MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Rachel return the dress after wearing it?

panlane

Woodyrocks wrote: »

Do you proffer that a persons' moralistic leanings should be founded on a trait such as shame? Does that not negate your argument? By encouraging (shame) something as equally devasting (as dishonesty) to society as a whole.

As a scientist working in the field of co-operation, I can assure you that there is a large body of work supporting shame as a pan-human emotion felt when personal violations of norms are known of by others: the intensity of the emotion being proportional to the size of the audience. As a consequence, it maintains social norms and the manifold co-operative enterprises associated with them. Basically, it works to stop people being selfish. Modern Western society relies very little on that particular emotion but many cultures, including our own not-too-distant past, depend on it heavily.

The idea that one should always feel good about oneself and one's choices is a rather peculiar modern fallacy.

iarocu

What moral dilemma? Rachel bought the dress for her special occasion. The shop supplied what she paid for.

Returning the dress under false pretences is no better than stealing.

Would Rachel inflate an insurance claim?

Would she falsely claim benefits she wasn't entitled to?

Many dishonest practises are widespread but that does not make them right. I am astounded that not only are people happy to return as "new and unused" goods they have used but they can not see that it is morally wrong and are happy to argue on this forum that it is OK.

Unless they are happy to pay brand new prices for second hand goods themselves why do they think others should unknowingly buy their returns.

As others have said if you want to hire something go to a hire shop.

Iain

Justamum

jowie wrote: »

Ah but you've misread the dilemma. The dress was just expensive, not a wedding dress.

I cannot believe how everyone has become all high-and-mighty about morals considering this website's overall goal: To turn the tables on retailers/financial institutions so we get something back. Ergo, if a company has a returns policy, what's so wrong about using it? Argos have their 16 day no-quibbles money back policy, and I've used it a handful of times. If they give me the option, I will take it. It's a great free way of borrowing goods.

So everyone get off your high horses, or don't bother using this site. You can't have it both ways.

To conclude: It's her gamble to take. If they don't return the dress then fair play. But if they do then take the refund and run. No doubt about it!

Erm. I don't think this website it designed to tell people how to be immoral and dishonest, it is to show people how to save money. Someone else who has been following the tips on this site might have saved up enough money to go and buy a brand new £200 dress - and end up buying a second hand one because someone had done just what you are suggesting.

Personally I think taking back a used item of clothing and getting a full refund is plain wrong. She should have bought something cheaper. I don't often get the chance to get new clothes, but when I do I expect them to actually BE new thanks.

Justamum

pukkamum wrote: »

oh my god i do this all the time why not the shops rip us off enough charging a fortune for bits of material it will be sold on so whats the problem P>S hanging it on the washing line for a day after wearing will get rid of bad smells and theres no rule to say you cant take back a dress if its been worn as long as it still has labels and yo have a reciept. People who dont do this are missing an opportunity!!

Where do you live? Just so I can avoid the shops you use!

sauvblanc

Woodyrocks wrote: »

Do you proffer that a persons' moralistic leanings should be founded on a trait such as shame? Does that not negate your argument? By encouraging (shame) something as equally devasting (as dishonesty) to society as a whole. Just my personal opinion of course, feel welcome to flame me all you want but I don't think any of us are pure enough to judge.

Be the light you want to see in the world :cool:

I'm not sure that shame can be equated with dishonesty? The emotion of shame/embarrassment acts as a break on an individual's behaviour when he/she feels that it would be viewed as inappropriate by others.

SunnyBrighton_2

Rachel, dishonest, sneaky - and shameless - as she is, is not alone it seems.

This is the Thatcher/Blair legacy to society - every man for himself, never mind the others, and as long as you come out on top, all is ok.

She's nothing more than a reflection of society now, and by the responses to the 'dilemma', she's certainly not alone. It seems to go with the 'park wherever you want', 'make as much noise as you want' and 'cheat as much as you want' way that characterises British society these days.

mary_cruse

My friend's father worked in a large London department store, in the mid-war years. He was employed as a chemist, specifically to perform tests on the fabric of ballgowns which had been bought and then returned after a few days with a complaint that they were unsuitable. Using various tests he was able to determine which dresses had traces of sweat or perfume. The people buying the clothes tended to become rather bombastic when confronted with the evidence of their dishonesty.
As a slight digression, I heard another story, perhaps apocryphal, of another London department store in which a newly appointed store assistant sold a silver fox fur coat to a woman customer who said, somewhat imperiously " put it on my account" and then swept out of the department, holding the coat but without having revealed who she was. The terrified assistant, fearing the sack, went to his manager and admitted his mistake. " Never mind", the manager replied briskly, " we shall just have to try to work out who it was".
The store sent invoices for the coat to about 30 of their regular customers,
expecting that all but one would respond by saying that they had not bought the coat. Somewhat to their surprise, 5 customers paid up!
With regard to Rachel, I understand her temptation but feel strongly that she should not try to return the dress. She could certainly try a dress agency or ebay, but returning it would, I agree, be theft. At the risk of sounding like a very old fogey, more joy is experienced in earning something than by getting it for nothing - Rachel got the experience of wearing the dress but was not prepared to pay for it and doesn't mind cheating someone else ( whether the shop or another possible purchaser of the dress). I think that the answer is clear.

Broadie_2

Well, I think the dress shop probably gets a lot of this happening, so they'll be ready for it!! Like sniffing it for perfume, tell tale signs of sitting down in it etc. I'd go for an 'honest lie' !!!! Depends on how good you are at acting!! Take it back to the shop, in floods of tears, and say he jilted you. You were there, ready for the big ceremony, and he didn't turn up..... remember to take the ring off your finger!
That or just try and sell it privately. You know though, maybe it would be nice to keep it as a memory of the day (which I hope went well) and take the loss of money on the chin.
Best of luck!

Broadie_2

As an afterthought, what about those bed companies that offer a 30 day free trial? Are they going to sell the bed on to someone else? How's that for a moral dilemma??

pinkfluffybabe

I think it is morally wrong to return it. If she was hard up she shouldn't have bought such an expensive dress in the first place.

I can't believe the number of people on here who think it is acceptable to do this. I am going to be really carefully examining everything I spend my hard earned on now to make sure!