Re-stocking fees....sound off here !!

[Anaries]

Look Cray, and I hope this is final, your train took the loopy track a few pages ago. You've posted and pestered me enough here and the other thread with the same "question." You're dug in like a third-grader on this "anything must have photos attached or it's a lie" crap and I'm not having further part in it. It's risible and facile.

Find someone else's porch swing to sit in and bore 'em with your obsessive question and theories of what constitutes truth, OK? I hope we can someday exchange civil posts again once you regain your balance.

Hey, you can't sass a mod like that

 

[choombak]

Okay so further thoughts on this, big picture not this one incident.

This will probably be the first time a customer comes up across a problem like this. But for the guy at the other side of the table that's not the case. They've seen it all.

When the buyer defaults to inflammatory language and speculation any good will the seller has banked for them evaporates like mist in the desert.

You can swear all you want that the thing has been drug through 100 yards of donkey dung and wrapped up in an used napkin because you're frustrated but for the guy at the other end; well he flat out knows that didn't happen and he starts thinking well what else is this person exaggerating. With computers and B2B software these days they really can pull up a thick file of info on any item now.

Any of those one horse CS guys in the warehouse will have some form of discretionary limits that they can use to make you happy. If your job one is to make them unhappy at all costs then good luck on getting taken care of.

Sure you can go nuclear and bombard their facebook and forums and whatever else to social media shame them. People do it all the time and if you catch the eye of someone maybe they'll fully bend their rules to make you go away. But when that happens another disclaimer line get added into the terms of sale and things get more difficult for the rest of the customers.

^^^ This is exactly what has happened in the last few years! Happens across the length and breadth of all industries, knives included.

 

[craytab]

Look Cray, and I hope this is final, your train took the loopy track a few pages ago. You've posted and pestered me enough here and the other thread with the same "question." You're dug in like a third-grader on this "anything must have photos attached or it's a lie" crap and I'm not having further part in it. It's risible and facile.

Find someone else's porch swing to sit in and bore 'em with your obsessive question and theories of what constitutes truth, OK? I hope we can someday exchange civil posts again once you regain your balance.

So this is your porch now. Interesting. OP needs proof. Words don't cut it. Much like yours. Why are you here defending this situation anyway?

Civility left the building with you.

 

[EChoil]

Sorry, missed this one first time around....

Well that's obviously your opinion. Because in practice, of the many knives I've returned to companies with restocking fees, I have never been charged a restocking fee ever. The difference is that I establish communication BEFORE boxing up the item and sending it back with a note saying what's wrong with the knife and requesting a refund.

Yup, opinions are all ANY of us offer.

OK, you're never charged the fees. Others are. It's inconsistent, therefore some would say 'unfair.' I'm just not so sure it's your self-perceived "brilliance in planning" that achieves such fee passes for you.

And yes, you're right that the customer is at the mercy of the retailer. Why? Because the customer agreed to the retailer's terms. Had the OP realized that KC could have said "nope nothing's wrong with it" and charged a restocking fee, the OP probably would have taken a different approach to avoid being charged the fee.

OK, let's take your position that the OP agreed to be ripped off by placing himself at the "mercy" of the retailer. Fine.

Consequently the retailer did indeed rip him off. That's what's being discussed here.

Your attempt here to bash all retailers who charge restocking fees isn't gaining much traction (aside from the conspiracy theories). Restocking fees are a necessary evil for the average knife retailer. The simple truth is that the average knife retailer cannot afford to send out knives for free, have them out of their inventory for weeks, insure them against loss, process & package orders, pay referral fees, credit card fees, etc, etc, WITHOUT a sale to offset all of these sunk costs.

Nice spin, Spin.

Not sure what you mean by "traction" but I know the majority here appear to think there should be some consideration given to an overhaul of the return fee process. A lot of suggestions have been made in both of the current threads on the subject.

Fact is you need to read me again. I'm not 'bashing all retailers' anywhere nor am I asking for total elimination of such fees. I'm bashing dealers who ripoff customers with extortionate so-called "re-stock" fees coldly allowing no elasticity in the policy. The distinction you miss is "reasonable" vs. "extortionate."

All that said, I do think it would be a good customer service practice for retailers to contact customers upon which a restocking fee would be imposed and offer alternatives before applying the fee. In other words, KC would send an email saying something like:

"Hey we received this knife back and have determined that it is not defective and therefore a restocking fee will apply to a refund. If you would instead like to exchange this knife for another, we would be happy to do so and no restocking fee would apply. Please let us know how you'd like to proceed."

So you think retailers should look at some "change-it-up" too. Cool. I'd like to see some modifications as well as the addition of some flexibility in these Draconian fees as well.

Kinda what I've been saying here. :thumbup:

 

[EChoil]

So this is your porch now. Interesting. OP needs proof. Words don't cut it. Much like yours. Why are you here defending this situation anyway?

Civility left the building with you.

No, only a thread I created. And you need to find someone else's swing for your hysteria.

Which half of BUG OFF do you not understand, dude? You just gonna hang around pestering until a mod jumps in?? Told you, I'm through with you here. Go pull someone else into your bushes, K? Sheeeesh.....

 

[somber]

Fantastic attitude:thumbup:

 

[EChoil]

Okay so further thoughts on this, big picture not this one incident.

This will probably be the first time a customer comes up across a problem like this. But for the guy at the other side of the table that's not the case. They've seen it all.

When the buyer defaults to inflammatory language and speculation any good will the seller has banked for them evaporates like mist in the desert.

You can swear all you want that the thing has been drug through 100 yards of donkey dung and wrapped up in an used napkin because you're frustrated but for the guy at the other end; well he flat out knows that didn't happen and he starts thinking well what else is this person exaggerating. With computers and B2B software these days they really can pull up a thick file of info on any item now.

Any of those one horse CS guys in the warehouse will have some form of discretionary limits that they can use to make you happy. If your job one is to make them unhappy at all costs then good luck on getting taken care of.

Sure you can go nuclear and bombard their facebook and forums and whatever else to social media shame them. People do it all the time and if you catch the eye of someone maybe they'll fully bend their rules to make you go away. But when that happens another disclaimer line get added into the terms of sale and things get more difficult for the rest of the customers.

Did the buyer immediately default to inflammatory language somewhere? I missed that. Can you direct me to it?

Your immediate jump into bias here by declaring the buyer a liar from the outset may make you appear to some here as the surrogate Eville Retailer intent upon imposing ridiculously high and inflexible re-stocking fees, imposed on some but not others according to your whims, as your latest profit center.

Just sayin......

 

[Jsega51]

Echoil, you're making it seem like restocking fees (in this specific case or elsewhere) are simply an evil tactic for the Dealer to make more money. The process of handling returns and issuing refunds and such takes time, employees and everything else that costs a business money. I asked this in the other thread and would love to see someone answer it...if the knife had all of these issues, why didn't the OP take it up with Rockstead and see if they would take care of the knife for him rather than just simply returning it. I for one wouldn't want to just return a knife that I saved for to specifically buy over the many other knives out there. I'd at least explore other options first...

 

[jbmonkey]

calm down guys. seriously, this one to one battle is running two threads now and going nowhere that is good for anyone involved. neither of you is going to convince the other they are wrong and there is no way to win. my advice....agree to disagree and go back to being friends or y'all will eventually get your threads locked. i apologize for butting in on something that isn't my business, but felt it was needed. now back to the discussion......

knifecenter is a good dealer, now whether their policies are bad/unfair/whatever or not is up to every buyer to decide on their own. the market will make knifecenter fix whatever works and doesn't work in their policies, or knife center won't be around. i personally feel knifecenter and their policy to stop having to fund rotten flippers and try but not buy customers, is a fine policy. it sure seems they have agreed to work with the buyer to make it much more palatable for everyone. hopefully a win for everyone involved. let's hope for the best for the buyer of the knife.

 

[Spinny]

Yup, opinions are all ANY of us offer.

OK, you're never charged the fees. Others are. It's inconsistent, therefore some would say 'unfair.' I'm just not so sure it's your self-perceived "brilliance in planning" that achieves such f[r]ee passes for you.

What you're referring to as "self-perceived brilliance", I consider "common sense". In every case where I needed to return something, my first action was to pick up the phone and speak to someone about my situation. At that point pretty much every company I've dealt with WANTS to make the customer happy, and will seek an agreeable solution. I firmly believe that the main reason we are discussing the situation at hand was due to insufficient communication between BOTH parties as to how the situation should have been handled. This communication needed to take place BEFORE the refund was issued. Both the OP and KC seem reasonable and I think a simple phone conversation as soon as the OP noticed these problems would have led to a much better resolution. By the time the refund was issued, and the restocking fee imposed, it's too late because now everyone's got a bad taste in their mouths...

 

[Mikael Andersson]

You know what happened the last time you started casting aspersions and making assumptions, those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

It is no assumptions but real life observations from living in Japan for four and a half years.

 

[AntDog]

Echoil, you're making it seem like restocking fees (in this specific case or elsewhere) are simply an evil tactic for the Dealer to make more money. The process of handling returns and issuing refunds and such takes time, employees and everything else that costs a business money. I asked this in the other thread and would love to see someone answer it...if the knife had all of these issues, why didn't the OP take it up with Rockstead and see if they would take care of the knife for him rather than just simply returning it. I for one wouldn't want to just return a knife that I saved for to specifically buy over the many other knives out there. I'd at least explore other options first...

Pretty much.

It's a whopping FIVE percent restocking fee. It just happens to be 5% of 1800 clams. To put it in perspective, it would be 5 bucks on a $100 knife.

This is not a money gathering tactic. It is in place to recoup the time it takes to open the package, inspect the knife, respond to the customer, clean the fingerprints off, repackage it, sort it back on the shelf etc.

5% is not too much to ask for this. Yes, it's a large amount in this case, but it was an expensive knife. That's why you have the freedom to agree to terms, or not.

Also, he did have the option to get in touch with Rockstead themselves. I can guarantee you they wouldn't want a subpar knife out there with their name on it.

There were a lot of different ways this could've been handled. They simply weren't explored for whatever reason.

 

[LaneMeyer]

By evidence, you really mean pictures, right?

There's evidence everywhere here. The written and spoken word is accepted to be evidentiary too you know...world-wide.

Ya I consider evidence to mean pictures. Or video. Or a reliable witness. Or something besides just saying it is so.
I could say you're a murderer but who is going to believe me unless I provide some kind of evidence to back up my statement?

 

[EChoil]

Echoil, you're making it seem like restocking fees (in this specific case or elsewhere) are simply an evil tactic for the Dealer to make more money. The process of handling returns and issuing refunds and such takes time,....

I am? Well, probably in some cases it is but did you miss all my posts where I said we all understand the reasons such policies must be in place...buyer abuse, etc. ??

I only think the policy has potential for being 'evil.' Not that they all do it. They certainly don't.

 

[EChoil]

What you're referring to as "self-perceived brilliance", I consider "common sense". In every case where I needed to return something, my first action was to pick up the phone and speak to someone about my situation. At that point pretty much every company I've dealt with WANTS to make the customer happy, and will seek an agreeable solution. I firmly believe that the main reason we are discussing the situation at hand was due to insufficient communication between BOTH parties as to how the situation should have been handled. This communication needed to take place BEFORE the refund was issued. Both the OP and KC seem reasonable and I think a simple phone conversation as soon as the OP noticed these problems would have led to a much better resolution. By the time the refund was issued, and the restocking fee imposed, it's too late because now everyone's got a bad taste in their mouths...

OK. Maybe it just came across that way. Sorry.

I agree with what you've eventually come to say. All of it.

 

[EChoil]

Ya I consider evidence to mean pictures. Or video. Or a reliable witness. Or something besides just saying it is so.
I could say you're a murderer but who is going to believe me unless I provide some kind of evidence to back up my statement?

OK, but as I pointed out to Cray, verbal or written text is accepted daily everywhere on earth as "evidence". To say the only truth/evidence is in pics is just not correct. A world with that belief would be nothing but anarchy, discounting all spoken and written words as lies by default.

Yeah, you could call me a murderer and if I were it would be truth. No requirement for pics for it to be truth. That's all I'm saying.

Not sure how literal you guys are being here in your belief of "pics or its a lie".... or if this is somewhat rhetorical.....

Whatever.....

 

[craytab]

Ya I consider evidence to mean pictures. Or video. Or a reliable witness. Or something besides just saying it is so.
I could say you're a murderer but who is going to believe me unless I provide some kind of evidence to back up my statement?

Excellent point.

OK, but as I pointed out to Cray, verbal or written text is accepted daily everywhere on earth as "evidence". To say the only truth/evidence is in pics is just not correct. A world with that belief would be nothing but anarchy, discounting all spoken and written words as lies by default.

Yeah, you could call me a murderer and if I were it would be truth. No requirement for pics for it to be truth. That's all I'm saying.

Not sure how literal you guys are being here in your belief of "pics or its a lie".... or if this is somewhat rhetorical.....

Whatever.....

I think the vast majority of people are not on your side with this one. Give it up. Pictures or it didn't happen. Small claims court would laugh this stuff out of the courthouse. Prove it. Not hard. Takes literally seconds of time to snap a couple pics. That is how the world works now. Have a problem with that? Sucks for you. The other guy is going to have pics.

 

[LaneMeyer]

OK, but as I pointed out to Cray, verbal or written text is accepted daily everywhere on earth as "evidence". To say the only truth/evidence is in pics is just not correct. A world with that belief would be nothing but anarchy, discounting all spoken and written words as lies by default.

Yeah, you could call me a murderer and if I were it would be truth. No requirement for pics for it to be truth. That's all I'm saying.

Not sure how literal you guys are being here in your belief of "pics or its a lie".... or if this is somewhat rhetorical.....

Whatever.....

Firstly, that is a problem with the world in many cases. Someone accuses you of something, and without a fair trial, without any evidence presented, you are arrested and locked up in prison. Based on someone's word. That's one of the great things about the Constitution, is it allows people a fair and speedy trial with a jury, not just, "Joe Green said so and wrote it down so we believe him."

Secondly, it's quite the opposite. Anarchy or revolution more likely, would ensue due to people accusing people of crimes they didn't commit, and them being sent off to the Gulag or Prison Camp. Look at history, it has happened many times. It's only because of evidence that people have a chance to defend themselves in a fair trial and not be accused of witchcraft and burned at the stake.

Lastly I never accused the OP of lying. I actually somewhat believe his story but without seeing what he is seeing it's not clear to me what actually happened. Pictures or video would go a long way in backing up his claim. If I just went around believing everything everyone said on the internet I'd be in a world of confusion.

 

[EChoil]

I think the vast majority of people are not on your side with this one. Give it up. Pictures or it didn't happen. Small claims court would laugh this stuff out of the courthouse. Prove it. Not hard. Takes literally seconds of time to snap a couple pics. That is how the world works now. Have a problem with that? Sucks for you. The other guy is going to have pics.

'An I've been asking YOU to give it up for six posts now.

Small claims court convicts on verbal and text evidence thousands of times a day everywhere.

What a scenario your life must be, requiring pics of everyone and everything to believe anything said by others....anything without video to be a patent lie. Don't be concerned for me---the world YOU'RE in must suck for you and anyone CLOSE to you. If such people exist.....

Now for the umpteenth time, would you PLEASE stop aiming your compulsive crap my way? Stop posting me.

 

[craytab]

'An I've been asking YOU to give it up for six posts now.

Small claims court convicts on verbal and text evidence thousands of times a day everywhere.

What a scenario your life must be, requiring pics of everyone and everything to believe anything said by others....anything without video to be a patent lie. Don't be concerned for me---the world YOU'RE in must suck for you and anyone CLOSE to you. If such people exist.....

Now for the umpteenth time, would you PLEASE stop aiming your compulsive crap my way? Stop posting me.

"If such people exist".....Nice personal touch.

If there is picture evidence, is ones complaint not strengthened?

I don't know what world you live in that evidence of a claim is not needed to prove said claim. Good luck living under that tyranny! I'd move if I were you!