is entitled by law to a refund for a defective product, if they want one. The consumer might also choose to settle for an exchange for a working product, if they desire. It is not necessary to settle for only a repair.

    These links can be found here:

    "https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/ge....html#post3613"

    There is also a new link that a consumer recently posted to the Industry Canada site:

    #16 – Industry Canada

    http://www.consumerhandbook.ca/en/topics/products-and-services/refund-and-exchange

    Since this is a Canada-wide site, and each province/territory has specific rules, the Industry Canada site does get into detailes, but it does say, “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.”

    Yes, for a product that is defective, the rules for returns are different. Note that repairs aren't even mentioned.


    Consumers are encouraged to check the other 15 links, and to contact their Consumers' Ministry regarding their specific case.
    Yes, please contact the ministry of consumer affairs for a truthful statement, and don't rely on faker advocate posts of their opinions.

  7. #487

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Well, the self-appointed CT Reps (assuming there are more than one of them) are suddenly all the way up to DEFCON 1, with their lie machine back at full speed.

    Apparently this is simply because a CT Rep finally agreed that “against a law, is illegal” – something everybody knows already, LOL.

    I guess the down-side for them is, they can no longer pretend that an actual court case is needed, before a consumer can be justified say that the dreaded "Repair Only Warranty" is "illegal" (i.e., against a law - the CPA to be specific).

    So in response to this minor set-back the CT Liars are once again re-posting many of their favourite lies (most previously recorded at "https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/ge...lies-here.html"), plus a few new lies for good measure:

    - The lie that consumers who post here are “faker advocates” (even though CT’s Jumpstart site also falls under the CT Rep’s definition of “faker advocate”, due to the “donate” button. And has anyone noticed Jumpstart needs you credit card info?)

    - The lie that says the posts with links to reliable consumer web sites, are really only posts with consumers’ “opinions” (even though those opinions are those of the reliable sources, such as low professors and lawyers).

    - Phoney stories about calls to the Consumer’s Ministry, with fake reports that the the Ministry will side with retailers who don’t follow the law. Hah! Call for yourself, consumers!

    - The lie that the SGA and CPA don’t allow a consumer to refuse a repair, and don't allow a consumer to insist on a refund or an exchange, if the consumer wants (see the thread "https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/ge....html#post3613"

    - The lie that other major retailer also have a “repair only” (or similar) policy, and will also have a policy to never give a refund, and to never replace a defective product (disproven on this thread).

    - The lie that the SGA or CPA discuss manufacturers’ warranties (no, the law is only about the implied warranty that the retailer is responsible for).

    It’s also the habit of the self-appointed CT Rep, when they run out of lies to tell, they post pointless insults - generally making fun of the mentally ill.

    Truly, it doesn't take much, to set them off again, on another lying spree.

    But it's hard not to notice that they've brought forth not one scrap of new evidence.

    They haven't even bothered to trot out that one, lonely site with outdated information, LOL.

    Yes, just the same old made up crap, still with nothing to back it up. Just a lot of self-serving opinion, and mis-interpretation.

    They really do seem desperate to convince us to abandon our rights as consumers.

  8. #488
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Well, the self-appointed CT Reps (assuming there are more than one of them) are suddenly all the way up to DEFCON 1, with their lie machine back at full speed.

    Apparently this is simply because a CT Rep finally agreed that “against a law, is illegal” – something everybody knows already, LOL.

    I guess the down-side for them is, they can no longer pretend that an actual court case is needed, before a consumer can be justified say that the dreaded "Repair Only Warranty" is "illegal" (i.e., against a law - the CPA to be specific).

    So in response to this minor set-back the CT Liars are once again re-posting many of their favourite lies (most previously recorded at "https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/ge...lies-here.html"), plus a few new lies for good measure:

    - The lie that consumers who post here are “faker advocates” (even though CT’s Jumpstart site also falls under the CT Rep’s definition of “faker advocate”, due to the “donate” button. And has anyone noticed Jumpstart needs you credit card info?)

