How Your Returns Are Used Against You At Best Buy, Other Retailers (nbcnews.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Wall Street Journal (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source): At Best Buy, returning too many items within a short time can hurt a person's score, as can returning high-theft items such as digital cameras. Every time shoppers returns purchases to Best Buy, they are tracked by a company which has the power to override the store's touted policy and refuse to refund their money. That is because the electronics giant is one of several chains that have hired a service called The Retail Equation to score customers' shopping behavior and impose limits on the amount of merchandise they can return. Stores have long used generous return guidelines to lure more customers, but such policies also invite abuse. Retailers estimate 11% of their sales are returned, and of those, 11% are likely fraudulent returns, according to a 2017 survey of 63 retailers by the National Retail Federation. Return fraud or abuse occurs when customers exploit the return process, such as requesting a refund for items they have used, stolen or bought somewhere else.

Amazon.com Inc. and other online players that have made it easy to return items have changed consumer expectations, adding pressure on brick-and-mortar chains. Some retailers monitor return fraud in-house, but Best Buy and others pay The Retail Equation to track and score each customer's return behavior for both in-store and online purchases. The service also works with Home Depot, J.C. Penney, Sephora and Victoria's Secret. Some retailers use the system only to assess returns made without a receipt. Best Buy uses The Retail Equation to assess all returns, even those made with a receipt.

Comments

I dunno about anyone else

[jareth-0205]

I always assumed this was the case? And it's not really unreasonable is it? Like, some people are going to take the piss, and it's not ridiculous that the company would keep track of customers that are causing them costs.

I'm the last person to be an apologist for big business, but this seems fairly reasonable to me...

Re:I dunno about anyone else

[ark1]

I support the overall concept however stores should be transparent if they are participating. You should also have the right to view your so called profile aggregated by Retail Equation to make sure the system is properly tracking your returns. Sort of like you can track your credit history.

Online is losing money hand over fist

[DogDude]

E-commerce has tons of sales, but they're all losing tons of money, too. Free returns? Free shipping. Yeah, that's not profitable for anybody, including Amazon. How long will investors tolerate losses?

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[mark-t]

Refusal to give a refund is not generally a valid reason for a CC chargeback. For one thing, you still have the merchandise you paid for.

"How Your Returns Are Used Against You"

[Dutch Gun]

So, basically, if you try to take advantage of the system, they'll call you on it. Not seeing the problem here. Sounds like someone trying to manufacture outrage as though the stores are trying to screw you over, but it sounds like they're just trying to protect themselves against a somewhat common type of fraud.

Or am I wrong here? If so, maybe someone can explain. I rarely shop retail these days, and I rarely return items.

Re:"How Your Returns Are Used Against You"

[Anonymous Coward]

As anyone who has ever worked retail will tell you, there are a lot of entitled assholes who over estimate their own cleverness. People will try to return a rusty grill they've gotten years of good use out of, and then get angry when the poor schmuck at the register expresses skepticism that they bought it last week. charred burger remains and all (regrettably, that's not a made up example).

Problem is, plan B for these societal dregs is to throw a temper tantrum in the middle of the store in the hopes that management would rather give them what they want just to get them out of the store. Unfortunately, they're usually right. Even the floor managers aren't paid enough to deal with some man-child (or woman child as the case may be) having a hissy fit while disturbing the decent customers. I wonder how this sort of system will handle the real shameless cases. The computer might say no, but management just wants them out of there without making a scene.

Hey, by all means, return things if you want. Everyone's gotten items that turned out to be either faulty or just not what they want, and there's nothing wrong with expecting decent customer service in either case. But oh boy, there's some real batshit cases out there who will abuse the heck out of anything they can, and then smugly act as if their immaturity makes them savvy shoppers.

Re:"How Your Returns Are Used Against You"

[Anonymous Coward]

It reminds me of when I used to pay for some items by check and I had a check declined. I'd never bounced a check, and I had more than enough money in my bank account to cover the purchase. I asked why and was referred to Telecheck. I didn't realize that check purchases were being tracked, and I did a bit of online searching. Then I called up the store for more information and the manager indicated I should actually call a different company who was responsible instead of Telecheck. They declined the check and then they proceeded to give me the run around when I wanted to know why. I'd done nothing wrong, and wasn't actually able to get an answer as to why my check was declined. The basic issues are the false positives and the lack of transparency.

The issues are essentially the same here, plus that this system isn't going to be particularly effective at stopping abuse. Although the return tracking isn't especially transparent, it seems there may be a limit of three returns in a year before being flagged for abuse. If I purchase 10 items from a store and I try to return four of them, that's a high percentage. If I purchase 100 items from that store and I try to return four of them, that's a low percentage, and I'm a good customer who occasionally returns items. Amazon is able to track the percentage of returns that I make, and therefore is able to distinguish between the two scenarios I described. This system seems incapable of doing so, and disproportionately will impact customers who make lots of purchases and return a small percentage of them. I agree that retailers have a good reason to mitigate return fraud, but this may not be a very effective way to do so.

Best Buy's returns policy only discusses how they use your ID at the very bottom of the page, buried beneath all of the other information. Worse than that, the page only says "our third party processor" and doesn't actually say who is tracking the users. In fairness, it says they only require an ID if there isn't other proof or purchase. I think it's very reasonable to track returns made without proof of purchase, and hopefully that's all they're doing. If so, I think they should be much more transparent about what they're doing, but it's not unreasonable in principle.

Re:"How Your Returns Are Used Against You"

[fafalone]

Well, I for one have exactly zero confidence this won't eventually (if not currently) be used to deny entirely legitimate returns as they push harder to reduce costs-- eventually that will result in increasing improper denials. "Oh sorry, you've exceeded your return quota of 1 item every 3 months, so this must be fraudulent as that's excessive."

Re:"How Your Returns Are Used Against You"

[guruevi]

The problem is not taking advantage of the system, the problem is that many people are unaware of their rights and these lists are typically turned abusive rather than stopping actual 'fraud'. It's easy to end up on the list because you returned a number of high value items and you otherwise don't frequent the retailers for high value items.

On the other hand you can always initiate a chargeback on your credit card. AutoZone once attempted to refuse me a refund. Sold me a set of wipers where one wouldn't fit and they wouldn't take it back because "store policy" (I opened the package and only then noticed that they sold me the wrong length for one side). I told the manager: sure, I'll just contact my credit card company and get the purchase voided. Instantly changed their tune.

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[msauve]

I've been on enough boards to know that there exists a significant "customer" base which is perfectly willing to unethically take maximum benefit of easy return policies for personal benefit. Like - "I know the new TV models will be out in a month, but I want a 4K now, so I'll buy one and then return it and get a new one when they're available." (or, "I'll buy one for my Superbowl party, and return it a couple weeks later" or similar)

That's why we can't have nice things (policies). If someone's purchase doesn't meet their legitimate, reasonable expectations, fine, return it. But there are many who know up front that they'll be returning it later, or expect to go through multiple returns so they can cherry pick the best of the best. Fuck 'em. Such abuse only ends up costing everyone else more, and I have an issue with funding reprobates.

There are many sides to this

[MpVpRb]

Someone who is super picky, and has a problem with everything they buy, and returns a lot of stuff is a customer to be avoided

If I was a seller, I would blacklist them

Someone who has real problems with stuff not working right should be able to return it

I think the bigger thing folks are missing

[rsilvergun]

is that this is the big data folks keep talking about. I'll leave figuring out how this can (will?) be abused as an exercise for the reader, but regardless this puts more power in the hands of retailers and contributes to tipping the balance between consumer/retailer. Airlines do the same thing with rapid price changes, and yes there's a bit of an arms race on right now, but I don't expect plucky consumers to come out ahead. There was already a lopsided power imbalance before all the mergers and acquisitions and leveraged buyout fueled bankruptcies.

TL;DR. We need to consider the effects of large sets of cheaply available consumer data being easily traded among the few retailers that are left.

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[Anonymous Coward]

A charge back because a store refused to abide by their printed and posted policies is a valid reason for a charge back. I can tell you that American Express fully supports this as long as you show what the store policy is and that you attempted to return in good faith within the terms of the store policy.

Scanning IDs?

[silverkniveshotmail.]

I wonder how they handle valid forms of ID that aren't driver licenses if their system doesn't understand them like passport cards or IDs from other countries.

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[GuB-42]

That's the problem with big companies. There is no respect from either side.
Big companies don't care about you, and in return people don't care about the well being of the company. The gap is so large that executives forget that customers and low rank employees are people not just profit making machines. And in return, customers who abuse the system don't seem to realize that by doing that, they hurt the small people (like other customers and employees) more than executives.

Machine Learning Failure?

[mentil]

It seems the retailer inputs driver's license number and address, or scans the barcode if it has one. That's how one is tracked. Retail return policies generally have a catch-all "we can refuse any refund for any or no reason at our discretion" clause, which is used in this case. It seems The Retail Equation (TRE) presumably uses machine learning fraud-detection systems, like a credit or debit card company uses, only you can't call them to force the transaction through, so you're just stuck with no way out. Given that returns are a cost-center for retailers, this is a 'feature' rather than a bug. Getting flagged means no returns to that store for 365 days, and you only find out after you've bought your merchandise; so if you bought clothes unsure if your spouse likes how they look, or if they'll be comfortable, then you're SOL if not. TRE has been around for several years, their website says 1999, and I found complaints about them online dating back to at least 2011.

TFA gives an anecdote of a guy who was blacklisted from his first return... before he even made it. So he was allowed zero returns from Best Buy before being banned from returns. Apparently, it triggers so rarely that there haven't been enough complaints about false positives to cause retailers to ditch the system. In my experience, customer complaints can cause a company to loosen its return policies to the point of letting pretty-obvious fraud through, although larger companies are probably less likely to care. I guess the moral is, shop at smaller stores if you're not certain you want something, and check the return policy.

Re:How can you return a stolen item?

[Anonymous Coward]

you steal an item from a store. You hang around outside the store, looking for dropped receipts that have your item listed, and usually was not paid for with a credit card (as the store will either refund the card, or only offer store credit), then you take your stolen item and the receipt inside and get your refund.

Or, you hang out in the parking lot looking for a dropped receipt with a big-ticket but small physical size item on it, you go inside, slip the item from the shelf, make your way back to the front of the store and head for the customer service desk and get a refund on the device you didn't even steal since you never left the store! (this is fraud however, still illegal of course).

Or, you steal items at one store location, then go to another store location and try to get a refund without receipt. Then be a complete asshat when they refuse until a manager caves and gives you money cause he's a spineless coward too stupid and scared to do his job properly and call the cops. (this last one is a constant source of irritation to a friend of mine working in retail)

Oh, and no, device serials are not always (or often) printed on purchase receipts in the US. That's why 2 of the above work yet the major US retailers still aren;t doing it.

If denied, request a Return Activity Report

[tepples]

It IS a credit reporting system because data may be shared across retailers. If this is the case you absolutely have the right to view and send a written request for review al

According The Retail Equation's page to request a Return Activity Report, retailers using the service are supposed to give a transaction ID when they refuse a return.

Us retail 4.5% profit last quarter.

[raymorris]

Last quarter Amazon's US retail operating profit was 4.5%.
Not bad for mass-produced merchandising. (Compare Walmart at 3.28%)

DogDude simply spoke without knowing what he was talking about, talking out of his ass. We all do that sometimes.

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a T-Mobil SIM card and a month's worth of service which I asked the retail associate would work with my Nexus 5 phone. They told me it would. There was no "all sales final" posted near the register or on the merchandise (there is on Verizon's stuff). It didn't work on Google Voice and the store wouldn't give me a refund.

When I did the charge back, I explained I was "refusing acceptance of the sale" which is a specific legal criteria you can use to void a commercial sale. This is very different from requesting a refund and it's baked into the Universal Commercial Code (google for it if you're curious). If you use a credit card processor here in the US, they must conform to this law regardless of the "all sales final" or whatever a vendor's return policy. I got my $62 back even thought the store tried to say that the sale was final, etc. etc. because I invoked this part of the UCC. It worked with Techdirt when I bought sheets that didn't fit and they said "all sales final". It even worked with a vendor in Europe who wasn't covered by US' laws, but VISA was and refunded my money.

Depends on the reason

[aepervius]

If the item is defective, there is in some jurisdiction a "hidden flaw" rules that allow a complete exchange or a complete refund (up to the retailer decision). e.g. if your buy a camera and after 3 month the camera internal sensor burn out, they have in those jurisdiction to prove either the consumer misused the camera (e.g. let it drop down and broke it) or with the hidden flaw laws, give a complete replacement or a free reparation (usually not the case too labor/pieces/cost intensive compared to the other solutions) or a complete refund.

Re: Great way to defraud customers

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only that but he said the next choice away was 1200mi in Seattle. Do maps in Alaska not have Canada on them?

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[Calydor]

To quote the GP, your purchase didn't meet your legitimate, reasonable expectations by having dead pixels. The return/exchange was fair.

So is there a market for tech rental?

[swb]

I get the outrage, like everyone else it's hard not to think of this as a blacklist designed to rip off customers and with all the Kafkaesque elements you'd expect from an opaque, privately run blacklist.

That being said, if a big part of this is tech "rental" -- buying an item for limited use and then returning, why not approach this as a business opportunity? Create some business model where people can more or less rent these items (purchase minus restocking fee) and where each iteration of sale-return results in a declining, "open box" selling price?

If this "problem" is big enough that it's worth the pure overhead cost of running a blacklist of abusive consumers, it sounds like there's a way to run to use that overhead instead towards basically renting these items to abusive customers.

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[Daralantan]

I used to work at Bed, Bath, and Beyond when in college. Our return policy was so insanely easy to abuse. I only ever recall one person being spoken to about their returns, and this was because they had made something like 78 returns in the past year. There were customers that would buy items with a coupon, then return without receipt (I didn't use my card, I paid cash) and get 100% store credit back for something they paid 20% off for... then just use their store credit on something with yet another 20% coupon. And they'd just do this all year. And we couldn't say anything about it ever... only the loss prevention guy was allowed to in extreme cases. But we'd have the same "super bowl party" tv situation. Except in ours, people would buy tons of outdoor furniture for summer parties - then just return it a week later scuffed up and dirty. And our policy allowed for this.

Re:charge back when best buy fails will change the

[datavirtue]

If you invoke the legal department in any financial company they are going to end the dispute immediately in your favor to avoid any further work or time. They will not risk exposing themselves to a regulatory finding over a transaction. I saw more than one case where a person was not able to access their money ($200 but the amount does not matter) for a day or two resulting in a settlement of $8000. The arbitration limit for the particular company at the time--a very small company.