CompUSA settles rebate complaint!

[borosp1]

Finally some company is found guilty for scaming customers by not paying rebates! Now they are going to be forced to honor all rebates even if a manufactures doesnt pay! this is a hot deal...

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- CompUSA has agreed to settle a government complaint over how it handles rebates.

The federal government says the Dallas, Texas-based company deceived people who bought computer products, but failed to receive promised rebates from $15 to $100.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ordered CompUSA to overhaul its rebate programs.

The deal announced Friday also requires CompUSA, for the next 20 years, to ensure all manufacturers of products sold in its stores pay rebates promptly.

The FTC's settlement also made CompUSA responsible for unpaid rebates on behalf of one of its manufacturers.

A CompUSA spokesman declined comment.

The settlement requires rebate payments for any eligible consumers that CompU-S-A can identify through its records, and for any eligible buyers who contact CompUSA or the FTC over the next 75 days."

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/biztech/03/11/compusa.rebates.ap/

 

[Poohbee]

people still buy stuff at CompUSA? I quit buying from them years ago... i do remember one time I had a rebate come in after a year and a half for the Command and Conquer game I bought... =I Scary....

 

[dboy]

Notice, the payments for old unpaid rebates is only for QPS products, which went bankrupt in 2002. So what consumers are still going to have their rebate paperwork from 3 years ago?

 

[dbates]

I hope so! I just sent in 6 rebates from stuff I got at CompUSA this weekend!
3 were just to the CompUSA rebate center!

 

[tm37]

I have not been paid on three rebates and I can tell you that each time I went in and I got a refund for the difference at the store.

<- Kepps the ad and the rebate stuff

 

[conehead433]

I quit buying any rebate item from CrapUSA that went to New Rochelle years ago.

 

[c627627]

Could someone please explain why TigerDirect hasn't been made to ensure "all their rebates are paid for the next 20 years," with all the people that have been scammed by TD, you'd think there would be a lawyer or ten in the bunch.

 

[Thump553]

Actually I always had good experiences (or reasonably good) with CompUSA and rebates and I have probably done well over 100 with them. A couple of years ago I got stiffed on a manufacturer rebate where I bought the item from CompUSA. I wrote CompUSA asking them for help pushing the manufacturer and instead they promptly sent me their own check for the full amount of the rebate. Now that's quality customer service.

 

[urs74]

So this isn't just on CompUSA mail-in rebates but for vendors they sell their rebates too? I guess I can see how the retail store should be relible sice they did advertise the rebate but again I think they shouldn't if this falls under the settlement since it's the vendor's fault for not paying the rebate not Comp's they should only be reliable for their own rebate. IMO

 

[NasdaqTrader889]

Still haven't gotten my Belkin rebate for a UPS just this past Oct. 2004 sent two emails and no reply.

 

[allisolm]

Originally posted by: Thump553
Actually I always had good experiences (or reasonably good) with CompUSA and rebates and I have probably done well over 100 with them. A couple of years ago I got stiffed on a manufacturer rebate where I bought the item from CompUSA. I wrote CompUSA asking them for help pushing the manufacturer and instead they promptly sent me their own check for the full amount of the rebate. Now that's quality customer service.

Ditto, ditto and ditto (except I went to the store and they paid).

CompUSA has been the only store (that I know of) to put out fliers and such stating that they were not responsible for rebates offered on products sold in their stores, advertised in their ads, and with forms printed out by them at their cash registers. I guess the court didn't agree.

Consumers have to follow rebate rules to the letter or risk not getting their money while rebate fulfillers have to follow none of the rebate rules. I think it's way past time that the stores and the manufacturers and the rebate houses are also made to adhere to the terms of the rebates.

 

[Dragonbate]

This is great... I got burned by them a while back on an Audigy 2 for about $100. Wonder if I can get that from them now under this suit? Anyhow now at least you can trust their advertised rebates. Recently walded away from a wireless router FAR because the rebate deal seemed iffy at the register.

 

[Gibson486]

I bought a router months ago from CompUSA and Belkin denied my rebate saying i did not cut out the upc's, even though i did. That mean CompUSA will pay me? I am confused....

 

[misterj]

AWESOME. down with rebates. well maybe not, but this is a refreshing step in the right direction.
i wonder how compusa will start doing things.. 99% of their ads are full of crap rebates. maybe i'll start buying from them again.

 

[allisolm]

Originally posted by: Gibson486
I bought a router months ago from CompUSA and Belkin denied my rebate saying i did not cut out the upc's, even though i did. That mean CompUSA will pay me? I am confused....

