Before Marlene leaves Crappy Tire forever, she should at least get back the extra $50 she spent on "Black Friday", owed to her because they dropped the price by 50% just days after the so-called "Black Friday" sale.
Her best option is simply to bring in the first item, unopened, and return it with the matching receipt, using the "90 day" return option. Then she can re-buy it at the sale price (assuming she's still willing to be a customer of Crappy Tire). Nothing wrong with that, and it follows all their own rules - they just don't like it because it means they didn't get to screw over a customer with their bogus 7-day Price Guarantee rip-off. Too bad, CT!
---
But here's an interesting scenario to consider: Is it fraud? Or no-fraud?
- Lets say she Marlene wanted to buy a second, identical item. Why not? It was worth buying one - maybe she thought it was good enough that she wanted another!
- She happens to have to first item in the trunk of her car when she goes back to the store.
- She goes in to buy the second one. Hey! It's even on sale, half price!
- She buys the second item at half-price, and puts it in her trunk, right beside the first one.
- Then she drives around a bit. Does some errands or whatever.
- But while she's out, she thinks, "Gee do I really need two of those?" She decides she doesn't need a second one, so she heads back to The Red Triangle of Crap.
- On the drive, she takes some fast corners and hits a speed bump or two. Swerves to miss a squirrel, maybe.
- Back at CT, she opens her trunk. Oops! The items have moved and shifted.
- Which one was the first one she bought? And which was the second?
According to the Crappy People, she absolutely, positively has to pick the right item, even though they are identical in every way.
Why?
Because if she accidentally pick the 2nd on and return it with the 1st receipt, she is guilty of FRAUD! She will go to jail, and the CT'ers have claimed that their conviction rate is 100%! Yikes! (But how do they know? Are they clairvoyant? Is that admissible evidence?)
Only if she somehow can pick out the 1st item, and return THAT one with the 1st receipt, is she being law-abiding, and completely innocent on all charges.
And her odds? Exactly 50/50.
What is poor Marlene do?
(Well, the Crappy People would say, "Keep both", LOL!)
But obviously, it matters not which one Marlene picks, because they are identical, and as long as she is not trying to deceive anyone, there is no fraud at all, in the legal sense of the term.
It wouldn't matter to Marlene, and it wouldn't matter to Canadian Tire, either. Identical is identical.
Besides, nobody, not CT and not Marlene, could say for sure which item was purchased first.
In fact, the only reason this comes up at all, is the Crappy People are looking for any excuse at all to keep Marlene's money, and this bogus "7 day" limit is there for exactly that reason.
Her best option is simply to bring in the first item, unopened, and return it with the matching receipt, using the "90 day" return option. Then she can re-buy it at the sale price (assuming she's still willing to be a customer of Crappy Tire). Nothing wrong with that, and it follows all their own rules - they just don't like it because it means they didn't get to screw over a customer with their bogus 7-day Price Guarantee rip-off. Too bad, CT!
---
But here's an interesting scenario to consider: Is it fraud? Or no-fraud?
- Lets say she Marlene wanted to buy a second, identical item. Why not? It was worth buying one - maybe she thought it was good enough that she wanted another!
- She happens to have to first item in the trunk of her car when she goes back to the store.
- She goes in to buy the second one. Hey! It's even on sale, half price!
- She buys the second item at half-price, and puts it in her trunk, right beside the first one.
- Then she drives around a bit. Does some errands or whatever.
- But while she's out, she thinks, "Gee do I really need two of those?" She decides she doesn't need a second one, so she heads back to The Red Triangle of Crap.
- On the drive, she takes some fast corners and hits a speed bump or two. Swerves to miss a squirrel, maybe.
- Back at CT, she opens her trunk. Oops! The items have moved and shifted.
- Which one was the first one she bought? And which was the second?
According to the Crappy People, she absolutely, positively has to pick the right item, even though they are identical in every way.
Why?
Because if she accidentally pick the 2nd on and return it with the 1st receipt, she is guilty of FRAUD! She will go to jail, and the CT'ers have claimed that their conviction rate is 100%! Yikes! (But how do they know? Are they clairvoyant? Is that admissible evidence?)
Only if she somehow can pick out the 1st item, and return THAT one with the 1st receipt, is she being law-abiding, and completely innocent on all charges.
And her odds? Exactly 50/50.
What is poor Marlene do?
(Well, the Crappy People would say, "Keep both", LOL!)
But obviously, it matters not which one Marlene picks, because they are identical, and as long as she is not trying to deceive anyone, there is no fraud at all, in the legal sense of the term.
It wouldn't matter to Marlene, and it wouldn't matter to Canadian Tire, either. Identical is identical.
Besides, nobody, not CT and not Marlene, could say for sure which item was purchased first.
In fact, the only reason this comes up at all, is the Crappy People are looking for any excuse at all to keep Marlene's money, and this bogus "7 day" limit is there for exactly that reason.
Last edited: