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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 03:47:31 GMT, "Bob (but not THAT Bob)"
wrote: SNIP I get every damn rebate I file, so I'm saving money at the expense of illiterates/incompetents - so what? Wow. That's a nice attitude you have grown over there. Did you use the condescending fertilizer or just the I don't give a **** version??? |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:15:15 -0600, M Berger wrote:
Wow... how lucky. You were unemployed for six months but you got 2 computers and $ 50 out of it! That might have eased the pain of being unemployed, but I would rather have been employed for the six months and paid for the cost of the computer (less the rebate, of course). |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
Etobian,
Perhaps you missed my response to M Berger: I received a year's salary continuance from the company that I was downsized from. Let's do the math: -- A year's salary continuance from my old job -- A new (better paying) job 6 months later (can you say "double-dipping"?) -- 2 computers -- $50 bucks In the end, not only did I end up with 2 free computers, but I made more money that year than any year in my life and my new job pays better than the old. I was forced into making the career change that so many people think about but are frozen by fear from doing. There's a saying about making a major change that goes something like this: "Before a change can be made, the pain of staying has to be greater than the pain of leaving." That's why many people remain in dead-end jobs or careers they really don't enjoy. The pain/fear of being unemployed for any length of time or failing at the new career keeps people locked into an unhappy, but safe, situation. That's exactly where I was. As I look back, I am very grateful for those 6 months of (fully paid) unemployment. I was forced to look inside and decide what I really wanted to do for the rest of my life and then go out and make it happen. And on top of it all, I ended up with 2 free computer systems! The Etobian wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 11:15:15 -0600, M Berger wrote: Wow... how lucky. You were unemployed for six months but you got 2 computers and $ 50 out of it! That might have eased the pain of being unemployed, but I would rather have been employed for the six months and paid for the cost of the computer (less the rebate, of course). |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
RichA wrote:
John wrote: 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. Mail-in rebates are always a scam. Why do they do them? Because people buy based on this. 50-80% never claim them. Rebates take 8-12 weeks and often are never delivered, another 50% forget about them. They force you to call someone to fix the problem or ask where your rebate is 16 weeks past due delivery time. At the end of it all, according to various business studies, only 3% of rebates are ever paid out. So, they can boost sales with what might amount to a 0.5% overall discount paid. It is business genius. I LOVE rebates. I always fill them out, checking off each step on the firm as I do so, always make copies of everything, and always send them in, with delivery confirmation. Eight out of 10 times no problem. When there is a problem, I go to the local Small Claims Court here in Oregon and sue both the stre and the manufacturer for breach of contract, fraud, and for violtions of something called the Oregon Unlawful trade Practices Act (ORS 646.601 et seq.) The local vendor is an actual and apparent agent of the manufacturer. I have always recovered my filing fees; a minimum of $ 200.00 statutory damages under the Oregon UTPA; a stautory "prevailing party fee" of $ 250.00 and the costs of service of the complaints and summonses on the local retailer and the registered agent of the manufacturer. Zinging Fry's and its various manufacturers is lots of fun. I just fiished, in early December, with Frys and Kingston Memoy on a thumb drive, which Kingston laimed lacked a dated sales receipt. They get so twidgy when served with a request for production requiring them to produce the original of the entirety of the rebate package sent in to the. Apparently whatever the service company at the post office box address in El Paso which so many manufacturers use (the work is actually done in Juarez across the river) keep no iinal records at all. Judges get so ticked when a defendant's lawyers say its company polivy to thow orginal records away g. Having lawyered for amost 40 years before hanging up my cleats makes this rather simple and quite profitable. After hiring lawyers two or three times to represen them, Fry's has figred out its cheaper to pay me than to contest the claim. YMMV. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
Jim McLaughlin wrote:
Zinging Fry's and its various manufacturers is lots of fun. I just fiished, in early December, with Frys and Kingston Memoy on a thumb drive, which Kingston laimed lacked a dated sales receipt. They get so twidgy when served with a request for production requiring them to produce the original of the entirety of the rebate package sent in to the. Apparently whatever the service company at the post office box address in El Paso which so many manufacturers use (the work is actually done in Juarez across the river) keep no iinal records at all. Judges get so ticked when a defendant's lawyers say its company polivy to thow orginal records away g. Kingston rebates don't go to El Paso, they go to White Bear Lake, MN (I just got finished mailing some out). I trust that the rest of your rather amusing story was more accurate? Bill |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
HeyBub wrote:
It's generally not a wise to guess about what I'm thinking. Inasmuch as it's against federal law to send invoices by Standard Mail (look at your telephone bill's envelope), one would think a similar rationale would apply to other financial instruments. And presumably one would be wrong for assuming that, since its being done. Of course, you could point this out to Parago and see if they are willing to change their practice. And invoices are much different than checks, in that invoices need to be delivered promptly so the recipient has ample time to pay it. Bill |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
In article ,
jJim McLaughlin wrote: I LOVE rebates. I always fill them out, checking off each step on the firm as I do so, always make copies of everything, and always send them in, with delivery confirmation. Eight out of 10 times no problem. When there is a problem, I go to the local Small Claims Court here in Oregon and sue both the stre and the manufacturer for breach of contract, fraud, and for violtions of something called the Oregon Unlawful trade Practices Act (ORS 646.601 et seq.) The local vendor is an actual and apparent agent of the manufacturer. I have always recovered my filing fees; a minimum of $ 200.00 statutory damages under the Oregon UTPA; a stautory "prevailing party fee" of $ 250.00 and the costs of service of the complaints and summonses on the local retailer and the registered agent of the manufacturer. snip I asked my lawyer friend if CA had a similar law. Here's her $.02. California does indeed. It is called the "Unfair Trade Practices Act." Business and Professions Code section 17200, states: "As used in this chapter, unfair competition shall mean and include any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising and any act prohibited by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17500) of Part 3 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code." Section 17500 states in relevant part that: "It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association, or any employee thereof with intent directly or indirectly to dispose of real or personal property or to perform services, professional or otherwise, or anything of any nature whatsoever or to induce the public to enter into any obligation relating thereto, to make or disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated before the public in this state, or to make or disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated from this state before the public in any state, in any newspaper or other publication, or any advertising device, or by public outcry or proclamation, or in any other manner or means whatever, including over the Internet, any statement, concerning that real or personal property or those services, professional or otherwise, or concerning any circumstance or matter of fact connected with the proposed performance or disposition thereof, which is untrue or misleading, and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading ...." However, I have not, yet, found the award of fees which he claims. In California, these cases are generally brought by the Attorney General and/or DA etc. on behalf of the People of the State of California. Civil penalties are awarded, but are paid to the state or to the city or county who brought the suit on behalf of the People. I don't see any basis, at least in the California version, to bring a separate claim and obtain these fees he mentions. As to the fraud and breach of contract issues, that may be different, but I still doubt they are paid to the individual, because the purpose is to make the consumer whole, not to be able to obtain monies over and above what they have lost or had to spend to recover that which was lost. Those kinds of fees generally go for intangibles like defamation, slander, intentional infliction of mental distress, etc. Not worth your time, other than when you can't get your money back. THEN small claims would be worth it. No lawyers in small claims, unless he or she is a party. -- ADD Example bobert |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
As has been adequately explained here before, rebates are by their very nature a scam. There is no logical explanation for a rebate program other than being a scam. The following truth will never change: If the producer of a product wants to sell you his product at a lower than normal price, they will give you a price break at the check out counter. Why not to assume that the company needs the money NOW. For example they need to report a good sales in this quarter. To me a rebate looks like an interest free loan from a customer, which taking into account that the customer gets a good deal sounds fair. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
Bob wrote:
In article , jJim McLaughlin wrote: I LOVE rebates. I always fill them out, checking off each step on the firm as I do so, always make copies of everything, and always send them in, with delivery confirmation. Eight out of 10 times no problem. When there is a problem, I go to the local Small Claims Court here in Oregon and sue both the stre and the manufacturer for breach of contract, fraud, and for violtions of something called the Oregon Unlawful trade Practices Act (ORS 646.601 et seq.) The local vendor is an actual and apparent agent of the manufacturer. I have always recovered my filing fees; a minimum of $ 200.00 statutory damages under the Oregon UTPA; a stautory "prevailing party fee" of $ 250.00 and the costs of service of the complaints and summonses on the local retailer and the registered agent of the manufacturer. snip I asked my lawyer friend if CA had a similar law. Here's her $.02. California does indeed. It is called the "Unfair Trade Practices Act." Business and Professions Code section 17200, states: "As used in this chapter, unfair competition shall mean and include any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising and any act prohibited by Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17500) of Part 3 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code." Section 17500 states in relevant part that: "It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association, or any employee thereof with intent directly or indirectly to dispose of real or personal property or to perform services, professional or otherwise, or anything of any nature whatsoever or to induce the public to enter into any obligation relating thereto, to make or disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated before the public in this state, or to make or disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated from this state before the public in any state, in any newspaper or other publication, or any advertising device, or by public outcry or proclamation, or in any other manner or means whatever, including over the Internet, any statement, concerning that real or personal property or those services, professional or otherwise, or concerning any circumstance or matter of fact connected with the proposed performance or disposition thereof, which is untrue or misleading, and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading ...." However, I have not, yet, found the award of fees which he claims. In California, these cases are generally brought by the Attorney General and/or DA etc. on behalf of the People of the State of California. Civil penalties are awarded, but are paid to the state or to the city or county who brought the suit on behalf of the People. I don't see any basis, at least in the California version, to bring a separate claim and obtain these fees he mentions. As to the fraud and breach of contract issues, that may be different, but I still doubt they are paid to the individual, because the purpose is to make the consumer whole, not to be able to obtain monies over and above what they have lost or had to spend to recover that which was lost. Those kinds of fees generally go for intangibles like defamation, slander, intentional infliction of mental distress, etc. Must be sad to live in such a backward place as California, with little in the way of consumer protections. Oregon law has a private right of action under its UTPA. See, ORS 646.638 (1). Oregon law also allows the State Attorney General or a District Attorney to bring a case. ORS 646.632. The two causes of action are separate and independent. Oregon law provides for minimum statutory damages for private party plantiffs in UTPA cases. See, ORS 646.638 (1). Oregon law provides for attorneys fees for a successful plaintiff. ORS 646.638 (3). Oregon law sets forth a far more extensive "laundry list" of sanctionable Unlawful Trade Practices than does California. ORS 646.608. See generally, texts at: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/646.html Prevailing party fees, in addition to damages, are provided for in ORS 20.190. Your doubts not withstanding, common law claims for breach of contract and for fraud always allow damages to a sucessful plantiff. None of thse damages are ever payable to the state, whether in Oregon or California. You California lawyer friend really needs t get her head out of her ass. As do you. Not worth your time, other than when you can't get your money back. THEN small claims would be worth it. No lawyers in small claims, unless he or she is a party. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Screwed by Canon Rebate
"clifto" wrote in message ... -hh wrote: John wrote: There's no other way of phrasing it: CANON RIPPED ME OFF EVEN THOUGH I FOLLOWED ALL THE RULES. Actually, it is the Redemption company who is Canon's representative who is doing the "ripping offing". It would appear that their excuse was because they were able to "lose" your UPC since you didn't physically attach it. I don't have to go back to the OP's article to know that he expressly said he *always* attaches the UPC to the rebate form with tape. Me neither, nor do I need to look at his first response in this thread he started, in which he claimed he sent in a "copy" of the UPC. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Screwed by Canon rebate. | John | Digital Photography | 57 | April 20th 07 07:19 PM |
Screwed by Canon Rebate | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 61 | February 19th 07 04:19 AM |
Canon 5D Rebate | [email protected] | Digital SLR Cameras | 10 | October 24th 06 07:17 PM |
Canon screwed themselves (or did they?) | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 22 | October 16th 06 06:00 PM |
Canon Offering $600+ Rebate on Digital Camera Equipment (3x Rebate Offers) | Mark | Digital Photography | 6 | November 4th 04 10:27 AM |