MONEY MORAL DILEMMA. Should Kate return a sale frock with a full price receipt?

ceebeeby

I'd like to say "no" this would be wrong, but I don't think it would be!! After all she's still only returning one dress to the store. I dunno that I'd be that cute though!

JS2006

Ebenezer_Screwj wrote: »

She should return the first dress she bought with its own receipt and see what the shop is prepared to offer.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I worked in the Customer Services Dept of a High Street store and I can tell you she would get absolutely !!!! all back! That's like me buying a telly, getting drunk and falling against it then taking it back and asking for a new one. Dream on!

zipman23

TechSHEengineer wrote: »

Sound bites from a Geordie.

Proud to be a Geordie?
(You're all from Scandinavia)

Your area wouldn't survive if it wasn't for taxpayer subsidy.
The Strikes and suchlike destroyed your employment prospects.

If the Geordie is going to post here, please make as sensible contribution!

I'm glad that my Geordie parents moved to a better part of the UK.

It was a sensible contribution actually. Alot of thought was put into your reply and I was merely stating that. How your brain deciphers that is your problem not mine so theres no need to get on your high horse is there?


By the way, didn't I mention that my name was Hans Eriksson? If your parents are Geordies...doesn't that make you "Scandinavian" too?

Which part of the UK do you live in then?

kami2112

Definitely return the dress, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.:T

dbfisokay

The bare bones of this are:
1.Kate bought a dress. Kate damaged the dress. There is nothing manufacturally wrong with the dress.
2. Kate saw an opportunity to diddle the vendor.:cool:

Question is: Is she prepared to take the consequences? - technology today may mean the receipt and the dress are linked so the diddle may not be a dawdle and she'll have a lot more than a fashion "horreur" to deal with. The 14 day policy is irrelevant. Kate's conscience and crime sheet are the things to note. How are they Kate?

gravitytolls

Cor, that is such a good idea, I wish I'd thought of it before.

Contains_Mild_Peril

I find it astonishing that some people appear to be suggesting that it would be better to return a worn dress than to return an unworn one with a receipt that belongs to another identical dress. Ew! If she's had it on for a whole party then it's not going to be in resalable condition. Is it better to get a refund for an item which has no value to the shop, thus leaving them £50 down, than to return an unworn dress which they can resell at the sale price leaving them £25 down? In the unlikely event of the shop giving a refund for the first dress before they realise that it has actually been worn (and not just tried on), I can't really see the logic behind the view that this is a better option just because it's (arguably) less dishonest.

Alwayshardup

LUCKY KATE BUYING A DRESS FOR £50, CANT REMEMBER LAST TIME I COULD AFFORD SPENDING THAT MUCH ON AN ITEM OF CLOTHING:rolleyes: THANK GOD FOR PRIMARK :rotfl: ANYWAY I WOULD DEFINATELY TAKE DRESS BACK AFTER ALL THESE SHOPS MARK PRICES UP FAR TOO HIGH.:mad: WHEN STOCK IN SALE ITS AT THE PRICE IT SHOULD BE AT ANYWAY:D

Carmina_Piranha_3

I would do this yes, but I would probably get a friend to carry out one of the transactions, and tell them the pin number for my credit card.

I don't think the shop is being swindled - it's within the 14-day returns period therefore they should expect that a few people will make returns. The shop is no worse off than if kate hadn't gone to the party and returned an unworn dress for a full refund, and somebody else bought a sale dress.

Carmina_Piranha_3

If I were Kate and could afford a dress at £50 I wouldn't do as the OP suggests though. I would instead buy TWO sale dresses at £25 each and return one of them for a £50 refund, keeping the other. That way I still paid £50 but I have a wearable dress and can chuck the ruined one :rotfl: