Slashdot Mirror
Best Buy Sued By Ohio
liryon writes "The Register is reporting that the state of Ohio has sued national electronics retailer Best Buy for misleading customers by repackaging used goods and then selling them as new, and for failing to pay rebate claims. The Register report can be found here, and the original story is here. I guess this is what you get for deciding the customer is not always right." See also the Ohio AG's press release.
The customer is not *always* right. The business is not *always* right. No one is always right. That's why treating your customers with respect (which sometimes means saying "no" to the truly asinine requests) is the best way to be successful.
Having been a Best Buy employee for three very long months in 1999, I can tell you that respect for the customer is *far* from BBUY's focus--it's all about PSPs, PSPs, PSPs--that's Product Support Plan, or BBUY's in-house extended warranty. I was told to lie about service policies, suggest that the product would be broken and unusable in a year without the PSP, and even offer discounts off of an item's price up to the amount of the PSP (and I worked in PC & Home Office, so the PSP was $199)--ANYTHING to get the customer to buy the damn thing.
That place is as close to evil as any company that exists. Not honoring rebates is probably in one of their SOP manuals.
I try to shop online to get a 7% discount avoiding the sales tax penalty for local purchases. I would not mind buy locally but I ran into just as many problems at a local retailer as online.
You know, you're supposed to claim all online purchases on your tax returns anyway. Also, I'd hardly call the 7% sales tax a penalty. It puts alot of money into the state. You don't want your state ending up like California; billions in debt.
Bugs are just features that have been fixed.
Yah, but crazy thing, I can't find anything I've bought online or through mailorder, no matter how hard I look.
You don't want your state ending up like California; billions in debt
You're right, I don't. They should rein in their spending if they are spending more than they are taking in.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
It doesn't excuse the guy in question from reading the fine print before blowing his money on one of these worthless "service plans,"
I'd like to point this out as a fallacy and a fraud. It is no secret that no one reads the fine print. There is no such thing as fine print. For the greatest part everything is in the same font size. It's called fine print because it's obfuscated. Obfuscation is deception and is also FRAUD. Fine print is an art of fraud. There is no secret in this.
Is it really nothing more than dishonest greed and graft which prompts the courts to uphold fine print?
+++ATHZ 99:5:80