Page 30 of 33 First ... 202829303132 ... Last
Results 291 to 300 of 322

Thread: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

  1. #291
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    If a cashier skims his/her till, they HAVE TO pay it back, from $5 to $1000. If their till is out a thousand dollars, s/he is suspended for a month without pay or fired depending on the decision by the store owner. Maybe not all cash offices run as efficiently as they should, but customers are not being cheated out of their CT money.
    Reminder, if you pay with a credit card, that isn't a CT credit card, you don't receive CT money for the transaction. Some of the accusations that ALL CT cashiers are actually con-artists that compete with one another to steal CT money, actually makes me laugh. Stealing CT money? So we can do what, shop at Canadian Tire with our CT nickels? Genius.
    Bogus information....liar! It is against employment standards act to have cashiers pay back money they are short (unless it was stolen and they are prosecuted by law). Same as it is against the law to make an employee pay for damages if they crash a company car or something. You guys who spend your days calling us liars, really have no clue. You just invent stuff and call it the truth. By the way, because each of our stores is owned by someone, the policies about discipline, termination, suspension etc....vary from store to store. So to claim that "this" is how it's handled is a lie.

    By the way i was reading the news this week about all sorts of credit card fraud and theft and guess who's name popped up......Canad.........oh wait no, it was SONY, again!!!! Watch out for the CT clerk, she's likely scamming you. haha oh yah and entering drivers license information and product serial number information into the computer, despite the fact there is no computer system in our stores that takes that information. I better add that to the lies told by CT haters.

  2. #292

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    It would be nice if somebody provided some verifiable proof on this topic, one way or another ... and on a suitable thread (even if one has to be added under "General Canadian Tire Complaints" or something.

  3. #293

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    That's not true.. I am a cashier at a canadian tire and they will not make you pay it back. If you're short that much you will be fired for good, not suspended. If they know it's you actually stealing the money, they will bring you to court to get their money. But they can't make you pay it back without proof that it is YOUR fault the money is gone.

  4. #294
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0276's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    690
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    I wonder if CT would have noticed had the customer not come in for the car? Trifling indeed!

    CTV Calgary- Canadian Tire repair leads to stolen car - CTV News

  5. #295
    Never again
    Guest Never again's Avatar

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    I wonder if CT would have noticed had the customer not come in for the car? Trifling indeed!

    CTV Calgary- Canadian Tire repair leads to stolen car - CTV News
    Interesting story. I really rolled my eyes reading the part where the store tries to claim that any car in their parking lot is not their responsibility. Nice. So, in other words, take your car there for repairs but don't expect it to be looked after.

  6. #296
    Posted by an unregistered user CT Me / Lawguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    494
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    Quote Originally Posted by Never again View Post
    Interesting story. I really rolled my eyes reading the part where the store tries to claim that any car in their parking lot is not their responsibility. Nice. So, in other words, take your car there for repairs but don't expect it to be looked after.
    No retailer and no auto repair shop will take responsibility for a car when it's in the parking lot. You will see signs posted everywhere that say not responsible for theft from vehicles. You'll see it an the airport, at the subway parking lots, in malls. If someone steals something or the something is the whole car, how is that the stores fault? Are they supposed to put a guard by every car in the lot?

    If it's in the shop and gets damaged, yes. Employee test driving or driving in or out of a shop, yes. All of that is covered.

    So in other words, again just a prime example of an angry consumer who thinks if it happened at Canadian Tire it must be their fault. Biased opinions are not facts

  7. #297
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0276's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    690
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    No retailer and no auto repair shop will take responsibility for a car when it's in the parking lot. You will see signs posted everywhere that say not responsible for theft from vehicles. You'll see it an the airport, at the subway parking lots, in malls. If someone steals something or the something is the whole car, how is that the stores fault? Are they supposed to put a guard by every car in the lot?

    If it's in the shop and gets damaged, yes. Employee test driving or driving in or out of a shop, yes. All of that is covered.

    So in other words, again just a prime example of an angry consumer who thinks if it happened at Canadian Tire it must be their fault. Biased opinions are not facts
    All this huffing and puffing and CT is ignoring another important fact. Where were the car keys? Certainly the garage had it at one time. So, the thieves walked right in, grabbed the keys and left with the car, without anyone from the CT garage noticing. LOL. Still not CT's fault right? I'm going to think really really hard here and come up with a CT excuse. It must be the customers fault for giving you the keys in the first place so that you can keep it somewhere, where it's not safe. Good job!

  8. #298
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0483's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    No retailer and no auto repair shop will take responsibility for a car when it's in the parking lot. You will see signs posted everywhere that say not responsible for theft from vehicles. You'll see it an the airport, at the subway parking lots, in malls. If someone steals something or the something is the whole car, how is that the stores fault? Are they supposed to put a guard by every car in the lot?

    If it's in the shop and gets damaged, yes. Employee test driving or driving in or out of a shop, yes. All of that is covered.

    So in other words, again just a prime example of an angry consumer who thinks if it happened at Canadian Tire it must be their fault. Biased opinions are not facts
    Your biased opinions aren't factual, so I agree.
    If I leave my vehicle in your care, then it's your responsibility. That's fact. Not "biased opinion".

  9. #299
    Posted by an unregistered user Guest-0571's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    just paid $10.00 restocking fee on a $179. bicycle (under5%) -for the reason it was too big and too heavy for me--used once to go around the block twice to try out -returned in same condition as bought--it seemed to have been returned by someone else before i bought it bc it was on the floor instead of hanging up and had a few scuffs on the seat,which i didnt object to-while i object to a restocking fee that is not mentioned anywhere on the bill or at the time of purchase this one at least is not exorbitant--the 30% one is outrageous- this one at marine drive store

  10. #300

    Re: Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    jused once to go aound the block twice to try out -returned in same condition as bought
    In otherwords it was not in the same condition as when you bought it. It's not considered new when you ride it around the block outside on the dirt/pavement.

    Reminds me of customers who bring back vacuum's claiming it's not powerful enough but swear they didn't use it at all. Yet when asked to explain how they know it is not powerful enough if it was not used, they then say they tried it once and was not poweful enough.

    In otherwords we CANNOT resell it because it's IS USED. Open the box and sure enough dirt and carpet fibers in "never used" (yet someone not powerful enough) the canister.

    --it seemed to have been returned by someone else before i bought it bc it was on the floor instead of hanging up
    Please explain how a product can be assume used because it was not put back in the home? (in this case, being hung up).

    The restocking fee was more than likely because the bicycle was used and could not be resold under the conditions of it being new and unused.

Page 30 of 33 First ... 202829303132 ... Last

Similar Threads

  1. Return Policy is false advertizing
    By Guest-0042 in forum Personal Stories
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: April 14th, 2014, 05:50 PM
  2. Return policy
    By Bob in forum Personal Stories
    Replies: 164
    Last Post: June 14th, 2012, 09:38 PM
  3. Ask an Employee
    By Employee in forum Employees Speak Out
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2012, 11:08 PM
  4. Canadian Tire doesn't honor their return policy?
    By Guest-0160 in forum General Canadian Tire Complaints / Chat
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: June 6th, 2011, 12:13 PM
  5. stupid b**ch hit my son......
    By dizzy in forum General Canadian Tire Complaints / Chat
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 4th, 2010, 03:06 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions