5 ms·

Is the idea that companies should just eat an ever increasing proportion of fraud? I'm thankful that a blunt policy isn't enforced on companies where I'm from -

Is the idea that companies should just eat an ever increasing proportion of fraud? I'm thankful that a blunt policy isn't enforced on companies where I'm from - as long as I know what the return policy is, I'm fine to make the decision whether it is acceptable for me or not. The result of that policy will probably just be that European companies are under more fraud pressure and will go out of business sooner than companies that have more tools to combat fraud.

netr0ute 4y ago
If those companies go out of business, then ones willing to follow the rules will fill in the gaping void. :)
- jonas21 4y ago
  And they'll charge twice as much for everything to make up for the cost of fraud.
  - netr0ute 4y ago
    Then cheaper ones will fill in the gaping void, and they still have to play by the rules too. This isn't the car business where cost of entry is high.
- barry-cotter 4y ago
  Or the business will become unprofitable and no one will do it.
  - netr0ute 4y ago
    Where will the customers go to get their products?
    - notch656a 4y ago
      The black market, where the sellers won't give two fucks about the law and they'll force you to pay with something irreversible like cash or crypto.
      - netr0ute 4y ago
        That could actually be a win-win, since return fraudsters now have no method to do their work, and you have the opportunity to pay with anonymous methods.
    - analog31 4y ago
      I only know the Silca brand from a pump that I got for $5 at St. Vinnie's. There are dozens if not hundreds of bike pumps on Amazon and AliExpress, including many that seem like the same pump being sold under different brands like GOBUYMD and PROOGMEF. I imagine they manage their costs so they can afford to eat the returns. That's the future of retail. If Silca goes out of business, someone will buy the brand, like Motobecane and Schwinn. I got a good pump at Target. I was able to confirm that it works before buying.
      - Lio 4y ago
        > If Silca goes out of business, someone will buy the brand, like Motobecane and Schwinn. This is what has already happened. Silca was an Italian brand that went out of business when the owner died. Josh Portner (the guy behind using dimples to market Zipp wheels) bought them[1]. As far as I know all the pumps and other accessories are now made in Taiwan or China by contract manufacturers. I have some of their stuff. It’s OK but no better than stuff from, say, Leyzne or Topeak. I would wager it’s come from the same contract manufacturer. 1. I believe they were friends. There’s a nice write up of the story online. Came across as a personal project to continue the brand.
raverbashing 4y ago
Having to accept returns doesn't mean having to accept return fraud, or things like returns without proof of purchase (And interestingly, by TFA Amazon actually helps dealing with the frauds - though I'm thinking they should start engaging lawyers on this) "the result of that policy" this is not a new thing, but yeah, please preach how some basic customer service is bad
- googlryas 4y ago
  Clearly one doesn't need to just accept return fraud. I'm not familiar enough with EU laws, but I'm assuming their consumer protection laws are a little stronger than a merchant just being allowed to unilaterally say "this is fraud, no refund for you". If the company gets dragged in front of a tribunal, or needs to provide evidence, what could they do in the situations where someone received a normal item, pilfered it for replacement parts, and then sent back the rest. How could one show that this is fraud and not the company just sending out an incomplete product? I suppose they could just ban the customer(can they?), but dedicated fraudsters would have no problem using numerous fake identities in order to conduct their fraud.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
    The company can do whatever, the consumer or a consumer protection agency would then have to sue, so this is highly asymmetrical (against the consumer/fraudster) in the individual case. A company trying to scam people like this by claiming return fraud would likely find itself in expensive hot water once the pattern became obvious though. Avoiding the risk of having to deal with this is one of the reasons why people buy via Amazon (aside from convenience and fast+cheap shipping).
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - withinboredom 4y ago
    > what could they do in the situations where someone received a normal item, pilfered it for replacement parts, and then sent back the rest. I imagine the manufacturer does some kind of QA, right? This seems like a pretty easy thing to prove. Sure, defective parts happen. But totally incomplete parts, that may be impossible in some cases, depending on the manufacturing process.
varispeed 4y ago
I think the problem is that the fraud has become essentially legal. Police is not interested in dealing with it, so fraudsters can do fraud to their heart's content without consequences. I have reported fraud many times, even had fraudsters on camera and all their details, Police huffed and puffed and said they won't do anything and complaints got me nowhere.

netr0ute 4y ago

If those companies go out of business, then ones willing to follow the rules will fill in the gaping void. :)

jonas21 4y ago
And they'll charge twice as much for everything to make up for the cost of fraud.
- netr0ute 4y ago
  Then cheaper ones will fill in the gaping void, and they still have to play by the rules too. This isn't the car business where cost of entry is high.
barry-cotter 4y ago
Or the business will become unprofitable and no one will do it.
- netr0ute 4y ago
  Where will the customers go to get their products?
  - notch656a 4y ago
    The black market, where the sellers won't give two fucks about the law and they'll force you to pay with something irreversible like cash or crypto.
    - netr0ute 4y ago
      That could actually be a win-win, since return fraudsters now have no method to do their work, and you have the opportunity to pay with anonymous methods.
  - analog31 4y ago
    I only know the Silca brand from a pump that I got for $5 at St. Vinnie's. There are dozens if not hundreds of bike pumps on Amazon and AliExpress, including many that seem like the same pump being sold under different brands like GOBUYMD and PROOGMEF. I imagine they manage their costs so they can afford to eat the returns. That's the future of retail. If Silca goes out of business, someone will buy the brand, like Motobecane and Schwinn. I got a good pump at Target. I was able to confirm that it works before buying.
    - Lio 4y ago
      > If Silca goes out of business, someone will buy the brand, like Motobecane and Schwinn. This is what has already happened. Silca was an Italian brand that went out of business when the owner died. Josh Portner (the guy behind using dimples to market Zipp wheels) bought them[1]. As far as I know all the pumps and other accessories are now made in Taiwan or China by contract manufacturers. I have some of their stuff. It’s OK but no better than stuff from, say, Leyzne or Topeak. I would wager it’s come from the same contract manufacturer. 1. I believe they were friends. There’s a nice write up of the story online. Came across as a personal project to continue the brand.

raverbashing 4y ago

Having to accept returns doesn't mean having to accept return fraud, or things like returns without proof of purchase (And interestingly, by TFA Amazon actually helps dealing with the frauds - though I'm thinking they should start engaging lawyers on this) "the result of that policy" this is not a new thing, but yeah, please preach how some basic customer service is bad

googlryas 4y ago
Clearly one doesn't need to just accept return fraud. I'm not familiar enough with EU laws, but I'm assuming their consumer protection laws are a little stronger than a merchant just being allowed to unilaterally say "this is fraud, no refund for you". If the company gets dragged in front of a tribunal, or needs to provide evidence, what could they do in the situations where someone received a normal item, pilfered it for replacement parts, and then sent back the rest. How could one show that this is fraud and not the company just sending out an incomplete product? I suppose they could just ban the customer(can they?), but dedicated fraudsters would have no problem using numerous fake identities in order to conduct their fraud.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
  The company can do whatever, the consumer or a consumer protection agency would then have to sue, so this is highly asymmetrical (against the consumer/fraudster) in the individual case. A company trying to scam people like this by claiming return fraud would likely find itself in expensive hot water once the pattern became obvious though. Avoiding the risk of having to deal with this is one of the reasons why people buy via Amazon (aside from convenience and fast+cheap shipping).
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- withinboredom 4y ago
  > what could they do in the situations where someone received a normal item, pilfered it for replacement parts, and then sent back the rest. I imagine the manufacturer does some kind of QA, right? This seems like a pretty easy thing to prove. Sure, defective parts happen. But totally incomplete parts, that may be impossible in some cases, depending on the manufacturing process.

varispeed 4y ago

I think the problem is that the fraud has become essentially legal. Police is not interested in dealing with it, so fraudsters can do fraud to their heart's content without consequences. I have reported fraud many times, even had fraudsters on camera and all their details, Police huffed and puffed and said they won't do anything and complaints got me nowhere.