Help! Tesco coupon policy? I've been banned!

rdwarr

elona wrote:

While igloo was detained (with her children) for doing something that was not actually illegal - how many shoplifters (which is illegal) were getting away with a load of pilfered stuff?

What a stupid question. And are you sure that what was done wasn't illegal? It may be OK with Tesco (although obviously not in this case) but coupons are issued by manufacturers for usage against their products. If a coupon says "only for use against purchase of Product X" and you use it without buying Product X, then it's fraud.

biglugs

If a coupon says "only for use against purchase of Product X" and you use it without buying Product X, then it's fraud.

So what you're saying is by accepting these vouchers Tesco is conspiring with all of its customers to commit fraud? Not only that but it is actually ENCOURAGING them to commit fraud!
If you really think this shouldn't you report this to the police?

bunking_off

What I don't understand with all of this is why the CSM didn't simply cancel the Clubcard account....

igloo

QUOTE=lush walrus....The security guard as far as I can read, did not use any physical force nor was abusive to the person, merely detained her to withdraw Tesco's property (which the person was very reluctant to hand back)....

QUOTE=rdwarr...If a coupon says "only for use against purchase of Product X" and you use it without buying Product X, then it's fraud.

Dear lush walrus

He did not detain me to withdraw Tesco property!

They took me to an office because I used too many coupons (but I had followed their HO policy to the letter). After telling me than I was banned, they asked for my name which I refused to give purely because of how they had treated me. THEN they asked for my clubcard because I would not give my name. They did not detain me to retrieve their property.

No, he did not use physical force. No, he was not abusive.
BUT there were five people in that small room (me, two small children, security guard and manager). When I refused to give him my clubcard, he stood up , took a step towards me and said that I could not leave until I gave it to him.

This I think was unacceptable behaviour. What would he have done if I said no again? I dread to think.

I phoned the police to ask for advice. The said the whole incident was a civil matter APART from his behaviour towards me they said that i could report it. I havent because I dont want to "waste police time" as you put it because I know they will probably only give him a talking to and thats it.


Dear rdwarr
Its Tesco policy, not mine. Their HO policy says that if you do not purchase the product you can give one coupon per manufacturer. One person on here who posted today said that they had a reply from Tesco stating that you could pay for ALL your goods with coupons and even have CHANGE if the coupons exceeded the goods! (http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=765913#post765913)

Are Tesco committing fraud by claiming the money back from manufacturers by telling them that "Yes, we have accepted these coupons in payment for your products, can we have our money back please?"?

Fifer

Great advice, waste police time and Tesco's investigation time. Say you succeed (which I can not imagine in a million years) then what, your success means that the security guard sacked for doing his job? Do you really feel that is a fair situation? Can you honestly say that using every voucher you can get your hands on is morally correct behavior?

Yes to all three questions. The security guard was breaking the law and abusing his position. He frightened an innocent mother with children and illegally detained them. Using the vouchers is not only morally acceptable but actively encouraged by Tesco HO, as evidenced by the email igloo received. If you are implying that this would be a waste of police time because of the current terrorist situation, what other crimes do you suggest they ignore? Breach of the peace maybe? Mugging? Maybe you won't want to involve them if you are caught up in a road-rage incident or if your house is broken into?

What a stupid question. And are you sure that what was done wasn't illegal?

If everything stated in igloo's posts is accurate (and I've no reason to suspect otherwise) then yes, I'm absolutely sure that what igloo did was not illegal. I'm just as sure that the actions of the manager and guard were illegal however ...

sans_2

Hi Igloo,

I was going to PM you but wasn't able to. Feel free to PM me, I was going to share a story.

ben500

redwarr and Lush you both clearly haven't been paying attention and are commenting way out of your depth it might be a good idea to restrict your comments and accusations to topics related to which you have a modicum of knowledge! Whilst you are entitled to your opinion it ceases to be an opinion when you enhance it with an accusation, at that point it becomes an allegation and you could find yourself having to justify it in the future. Whilst that is highly unlikely in this forum you would find the situation very very different in many forums.

bunking_off

ben500 wrote:

redwarr and Lush you both clearly haven't been paying attention and are commenting way out of your depth it might be a good idea to restrict your comments and accusations to topics related to which you have a modicum of knowledge!

I have no opinions either way as to what each poster said. However, I would defend the right of anyone to voice their opinions - so long as they're not libellous - whether or not they align with ben500's. This board would be incredibly boring if everyone agreed with one another...

katiepops_2

Considering the whole point of joining this site is to save money, I can't really understand why Igloo is getting stick from people for DARING to use coupons - for God's sake, why shouldn't she? She's SAVING MONEY!

Kate

ohreally

ben500 wrote:

I don't think that is going to happen somehow

Under the circumstance it's a reasonable request for the company to provide this information and lets face it it's hardly commercialy sensitive unless of course it condones unlawfull practise which neatly brings us back to the position the op found herself in.