A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Screwed by Canon rebate.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 29th 06, 09:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

Bill Funk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 02:53:51 GMT, "Mike Russell"
-MOVE wrote:

You may be able to start a chargeback procedure against the retailer via
your credit card company. This is a somewhat cumbersome process, but much
easier than going to court, and may get the retailer going to bat for you to
avoid the chargeback.


As I understand credit cards, you won't get any satisfaction from the
retailer this way; the retailer doesn't offer the rebate, and the sale
isn't made with any expectation of getting he rebate from the
retailer.
IOW, the retailer has nothing to do with the rebate.
Unless, of course, the retailer DOES have something to do with the
rebate (COSTCO often handles rebates on items they sall, for
instance).
But, unless the retailer explicitly offers to handle the rebate, the
retailer is out of the loop.


They can't be totally out of the loop, given that they are usually
responsible for, at least, providing everything needed to document the
sale, and to make sure everything the rebate requires is provided in the
package. Should they fail to do that, then they could be a party to any
legal action.
  #22  
Old December 29th 06, 09:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

hoover wrote:
Canon sucks - they pulled that **** on me with a printer I bought last year
from Ritz. I returned the printer to Ritz and they as much acknowledged
this is a typical con by Canon.

"John" wrote in message
...
I know that the institution of rebates is meant to rip you off so I'm quite
anal about paying attention to the details and ALWAYS sending in the rebate
with delivery confirmation. The delivery confirmation at least minimizes
the "Sorry, we never received your rebate" or "Sorry, we didn't receive
your rebate in time" excuses.

I read the rebate forms several times looking for the "gotcha's". I know I
go through way more trouble than I should for $20-$50 but it's the
principle. They make it as annoying as possible to claim a rebate so that
most people won't bother. I'm the one that bothers.

I send in my rebate to Canon along with all the rebate form, purchase
receipt and I cut out the UPC code from the box and put that in the
envelope. My new tactic is to use wide tape and tape the UPC code to the
rebate form.

I checked on my rebate status just now.

Error(s): An original qualifying UPC was not included

Yep. No matter how hard I tried, Canon still managed to screw me over.

Since they want "an original" qualifying UPC", my copy won't suffice.

Canon, the next time I'm in the market for a product I'll remember this
incident.



My wife handles rebating, and she is about as meticulous as one can be
at this. So far, we have never failed to get a rebate, although they
often take so long that we have forgotten all about them when they
arrive. she also copies everything she sends...
  #23  
Old December 29th 06, 09:24 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

Bryan Olson wrote:
John wrote:
I know that the institution of rebates is meant to rip you off so


Yup.

[...]
I checked on my rebate status just now.

Error(s): An original qualifying UPC was not included

Yep. No matter how hard I tried, Canon still managed to screw me over.

Since they want "an original" qualifying UPC", my copy won't suffice.


In my experience, the companies initially try to cheat me out of
about 20-25% of the rebates. Never give up after the first refusal.
My collection rate is 100% over the past few years, including a
couple on which I did make mistakes.

Just as they expect a large percentage not to apply, they expect
a large percentage to accept their refusal to pay. Follow up.
Tell them you keep copies, just as most of the forms say to do.


A trick they learned from SSI. 80% of applications for SS disability
are rejected, and 80% of those who are submitted again, by a law firm,
are approved. So, the question is, how much does the ABA contribute to
the people in charge? Grin.

In this case, you cannot prove that you included the UPC, so
you might think you cannot make a strong case. Not so. You
have exactly the documentation someone who follows their rules
is supposed to have. If there's no way to settle such matters,
that's their fault. Politely ask them: under the rules they
made, how does the customer show that he sent the UPC?


  #24  
Old December 29th 06, 09:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
JC Dill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 347
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:19:18 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

IOW, the retailer has nothing to do with the rebate.
Unless, of course, the retailer DOES have something to do with the
rebate (COSTCO often handles rebates on items they sall, for
instance).
But, unless the retailer explicitly offers to handle the rebate, the
retailer is out of the loop.


They can't be totally out of the loop, given that they are usually
responsible for, at least, providing everything needed to document the
sale, and to make sure everything the rebate requires is provided in the
package. Should they fail to do that, then they could be a party to any
legal action.


I don't see that the retailer is responsible to "make sure everything
the rebate requires" is provided in the package. However, if the
retailer *advertises* the rebate, then IMHO the retailer is becoming
responsible for ensuring that a properly applied-for rebate is
honored. Otherwise it leaks into "false advertising" on the
retailer's part.

jc

--

"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
  #25  
Old December 29th 06, 09:48 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
JC Dill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 347
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:24:47 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

A trick they learned from SSI. 80% of applications for SS disability
are rejected, and 80% of those who are submitted again, by a law firm,
are approved. So, the question is, how much does the ABA contribute to
the people in charge? Grin.


Even if 100% of the applications that are rejected in the first set
were resubmitted by a law firm in the second set, SSD would only have
to pay out on 84% of the applications submitted. However, it's much
more likely that the applications resubmitted thru a law firm
constitute far less than 100% of the rejected applications. Clearly
part of the reason that so many of the (law firm assisted) resubmitted
applications are approved would be due to applicant self-selection
(those who knew their claim was weak dropping their claim) as well as
law firm selection (they won't take on cases that are weak).

jc
--

"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
  #26  
Old December 29th 06, 10:48 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bill Funk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,500
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:19:18 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Bill Funk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 02:53:51 GMT, "Mike Russell"
-MOVE wrote:

You may be able to start a chargeback procedure against the retailer via
your credit card company. This is a somewhat cumbersome process, but much
easier than going to court, and may get the retailer going to bat for you to
avoid the chargeback.


As I understand credit cards, you won't get any satisfaction from the
retailer this way; the retailer doesn't offer the rebate, and the sale
isn't made with any expectation of getting he rebate from the
retailer.
IOW, the retailer has nothing to do with the rebate.
Unless, of course, the retailer DOES have something to do with the
rebate (COSTCO often handles rebates on items they sall, for
instance).
But, unless the retailer explicitly offers to handle the rebate, the
retailer is out of the loop.


They can't be totally out of the loop, given that they are usually
responsible for, at least, providing everything needed to document the
sale, and to make sure everything the rebate requires is provided in the
package. Should they fail to do that, then they could be a party to any
legal action.


I've seen very few rebates where the normal paperwork the cuseomer
gets isn't enough for a rebate. Usually, this means the rebate form
itself (usually inside the packaging), the USP code from the
packaging, and the receipt.
How many places do you shop that don't provide a receipt?
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
  #27  
Old December 29th 06, 11:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
John McWilliams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,945
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

JC Dill wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:19:18 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

IOW, the retailer has nothing to do with the rebate.
Unless, of course, the retailer DOES have something to do with the
rebate (COSTCO often handles rebates on items they sall, for
instance).
But, unless the retailer explicitly offers to handle the rebate, the
retailer is out of the loop.

They can't be totally out of the loop, given that they are usually
responsible for, at least, providing everything needed to document the
sale, and to make sure everything the rebate requires is provided in the
package. Should they fail to do that, then they could be a party to any
legal action.


I don't see that the retailer is responsible to "make sure everything
the rebate requires" is provided in the package. However, if the
retailer *advertises* the rebate, then IMHO the retailer is becoming
responsible for ensuring that a properly applied-for rebate is
honored. Otherwise it leaks into "false advertising" on the
retailer's part.


Interesting interpretation. With this reasoning, it'd seem a retailer is
responsible to oversee warranty work, also.

--
john mcwilliams
  #28  
Old December 30th 06, 01:18 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

Bill Funk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:19:18 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Bill Funk wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 02:53:51 GMT, "Mike Russell"
-MOVE wrote:

You may be able to start a chargeback procedure against the retailer via
your credit card company. This is a somewhat cumbersome process, but much
easier than going to court, and may get the retailer going to bat for you to
avoid the chargeback.
As I understand credit cards, you won't get any satisfaction from the
retailer this way; the retailer doesn't offer the rebate, and the sale
isn't made with any expectation of getting he rebate from the
retailer.
IOW, the retailer has nothing to do with the rebate.
Unless, of course, the retailer DOES have something to do with the
rebate (COSTCO often handles rebates on items they sall, for
instance).
But, unless the retailer explicitly offers to handle the rebate, the
retailer is out of the loop.

They can't be totally out of the loop, given that they are usually
responsible for, at least, providing everything needed to document the
sale, and to make sure everything the rebate requires is provided in the
package. Should they fail to do that, then they could be a party to any
legal action.


I've seen very few rebates where the normal paperwork the cuseomer
gets isn't enough for a rebate. Usually, this means the rebate form
itself (usually inside the packaging), the USP code from the
packaging, and the receipt.
How many places do you shop that don't provide a receipt?


I have seen some places that won't print you a duplicate of the receipt
so you can still have warranty, AND rebate.
  #29  
Old December 30th 06, 01:20 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron Hunter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,064
Default Screwed by Canon rebate.

JC Dill wrote:
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:24:47 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

A trick they learned from SSI. 80% of applications for SS disability
are rejected, and 80% of those who are submitted again, by a law firm,
are approved. So, the question is, how much does the ABA contribute to
the people in charge? Grin.


Even if 100% of the applications that are rejected in the first set
were resubmitted by a law firm in the second set, SSD would only have
to pay out on 84% of the applications submitted. However, it's much
more likely that the applications resubmitted thru a law firm
constitute far less than 100% of the rejected applications. Clearly
part of the reason that so many of the (law firm assisted) resubmitted
applications are approved would be due to applicant self-selection
(those who knew their claim was weak dropping their claim) as well as
law firm selection (they won't take on cases that are weak).

jc


That is the point. They (SSI) do this just to decrease the number who
receive the benefit. Making the process of submitting a rebate as
tedious as possible assures that a lot of people won't do it, and they
save that much money. I never buy anything that I wouldn't buy if there
was no rebate.
  #30  
Old December 30th 06, 01:47 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Skip
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,144
Default Screwed by Canon rebate. Who to contact?

"John" wrote in message
...
Skip wrote:
Check this thread, it may hold some ideas for you...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=21375382


I checked the thread. Thank you. Apparently a bunch of other people are
less than happy with Canon's rebate scam.

I've written a letter to . I can't seem to find
any phone numbers or other email addresses on the Canon site. Anyone know
what they are?

I wonder what the purpose of filling in the rebate form on-line since you
still have to physically mail in the UPC code from the box?


Sorry about the top post, though...

--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
www.pbase.com/skipm


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon 5D Rebate [email protected] Digital SLR Cameras 10 October 24th 06 07:17 PM
Canon 5D Rebate [email protected] Digital Photography 2 October 22nd 06 01:48 AM
Canon screwed themselves (or did they?) RichA Digital SLR Cameras 22 October 16th 06 06:00 PM
Piggyback on my Canon Rebate Ed Greenberg 35mm Equipment for Sale 0 November 11th 04 10:36 PM
Canon Offering $600+ Rebate on Digital Camera Equipment (3x Rebate Offers) Mark Digital Photography 6 November 4th 04 11:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.