Nowhere in my writing have I taken the corporate side or defended a
company for fraud.

Telling people to pursue a class action lawsuit is not practical advice as
in effect it means companies will rarely be called to account. Expecting us
to live by a company's return policiy no matter how unreasonable is also
one-sided, especially when a company comes up with a loophole to let them
ignore their own usual policy. The consumer is at a massive disadvantage,
so if some droid at the returns desk mistakenly allows a consumer to get his
money back against the company's wishes I for one see that as poetic
justice.


For a creative newsgroup, there seems to be a real lack of imagination.
Another poster offered two more legal, ethical options for dealing with
the unscrupulous retailer. I just threw one option out there and you use
it as reason enough to through out any other ethical options.


My only point in all of this is to say something that we have all
heard from our grandmothers; two wrongs don't make a right.
It is wrong to use fraud to combat fraud.

What "fraud"? I bought two identical items on two different days, one item
was defective, I returned it and HD got a replacement or credit from the
mfg., they suffered no loss. So, where's the fraud?

Nevermind, we've just going in circles here.


You keep adding details to your story, and act like I was replied to
yours, ex pos facto.
The *original poster,* to whom I first replied, suggested buying
something, today, to swap out for something bought a long time ago, and
return it as the new one.
That is fraud and tantamount to theft.


However karma seems to be in effect, the company I had the dispute with over
the inkjet cartridges recently discovered one of their top execs had
defrauded them of millions of dollars, can't say I shed any tears over that.


Neither do I. You reap what you sow.



--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply