Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Interesting Discussions
Is this ethical?
Previous  1  2



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

monseychick




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 30 2014, 8:21 pm
Barbara wrote:
I think I'd need halachic sources to say its ethical to return a used item.

To say that once you use it, its yours? I don't need halachic sources for that.


Heres we we "agree to disagree "

YOU NEED HALACHIC SOURCES FOR EVERYTHING

(Rambam Hilchos Yesodei ha Torah)
Back to top

MaBelleVie




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 30 2014, 8:23 pm
What can be unethical about it if the store is aware and it isn't considered a distortion of their policy?
Back to top

Barbara




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 30 2014, 10:25 pm
MaBelleVie wrote:
What can be unethical about it if the store is aware and it isn't considered a distortion of their policy?


Because you have taken something without paying for it.

Nordstrom allows returns for any reason. Does that mean that it would be ethical of me to travel across the country with nothing but a few pairs of undies (not returnable), head to Nordstrom, spend a couple of thousand on clothes, then return them at the end of the holiday - changed my mind. The return policy doesn't forbid it.

Or to buy cosmetics from Sephora for a special occasion, then return them afterwards?

In every one of these cases, the value of the merchandise was reduced by the user, who does not wish to pay for that reduced value. It's not a case where the merchandise was defective. Nor is it a case where the consumer changed her mind while leaving the item in new condition. It's stealing value.
Back to top

groovy1224




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 30 2014, 10:38 pm
Barbara wrote:
Because you have taken something without paying for it.

Nordstrom allows returns for any reason. Does that mean that it would be ethical of me to travel across the country with nothing but a few pairs of undies (not returnable), head to Nordstrom, spend a couple of thousand on clothes, then return them at the end of the holiday - changed my mind. The return policy doesn't forbid it.

Or to buy cosmetics from Sephora for a special occasion, then return them afterwards?

In every one of these cases, the value of the merchandise was reduced by the user, who does not wish to pay for that reduced value. It's not a case where the merchandise was defective. Nor is it a case where the consumer changed her mind while leaving the item in new condition. It's stealing value.


Of course that's unethical..buying clothes with the express intent of wearing them and then returning them is quite unsavory. But the OP didn't do anything like that-she bought the item in good faith, assuming she could live with its size issue. After wearing it a day, she realized she couldn't. Something she couldn't have known until she wore it a while and noticed.
Back to top

MaBelleVie




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Jun 30 2014, 10:42 pm
Barbara wrote:
Because you have taken something without paying for it.

Nordstrom allows returns for any reason. Does that mean that it would be ethical of me to travel across the country with nothing but a few pairs of undies (not returnable), head to Nordstrom, spend a couple of thousand on clothes, then return them at the end of the holiday - changed my mind. The return policy doesn't forbid it.

Or to buy cosmetics from Sephora for a special occasion, then return them afterwards?

In every one of these cases, the value of the merchandise was reduced by the user, who does not wish to pay for that reduced value. It's not a case where the merchandise was defective. Nor is it a case where the consumer changed her mind while leaving the item in new condition. It's stealing value.


Those examples are what I meant by a distortion of store policy, and unrelated to what OP wrote. She did not buy it with the intention of returning. She bought it with the intention of keeping it, and later realized that she is not happy with the product. If the store policy allows returns on used items for that reason, she is not stealing value or anything else.
Back to top

amother


 

Post Mon, Jun 30 2014, 11:55 pm
Anyone shop in Bed bath and beyond?
I wasnt sure which item to buy and the salesman encouraged me to buy both, try them on, and return one. I told him it didnt feel right but he convinced me that this was their policy!
And now if I have an option of 2 stores I always buy from them, because of their no questions asked return policy.
Back to top

Bruria




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 1:54 am
I think it's fine if it's according to the store policy,if so, yes, it's ethical.
Back to top

m in Israel




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 2:02 am
Barbara wrote:
Because you have taken something without paying for it.

Nordstrom allows returns for any reason. Does that mean that it would be ethical of me to travel across the country with nothing but a few pairs of undies (not returnable), head to Nordstrom, spend a couple of thousand on clothes, then return them at the end of the holiday - changed my mind. The return policy doesn't forbid it.

Or to buy cosmetics from Sephora for a special occasion, then return them afterwards?

In every one of these cases, the value of the merchandise was reduced by the user, who does not wish to pay for that reduced value. It's not a case where the merchandise was defective. Nor is it a case where the consumer changed her mind while leaving the item in new condition. It's stealing value.


Of course it is REDUCING the value -- but I cannot understand how it is possible to "steal" with the owner's consent. If the store had a free give away, that everyone who made a purchase would receive a free shirt, would taking that shirt be stealing because you have "taken something without paying for it"? Stealing by definition means you have taken something WITHOUT THE CONSENT of the owner. Stores with these policies are in essence saying the "free gift" that comes along with your purchase is the right to return this item even if the value of it has been reduced as a result of your purchase.

I understand how willfully misusing/ misapplying a policy runs into ethical questions (although I disagree with you that either of those case would be "stealing" for the reasons I explained above), but OP's situation is EXACTLY what these policies are intended for. The store is happy for people to buy items they are not sure about and use them, because the number of people who keep the item that they may not have bought without such a policy exceeds the number who return them -- or because it increases costumer loyalty, etc.

I do believe it is unethical of a store to pass of as brand new something that has been returned after use (the example in your first post on this thread), but I don't believe that is the problem of the purchaser who is following all of the policies of the store without abuse.
Back to top

Raisin




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 7:51 am
If you tell the truth it is ok. I don't think stores put clothing like that back on the shelf. Many stores throw out tons of unsold clothing btw after cutting them to make sure no one else gets any use from them. http://nymag.com/thecut/2010/0......html

I think this is different then my sisters friend who always wore expensive, beautiful clothing which she would buy, wear for a few weeks and then return.
Back to top

Barbara




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 9:37 am
m in Israel wrote:
Of course it is REDUCING the value -- but I cannot understand how it is possible to "steal" with the owner's consent. If the store had a free give away, that everyone who made a purchase would receive a free shirt, would taking that shirt be stealing because you have "taken something without paying for it"? Stealing by definition means you have taken something WITHOUT THE CONSENT of the owner. Stores with these policies are in essence saying the "free gift" that comes along with your purchase is the right to return this item even if the value of it has been reduced as a result of your purchase.

I understand how willfully misusing/ misapplying a policy runs into ethical questions (although I disagree with you that either of those case would be "stealing" for the reasons I explained above), but OP's situation is EXACTLY what these policies are intended for. The store is happy for people to buy items they are not sure about and use them, because the number of people who keep the item that they may not have bought without such a policy exceeds the number who return them -- or because it increases costumer loyalty, etc.

I do believe it is unethical of a store to pass of as brand new something that has been returned after use (the example in your first post on this thread), but I don't believe that is the problem of the purchaser who is following all of the policies of the store without abuse.


Why do you think that some examples are perverting the store's return policy, and others are not. In every case, someone wears the clothing, then returns it in used (unsalable) condition, for reasons that were or should have been apparent to her before she wore the clothing.

The only difference is that you're OK with one, and not OK with the other.

Stores give liberal return policies because they trust that most people will be honest. Because they want the person who is concerned that the skirt might shrink, or the sweater stretch, to be comfortable with her purchase, knowing that if the product proves to be substandard, it can be returned.

Wearing an item, then returning it because you decide that you don't like it (its too big) is not honest or ethical.
Back to top

MaBelleVie




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 9:39 am
If the store policy is to accept returns on items you're not happy with FOR ANY REASON, then it's perfectly honest and ethical to do so. We are assuming that the store policy is not to accept returns on used items that were bought as a rental of sorts. Intention.
Back to top

amother


 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 9:50 am
Rite Aid has a satisfaction guaranteed policy, even after use. I asked them about it, and they said it's no problem to return, even open items. It's the only reason I buy my makeup there, and I have on occasion returned a used lipstick that had an awful color on, or a tube of mascara that smudged non-stop.
Back to top

Barbara




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 10:06 am
MaBelleVie wrote:
If the store policy is to accept returns on items you're not happy with FOR ANY REASON, then it's perfectly honest and ethical to do so. We are assuming that the store policy is not to accept returns on used items that were bought as a rental of sorts. Intention.


The policy doesn't say that subjective intent is important. You're reading that into the policy, because you want it to be ethical to wear something once, decide that you don't like it after all, and return it.
Back to top

Barbara




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 10:09 am
amother wrote:
Rite Aid has a satisfaction guaranteed policy, even after use. I asked them about it, and they said it's no problem to return, even open items. It's the only reason I buy my makeup there, and I have on occasion returned a used lipstick that had an awful color on, or a tube of mascara that smudged non-stop.


You see, that's different IMNSHO.

You purchased a mascara that did not perform as you wanted it to. You couldn't have known that until you tried it. That's like the sweater that stretched out beyond expectations. Defective, or not as expected. As to the lipstick, again, you couldn't tell how the color would look on you until you tried it. Now, lipsticks can't be resold. But a shirt that is just tried on can be.
Back to top

MaBelleVie




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 10:25 am
Barbara wrote:
The policy doesn't say that subjective intent is important. You're reading that into the policy, because you want it to be ethical to wear something once, decide that you don't like it after all, and return it.


