Slashdot Mirror
EB Demands Payment From Victim of Theft
blincoln writes "ABC Action News is reporting that a Florida Electronics Boutique bought stolen games and gaming hardware, and made a profit on selling them back to their rightful owner, refusing to return the merchandise unless she paid them. From the article: 'EB Games still insists it will not refund Michelle's money. If she wants her money back, the company said, she can go through the legal system and get restitution from the thief.' In addition, EB appears to be violating the law by re-selling used merchandise without holding it for the required number of days. I was under the impression that purchasers of stolen merchandise could expect it to be seized by the police (who would return it to the owner) and not recover any of the money they spent buying it unless they took action against the thief. Is that not the case in Florida?"
how is this even an issue? the law clearly states that they must hold the goods for a certain amount of time (10 days
if I'm not mistaken before they're given away. The article says she went to the store after two days and they had already
sold her playstation. They clearly violated law and should be reported to the authorities, not the manager as she did.
It seems like EB's operations in Florida are illegal because under state law they have to hold any used good they buy for 15 days specifically to allow for any such claim of theft to be made. EB clearly sold some of the goods before that time, so they're in trouble.
So, now, the only question is why it's a local TV station pointing this out instead of the local police? EB's used goods operation isn't complying with state law. That's the bigger problem...
The article mentions her writing letters and going to the store, but never mentions police. If you believe a merchant has stolen goods, call the cops!
So they buy stolen goods without checking. They dont hold it forthe required 15 days. They then refuse to reimburse the person for the goods they illegally sold. They refuse to return the goods (without pay) that they unknowingly receaved through illegal channels. I was under the impression that in a case like this, EB should be returning the goods and seeking restitution from the thief, while the person who's property was stolen gets their goods back from EB. Of course, I'm no lawyer, but that's only common sense.
as stated in the article, they didn't hold them for 15 days, specifically designed for preventing this sort of thing.
But isn't there a law on the books about buying stolen goods? I always thought that that was a crime as well.
EB is obviously not looking at the big picture here. They want to recoup the cost of the stuff that they bought. However, a good response here (like giving her her stuff and sucking the loss), is going to win a good customer (this store did the right thing, that's why I purchase from them).
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
EB has only be stealing from customers figuratively with selling games they pay $20 (in credit, mind you) for back to $47.99. $2 off used instead of new for a $50. Wow, how thoughtful.
Of course, that's provided that you buy new and your "new" game isn't simply a re-shrinked used game being sold as new.
Next up on the list of EB crimes against consumers will be punching you in the face after each purchase, followed by stealing back what you just bought.
Regardless of whether or not EB knew the goods were stolen when they purchased them from the thief, they did not not take reasonable precautions to ensure that they weren't stolen, such as follow the 15 day law.
EB's actions were simply reprehensible, and I, for one, will no longer deal with them.
The theif admitted that he went to EB because they don't do any check on the goods and don't ask questions, In my estimation this amounts to a fencing operation posing as a reputable business. I hope the local law enforcement stings them.
I don't believe it is EB's policy to hold games for a certain amount of days before they can resell them.
I see, they've chosen to opt out of that law. Do they have a policy on whether they're allowed to keep slaves too?
Isn't this what small claims court is for? Seems open and shut enough to me. Not much sense for a business to pursue it further than that, given that a few hunderd bucks in lawyers' fees are easily spent.
Of course, after getting your money back in small claims court, set the cops loose on em for fencing.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
"He said that he went in there and took it. He was hard up for money for his rent," Wayne Welsh said. "He took them to EB Games in Gulfview Square Mall and sold them...he said that's where they don't do a check and he can sell them without worrying about the police finding out he stole them."
This isn't a random occurrence. He already knew where to go to sell them without any checks.That indicates that this store has a history of such deals. It seems that the cops should be doing a lot of digging into that store's previous dealings.
From the EBgames.com website: If you would like to speak to a Customer Service representative for any reason , please call us at 1-877-432-9675. Hours of operation: Open 7 days a week, 8:00 am to midnight EST.
If enough of us call to let them know about what we think of their policies, they might understand the magnitude of their problem. The call's free folks, and so is 5 minutes of your time on a Sunday.
Some friends of mine recently had a whole shelf of DVD's stolen from their apartment (some of which were expensive imports from Japan). They contacted the police, filed the report, and were told that they should first call around to all the local used disc stores, starting with whichever ones were physically closest to their apartment. If the used disc store is on the up-and-up and wants to avoid legal troubles, they should be able to give them the goods back for free, and then it's *their* job to push things through the legal system to try to get reimbursed by the thief. Thus the legal hassles are offloaded from the original victim of theft to the store that bought the stolen goods, and the original victim walks away from the whole affair and doesn't need to be involved (except perhaps to give testimony as a witness in the event).
The preferred method was to have the victim of the theft do all the 'legwork' and only involve the police if there is some difficulty in getting cooperation.
Well, it worked. They found someone had just sold an alottment of DVD's that exactly matched the list of stolen goods (minus one that the thief apparently kept or lost). The store was cooperative and returned the goods. They had the name of the thief on record (and he'd stupidly used his real ID and real name when selling the goods), and were going to deal with the court case themselves.
That was the last we'd heard of the incident.
It would be a happy ending if it wasn't for the fact that the thief (remember he used his real name) turned out to be a friend we all knew. He knew about the DVD's because he'd been invited over on occasion to watch them. Obviously, this incident was the end of friendly relations with the guy. When my friend called him on the phone, he claimed "Oh, yeah, those DVD's, uhm yeah, some homeless black guy said he just found them and he gave a bunch of them to me. I didn't realize they were yours or I would have given them to you, dude." (Yeah, right - some of those DVD's were really obscure rare items, so there's no way he could fail to notice that that exact combination of DVD's was the same as the ones at his friend's house.)
Some people can be real scum.
But anyway, the point of the story is that this incident is an example of how pawn shops are supposed to work when everything is being done legally and with good intentions, unlike what EB games did.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
But when Michelle went back to EB Games to pick up her lost property, she got another shock. EB Games insisted on selling her back her own property for roughly twice as much as they had paid the thief.
In point of fact, it's not the police, exactly, who enforce the court's decision, but the county/city/whatever jurisdiction the court has's Sheriff's Dept.
+++ATH0
First, Dragoon412 is describing every retail store. During peak periods, for example, "this past holiday season", there's not a retail store anywhere that's backroom is not stocked "6 to 8 feet in the employee bathroom for lack of anywhere else to put merchandise." That's because it was Christmas. 20-box deliveries are normal, but only during Christmas.
Moreover, I can't really think of any retail chain that specifically allows its individual stores to order individual products. Specific ordering on a store level for any chain that buys in bulk is an inventory management nightmare and would come at nothing less than a huge cost, and therefore price, increase.
Why the low emphasis on gaming knowledge? As a former EB assistant manager, I'll tell you. Typically, people who "know about games" don't work. They sit on their asses during paid hours and talk about games with other people you've hired that "know about games." Nine times out of ten, you hire a guy who is "knowledgeable" and you've hired a poor worker. They don't sell. They don't work. They talk about games. They're elist and will, quite undiplomatically, tell customers that the game that customer has brought to the counter "sucks." Give me a good salesperson over a knowledgable gamer any day. That's not to suggest that a good salesperson will not learn about the product she sells. She will. But the ones who write on their application "I know a lot about video games because I've been playing them 5 hours a day since I was five" are not the people you want working in your store, because, simply, they won't work.
In reference both to Dragoon412's comment and to the original article, there is little consistency of quality between any retail chain. I think the EB I worked at was run extremely tightly, with an emphasis on professionalism, politeness, and gaming knowledge. I've been to other EBs where that is definitly not the case, which is just like any other retail chain. They're highly dependent on the personality and drive of the manager. Surprise.
Secondly, as already stated, EB is not the same store as Gamestop. While Babbages/Gamestop - which are all owned by Barnes and Noble - might use DOS still, EB does not use a DOS-based POS. While they are now in the minority, when I worked at EB in the mall I noticed that many other retail stores are still on rudimentory POS. What does that have to do with selling inside the safety period mentioned in the article, or even running a good store? Not a damn thing. A good manager and employees can run a tight, strong, customer-centric store with a pen and a pad (as once nightmaringly demonstrated at my store on a Black Friday).
Yes, you'll find game stores that are run horribly, as the article so acutely demonstrates. You might have to look hard, but what you will eventually also find, though, are hard working people in EB (and presumably Gamestop) who care about their work and their customers. I know I sound like I'm pitching the company line here. Nevertheless, I have as many anti-corporate Steven Morgan jokes as the next guy. Dragoon421's "EB" store and the one in the article are individual stores not indicative of the entire company.
The chain's corporate HQ could sue the franchise holder for damaging the corporate name through his illegal actions. Reimbursing this lady is necessary, but it is no longer enough by itself.
I would agree reimbursement is not enough. But I think Corporate should go a step further. Instead of suing, they should very publically revoke the franshise agreement. There are generally some pretty strong conditions on tarnishing the brand. If it was 'common knowledge' as the story indicates that this store didn't do checks (making it a common, recurring practice), etc, and then in this case knowingly sold stolen property (back to the original owner), I don't think they'd have any problem terminating their agreement.
Of course RFID tags are manufactured by Satan himself and there is no legitimate use for them, or at least so say the /. editors.
Lasers Controlled Games!
It is natural to look to various issues of injustice and argue what the result should be. In practice, a seasoned lawyer will recognize that the devil is always in the details, and that the general hypothetical might well be settled either way. In the absence of a comprehensive understanding of the facts, we are just guessing.
I have learned, from extensive experience, that news reporting as to details is terribly weak. The news gets it right as to the big picture with astonishing frequency, but almost every news article I have seen published with which I had intimate familiarity with the details contains several material errors. In short, don't believe everything you read.
Note, further, that law does not always provide a civil remedy for every bad action of a person or company, even where the conduct of EB may have been a violation or a crime. It is quite possible that EB may be subject to fines or worse, but that the buyer's sole recourse would be against the thief. It may well be that EB may be subject to restitution for various forms of conversion, plus punitive damages. Who knows? The devil is in the details. Without the facts, we'd just be guessing.