|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Insisting on the charges for this was appalling - but here's the other side of it, for those who may be interested.
Although our friend assumes that two-fifty implies $2.50, it is just as common that it would indicate $250. In fact, it is common for $250 to be expressed verbally as two-fifty and not two hundred and fifty. Most of the time, it is fairly obvious which amount is being referred to.
However, it could be claimed that one is not buying one or two cookies, but the knowledge to produce these delicious treats, which may not be worth $250, but could easily be construed to be worth far more than $2.50, especially to the exclusive clientele that frequents this store.
Therefore, it would be a stretch indeed to suggest that the employee intentionally tried to use deception here, especially since all purchases have to be approved by the customer, either in writing by way of a credit card charge, or by making payment at the time of sale.
Which brings us to the central point - charges made on one's credit card require that they be made in writing, and one must sign as proof that they are approved. Even if he/she had no idea that acquiring the recipe was going to be so expensive, any confusion would have been cleared up
here, save for the negligence on the part of the customer, who is fully responsible for examining the charges prior to approval.
What about the lack of a refund? The store is right insofar as the benefit has already been conveyed, since there isn't any real way to return information. Moreover, there isn't any real grounds why the return should be granted, other than a misunderstanding arising from the
customer's own negligence.
Just playing devil's advocate here - personally, I feel the whole affair should have been settled in the interests of goodwill.
A.J.
|