Stupid return policy to hide employee theft?

G

Guest-0572

Posted by an unregistered user
CT_MANAGER said:
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.



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.
Click to expand...

Watch the store turn around and sell it for $179 again (as new).
 
C

CT Challenger

New member
sarahWR said:
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.
Click to expand...

Interesting case from Store #272.

CanLII - 2007 CanLII 49745 (ON LRB)

A 16-year-old cashier entered the wrong amount for a customer's credit card payment - an extra $1000. This was an honest error, but a big one.

Despite having a policy of escalating warnings, the store skipped their own steps, and fired her at the first opportunity.

Even though she had done nothing illegal, they also threatened her, to compel her to give them her last pay cheque. This was contrary to Regulation 288/01.

Fortunately, the judge made them give her pay back to her.

But their threats also caused the young lady to give them $40 out of her own purse. Since this wasn't part of her pay, the judge couldn't order the store to repay her.

Nice job, Store #272!
 
C

CT Challenger

New member
There are several issues in the original story.

First, there's the issue of restocking fees. Customers should be clearly told that there will be a restocking fee prior to the purchase. It's not good enough to put a sign at Customer Service saying which items will have these fees, but in fact I've never seen such a sign in a Crappy store. Even putting a notice on the receipt isn't sufficient notice, but Crappy didn't even go that far. And there isn't even anything on the web site about restocking fees at all.

Then, there's the question of when a fee it to be charged. Since the web site, store signage and receipt are silent on this point, we can only guess what rules were used. But, if all the store needed to do was hang the bike back up, then there's no justification for a fee.

There is also the issue of 'original condition'. The customer said it "had a few scuffs on the seat", so it wasn't even in 'original condition' for them. Either it wasn't looked after in the store, or it has already been used and then returned. So, the customer didn't even get it in "original condition" when they purchased it. The customer went on to say, "returned in same condition as bought" and had "used once to go around the block twice to try out". So, it was in "original condition", and this should not have been an issue.

CT_MANAGER said:
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.
Click to expand...

There is no reason to assume that the bike was dirty - the customer even said that this was not the case. You are just making things up, to try to justify the poor treatment that this customer received.

CT_MANAGER said:
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.
Click to expand...

More guess-work and assumptions that are not justified.

If we are taking turns making wild guesses, the fee was more than likely an attempt to rip off a customer who merely wanted to return an unsatisfactory item in its original condition, according to the store's own policies.

The original story, and the resonse of CT_MANGER, are warning to other consumers to avoid Crappy Tire. If consumers decide to take a risk by purchasing from Crappy Tire, then need to be very wary of hidden fees and unstated policies.
 
C

CT Challenger

New member
Unregistered said:
Store did her a favor taking a used bike back. Normally bike places don't take bikes back once used.
Click to expand...

Ripping off someone for an undisclosed fee isn't doing a customer a 'favour'.

If they'd charged a bigger fee, that wouldn't have been doing a bigger favour, lol!

No, the store was obligated to take it back if it was "in its original condition and packaging".

The bogus fee was just an extra slap in the face. They they hung the bike back up and kept the extra money.

Not honest, and certainly no 'favourable'.
 
C

CT_MANAGER

New member
Unregistered said:
If we are taking turns making wild guesses, the fee was more than likely an attempt to rip off a customer who merely wanted to return an unsatisfactory item in its original condition, according to the store's own policies.
Click to expand...

Obviously what I said was a GUESS; I was not there. I never said it WAS the reason for it, I merely stated it MAY have been the reason. I was not there to see the condition of the bike and neither were you so we are BOTH guessing.

Personally I've never worked in a store that had restocking fee's. I'd like to know how the restocking fee was charged to the customer. Looking at the customers return receipt would indicate how this was done. Was there a 98# number the store uses? Or did the customer service rep/manager reduce the return another way. That would be where we should go next.
 
C

CT Challenger

New member
C

CT Challenger

New member
A

Angry CT Guy

Posted by an unregistered user
Unregistered said:
i really liked the closing:


Stores that proudly provide do-it-yourself service -- with no attempt to help the confused - don't deserve our continued patronage.Customers should stop going to retailers that stint on staff.

We have the power to change things, so let's use it.​
Click to expand...

Actually, the majority of customers have spoken already and things have changed. Gone are most of the highly staffed, highly trained retail staff. They've been put out of business by big box retailers with much lower pricing. At the end of the day, pricing was the deciding factor and people weren't willing to pay a premium for expertise.
Not too many niche shops popping up, but lots of mass retailers. Lots of people want both, low prices and lots of staff with good expertise. Let me know when you find it.
 
C

CT Challenger

New member
Unregistered said:
typical non response when losing the battle.....89 years and millions of customers every year. tsk, tsk faker advocate.
Click to expand...

Please ignore the Angry Crappy Tire Trolll:

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]
 
C

CT Me / Lawguy

Posted by an unregistered user
Unregistered said:
Interesting, how things are so bad in the U.S.

Geez, the Crappy People sure are fascinated with the marketplace south of the border.

Hey, speaking of the U.S., how'd that expansion work out for you, into Texas?

Any plans for another move? It only cost you losers $30 million last time, LOL!
Click to expand...

Again with your economics and business genius display. You are aware that what happens in the United States has a major impact on Canada? Oh yes and your beloved Lowe's - who recently you claimed alongside walmart and home depot were better stock buys then Canadian Tire. Looks to me like a big ole Lowes low to me. Closing stores....oops

Now what's the matter sharp shooter? run out of ammunition again so the best you have is a mistake made 30 years ago? I wasn't even 10 years old when that happened LOL imagine how much I care.
 
C

CT Challenger

New member
Hey, if the Crappy People want to compare themselves to U.S. retailers, then they should just re-enter than market, then start drawing comparisons.

Yeah, good luck with that - LOL!

They sure don't like to hear about their dismal failure in that market previously, yet them keep bringing it up - hilarious!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top