If they allow returns for any reason, there's nothing to read into. They allow it. I'm adding that I think it's unethical to knowingly misuse that sort of policy by buying with the intent of returning.
Back to top

m in Israel




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 11:10 am
Barbara wrote:
Why do you think that some examples are perverting the store's return policy, and others are not. In every case, someone wears the clothing, then returns it in used (unsalable) condition, for reasons that were or should have been apparent to her before she wore the clothing.

The only difference is that you're OK with one, and not OK with the other.


Actually, I'm OK with both. I believe that as long as you follow the policy, it's fine, whatever the circumstances. But I do agree that a case can be made against more extreme case (like your example of buying an entire wardrobe for a trip to avoid having to pack) which are likely outside the range of what any normal person would do. But OP's example is well within the range of normal.

Quote:

Stores give liberal return policies because they trust that most people will be honest. Because they want the person who is concerned that the skirt might shrink, or the sweater stretch, to be comfortable with her purchase, knowing that if the product proves to be substandard, it can be returned.

Wearing an item, then returning it because you decide that you don't like it (its too big) is not honest or ethical.


Nope, stores don't give liberal return policies because they trust people to be honest -- they give liberal return policies because it is good for their business. In any case honesty certainly doesn't play a role in this scenario, as we all agree OP must be honest and say she has used it. And it is quite typical for something to feel OK in a fitting room for 5 minutes and then when you wear it in real life you see that it doesn't fit well or feel comfortable. There is no question that the store has these types of situations in mind as well when developing their policies -- certainly the stores with very liberal policies. They want you to be comfortable buying things even before you are completely sure that you like it/ it fits properly/ the price is good/ etc. because their evidence shows that they benefit more than they lose.

And as you have said, the policy doesn't discuss subjective reasons for the return. If they go out of their way to advertise a policy that allows "no questions asked" returns, I find it hard to believe that they really mean "but please only return things that are substandard, not just because you changed your mind."

And FTR I have almost never returned any article of clothing that I have bought in my life -- I am not being defensive here. I truly believe there are no ethical problems with following a clearly stated, objective, return policy, especially considering that the OP bought it good faith and then realized the item didn't meet her needs.
Back to top

causemommysaid




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 11:21 am
Barbara wrote:
Because you have taken something without paying for it.

Nordstrom allows returns for any reason. Does that mean that it would be ethical of me to travel across the country with nothing but a few pairs of undies (not returnable), head to Nordstrom, spend a couple of thousand on clothes, then return them at the end of the holiday - changed my mind. The return policy doesn't forbid it.

Or to buy cosmetics from Sephora for a special occasion, then return them afterwards?

In every one of these cases, the value of the merchandise was reduced by the user, who does not wish to pay for that reduced value. It's not a case where the merchandise was defective. Nor is it a case where the consumer changed her mind while leaving the item in new condition. It's stealing value.


intent counts. if you intend to buy something and keep it but for whatever reason you change your mind its not unethical as long as the store allows.

if you buy it with the intent of returning it then your right thats unethical.

that is not the case with the OP
Back to top

m in Israel




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 11:35 am
Barbara wrote:
The policy doesn't say that subjective intent is important. You're reading that into the policy, because you want it to be ethical to wear something once, decide that you don't like it after all, and return it.


The policy says you can return it no matter what. We are not discussing the store policy here, but rather the question of whether certain returns are unethical even if they meet the criteria of the policy. YOU are the one who is differentiating based on subjective intent -- factoring in the reason for the return rather than just the facts of the case (I.e. returns because the item is subpar in some way vs. returns because you didn't like the item)

My person opinion is that subjective intent is not important and as long as you are completely honest and following the store policy it is perfectly ethical. The only scenario where I do agree that intent affects the ethical implications is if someone buys with the specific intent of using an item for a certain amount of time and then returning it. In that case one can argue that the purchase may have not been "in good faith".
Back to top

MaBelleVie




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Jul 01 2014, 11:42 am
Yeah, I should add that this topic is entirely theoretical for me as well. I am unfortunately not great about returning items that have a legitimate reason to go back, such as something I ordered, tried on, and realized doesn't fit (two minute try on, tags still attached). I have never returned used items for any reason, even to stores that allow it, even if the product is defective. But that's just my own lack of organization. Anyway, again, I'm not defending my own practice, I'm contributing my thoughts on the ethics at hand.
Back to top
Page 2 of 2 Previous  1  2 Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Related Topics Replies Last Post
What would be theordically right/ethical in this case
by amother
14 Thu, Jan 25 2024, 2:19 pm View last post
What's ethical when getting a tuition break?
by amother
7 Fri, Sep 29 2023, 11:50 am View last post