Subject:
|
Re: Has any one else noticed this lately?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 Jan 2000 21:17:04 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpieniazek@novera*StopSpam*.com
|
Viewed:
|
912 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Campbell wrote:
>
> Mookie wrote:
> >
> > I've noticed this too.. more because I got a box without looking that
> > someone apparently had opened, taken out what they wanted, and the GLUED
> > it shut again and returned it. I'm not sure if they'll believe me if I
> > take it back though... so I pondered calling CA though should they
> > really pay for someone elses greed and rudeness?? I don't think so..
> > though you can be sure I'll be looking at my boxes much more closely
> > from now on.
> >
> > I just can't believe people have the b*lls to do this kind of stuff..
> > what's worse is they get away with it :(
> >
> > Tamy
>
>
> I had been keeping an eye on a single remaining 6761 Bandit's Hideout at
> a local TRU, waiting for it to go on clearance. Between the time that it
> was normal retail price and I found it on the clearance aisle (about a
> week) somebody had ripped open the box and stolen quite a few pieces out
> of it. Since I still wanted some of the remaining pieces, I talked TRU
> into taking another percentage off the price. I cataloged the losses and
> wrote to Customer Service, explained the entire situation. Less than a
> week later a package arrived at my home with all of the missing pieces.
> The accompanying letter stated that they were sorry I had such difficulty.
>
> Another Job-Well-Done by Susan Williams and LEGO Customer Service.
Agreed, CA is swell. But my question to you is, you asked for a discount
and got it. Was that just to cover the hassle of getting the replacement
parts? Or did you argue that because there were parts missing, you
should get a discount for the value OF THOSE PARTS.
I ask not to be judgemental, but merely because I am curious.
I today bought 2 4561s which had been opened, at a particular Target. I
dealt with a supervisor, identified what parts were missing, and made a
case that I should get an additional discount, based on the value of the
missing parts. I got it. Therefore, I personally now would not feel
justified in going to CA to ask for the replacement, as to me,
personally, that smacks of double dipping. TARGET should take the hit,
it's THEIR security that allowed the shrinkage. Doesn't seem fair to ask
LEGO to eat it.
Am I alone in this rather radical stance?
--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
NOTE: Soon to be lpieniazek@tsisoft.com :-)
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Has any one else noticed this lately?
|
| (...) Nope.(1) However, I would consider it fair to go to CA, and offer to pay them for the missing parts. (assuming I thought the missing parts were worth it - otherwise, I'd just drop it). James (URL) then, I'm the kind of freak that corrects a (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Has any one else noticed this lately?
|
| (...) I agree with you. If you get compensated for not having the pieces, there's not much more to complain about. If you know in advance that you can call CA and get replacement pieces for free (which wasn't necessarily the case here), you (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Has any one else noticed this lately?
|
| (...) I had been keeping an eye on a single remaining 6761 Bandit's Hideout at a local TRU, waiting for it to go on clearance. Between the time that it was normal retail price and I found it on the clearance aisle (about a week) somebody had ripped (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)
|
52 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