    - The lie that says the posts with links to reliable consumer web sites, are really only posts with consumers’ “opinions” (even though those opinions are those of the reliable sources, such as low professors and lawyers).

    - Phoney stories about calls to the Consumer’s Ministry, with fake reports that the the Ministry will side with retailers who don’t follow the law. Hah! Call for yourself, consumers!

    - The lie that the SGA and CPA don’t allow a consumer to refuse a repair, and don't allow a consumer to insist on a refund or an exchange, if the consumer wants (see the thread "https://www.canadiantiresucks.net/ge....html#post3613"

    - The lie that other major retailer also have a “repair only” (or similar) policy, and will also have a policy to never give a refund, and to never replace a defective product (disproven on this thread).

    - The lie that the SGA or CPA discuss manufacturers’ warranties (no, the law is only about the implied warranty that the retailer is responsible for).

    It’s also the habit of the self-appointed CT Rep, when they run out of lies to tell, they post pointless insults - generally making fun of the mentally ill.

    Truly, it doesn't take much, to set them off again, on another lying spree.

    But it's hard not to notice that they've brought forth not one scrap of new evidence.

    They haven't even bothered to trot out that one, lonely site with outdated information, LOL.

    Yes, just the same old made up crap, still with nothing to back it up. Just a lot of self-serving opinion, and mis-interpretation.

    They really do seem desperate to convince us to abandon our rights as consumers.
    Round and round we go....
    According to the above post, it is up to the buyer to determine how a warranty is followed.
    Well if that's the case then I everythign I ever bought just got a lifetime warranty, including my cars.
    So every time my car breaks down, rather then send it in for repairs and leave it for the day, a new car off the lot to replace mine each time there is an issue.

    Believe what you wish, the overall impact to me is zero, except that I gain some comical value from both your stubbornness and your inability to comprehend what is being told to you, by the guys who do this every day.

  9. #489
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Fellow Consumers:

    Do NOT be distracted by the CT Dealer/Liars references to manufacturers' warranties - this is completely off topic.

    Instead, focus on the return polices: what the laws say about them, and what the store's polices really are (and not just what's on the CT web site or receipt).

    The only people going 'round and round', are the CT Dealer/Liars, who keep offering the same unsubstantiated opinions, and keep lying about the policies of their own stores, the policies of other stores, and the laws in Canada.

    But the consumers who post here? They simply continue to point to the growing body of evidence that consumers are entitled to a refund or exchange (their choice), in accordance with the laws of specific provinces and territories. See the Sale of Goods Act thread for more details.

    "Friends Don't Let Friends Do Business With Canadian Tire"

  10. #490
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0477's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: "Repair Only Warranty" - No Refund, No Exchange

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    The only thing it [the SGA and CPA] specifies is that a seller must offer a remedy within the terms of the warranty of the defective item.
    Really?

    What Part and Section is that?

    I've seen that claim made on this site before, can't find it in the Act at all. Just stuff about the implied warranty that the retailer has to meet.

    Now, being "very versed" and "quite versed" on this topic, I'm sure the self-appointed CT Reps can just quote this from memory, but to make sure we're on the same page, here's a link to the Act: Consumer Protection Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 30, Sched. A

    Looking forward to some specifics to back up this repeated claim!

Page 49 of 88 First ... 39474849505159 ... Last

Similar Threads

  1. CTC CEO Stephen Wetmore: "Canadian Tire Sucks"
    By DavidLeR in forum General Canadian Tire Complaints / Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 21st, 2011, 10:42 PM
  2. "Do you work here??"
    By CT_MANAGER in forum Employees Speak Out
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2011, 12:19 AM
  3. I'm one of those "Bad" Canadian Tire Employees
    By Tango Anglo in forum Employees Speak Out
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 3rd, 2011, 08:32 PM
  4. CBC's "Go Public" reports on Canadian Tire.
    By Jadelakes in forum New to this site?
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: December 21st, 2010, 12:08 PM
  5. Can't return "Powerbuilt 42-in. Professional Creeper"
    By unhappyctccustomer in forum Personal Stories
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: October 28th, 2010, 03:48 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions