I read through some of the old posts, and a lot of them are in regards to refunds for defective products sold by other retailers. Some of the Canadian Tire people think that they don't have to give refunds, but there are a lot of sources who say refunds are required. Ellen Roseman in particular, who also appeared recently on the CBC program, and repeated that products that aren't what the consumer expected are refundable.
Some of the Canadian Tire people had been saying that refunds are not required on certain defective items at other stores, so this is proof that Canadian Tires stores never have to give a refund on anything. But this is flawed logic, if these products have unique rules. For instance, certain garments are not returnable for health reason. But this wouldn't apply to defective garments, like swimwear, since they should not be re-sold (i.e. they should be returned to the manufacturer).
It's a similar thing with DVDs, CDs and computer software. There are special rules for the copyrights on digital media, so that the creator doesn't lose out on the royalties due to illegal copying. But again, if the media is damaged, and nobody could have ever used it, there shouldn't be a problem getting a refund.
I also saw one or two examples give by Canadian Tire, where other stores who have a policy against giving a refund for certain products, like appliances. If there is a law that says refunds are required in these cases, then these stores are also going against the law, and consumers should be complaining, and taking their business elsewhere.
Besides, if two stores are doing something that's against the law, that doesn't make it suddenly legal. Just like the traffic laws, if there are other drivers speeding on the 401, I can't just say to the cops "well speeding must be legal now - other people are doing it too".
Everybody should be following the laws, and not looking for loop holes and excuses from others who are breaking the same law.