View Single Post
Old 12-21-2009, 01:57 AM   #133
scveteran
Groupie
scveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheesescveteran can extract oil from cheese
 
scveteran's Avatar
 
Posts: 162
Karma: 1230
Join Date: Mar 2009
Device: none
Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon View Post
Ah.

You see, this hadn't actually been mentioned. I don't (and won't) have a Kindle, and I was fully expecting it to work like the Amazon website (which I don't think is an unreasonable expectation), in that when you hit buy your card's already credited and if you'd ordered software, tough luck on cancelling.

Scratch that complaint then.


scveteran - Yes, but by Amazons standard, it's 30 books ever, unless their policy has changed. This is why written returns policys are good, and bluntly if there are serious flaws I don't care anyway - I have a legal right to return the book, and when I have to anticipate having to take legal action to do so...at some point (even a decade down the line), well, it's offputting. When the store is so tightly integrated? It's a blocker.

Are you guessing on the the 30 books ever?? It sounds to me that you are since you don't know if their policy changed, and other posts have questioned what the actual policy is. Also the TS, mentioned that 30 is a low number. So before I take you at your word here, please provide a link to the policy.

However, I really don't care if the policy is a fixed 30 books ever. I can see no rational basis for the company to eat a lot of extra costs due to misbehavior on the part of the customer. And to me, I can't see anything but misbehavior on the part of a customer who has to get 30 or more seperate refunds.

I think that anyone who considers legal actions possibly a decade down the road to return a book is not thinking clearly. This just doesn't seem rational to me. Can you explain that comment? Maybe I am missing something or misreading you.
scveteran is offline   Reply With Quote