I don't think so. The order only requires them to pay for back rebates of QPS items.

Here is the gist of the order and a link to the actual document.

"CompUSA. The consent order with CompUSA prohibits it from, among other things, representing the time in which it will mail any cash rebate that it will fund, unless it has substantiation for that claim. It also prohibits CompUSA from failing to provide any such rebate within the time specified to consumers, or, if no time is specified, within 30 days. The company also is prohibited from misrepresenting any material terms of any CompUSA rebate program.

Further, the order addresses CompUSA?s role as a retailer in advertising manufacturers? rebates ? that is, those to be funded by the manufacturers. Under the terms of the order, CompUSA is prohibited from advertising the availability of a manufacturer?s rebate unless: 1) it has an established record with the manufacturer demonstrating that the manufacturer has consistently paid rebates in a timely manner; or 2) if it does not have such an established record with the manufacturer, CompUSA has conducted a reasonable financial analysis of the manufacturer that demonstrates the manufacturer?s ability to pay the offered.

Finally, the order requires CompUSA to pay all valid QPS rebate requests that were received from consumers who bought QPS products at CompUSA, and which are due or past due. CompUSA also is required to send a rebate to any eligible consumer who contacts CompUSA or the FTC within 75 days after the order is served on the company."

 

[Lanyap]

Originally posted by: urs74
So this isn't just on CompUSA mail-in rebates but for vendors they sell their rebates too? I guess I can see how the retail store should be relible sice they did advertise the rebate but again I think they shouldn't if this falls under the settlement since it's the vendor's fault for not paying the rebate not Comp's they should only be reliable for their own rebate. IMO

What most people don't realize is that the retailers, manufacturers and distributors get together and plan many rebates to coordinate with retailer sales. People from these companies get together to work up the ads, the rebate forms, amounts and requirements. Many retailers will act like they had nothing to do with the rebate which is false.

 

[ParatoOptimal]

I've generally had good luck with CUSA rebates.

I did get screwed on a couple where they claimed I botched sending the required materials. They gave me no recourse to send my copies which proved I submitted EVERYTING CORRECTLY.

I did get screwed a few times where they NEVER sent me ANY confirmation or rejection.

In both of the above cases, I followed-up as best as I could only to be told that the promotion was over and there was nowhere to send my copies and no money left in the specific accounts to pay me.

On one other occasion I was at fault for not including something. I noticed it when I returned home from the P.O.. I phoned the number on the rebate form and was told to wait for a rejection notice that would inform me what was missing and where to send it. I NEVER received a rejection notice. I kept calling only to be told to wait until on my final call I was told that the account to pay those rebates was closed/empty becuase it was past the valid pay out date.

 

[breweyez]

this is good news for all the people who still do rebates

the other guys like tiger, frys, bestbuy, officemax, etc... will see this. i hope they deliver rebates within 75 days now :thumbsup:

 

[intogamer]

:thumbsup:

 

[ParatoOptimal]

Originally posted by: urs74
So this isn't just on CompUSA mail-in rebates but for vendors they sell their rebates too? I guess I can see how the retail store should be relible sice they did advertise the rebate but again I think they shouldn't if this falls under the settlement since it's the vendor's fault for not paying the rebate not Comp's they should only be reliable for their own rebate. IMO

If CUSA advertises an offer including a rebate that a manufacturer is to honor and that manufacturer doesn't honor it, CUSA should be held somewhat liable.

They ran the advertisement stating what you would get if you made the purchase. You did your part. CUSA got the sale.

Depending on a state's statutes, CUSA could be held completely liable, partially liable, have to allow consumers to return their purchases for refund or at least credit or be forced to no longer advertise or offer rebates from that or those specific manufacturers.

They can not make you an offer in good faith if they have reason to believe thay manufacturer may not honor that offer.

If a manufacturer isn't paying valid rebate claims, CUSA is complicit in that manufacturer's fraud. It isn't simply that CUSA did their part and your problem is with the manufacturer. CUSA took your money. CUSA offered the deal in THEIR advertisement extending you certain goods for a certain final price if you you paid an initial fee and complied with rebate requirements. They used the rebate offer to get you to buy. It wasn't just an extra benefit thrown it. It was a contingency of your purchase. You wouldn't have made the purchase if you didn't think you would get the paid rebate. They wouldn't have put the item in your bag if you didn't pay.

Even if the manufacturer went bankrupt and CUSA had no intent to dupe you into making a purchase by offering a rebate you couldn't get from a bankrupt manufacturer, most states would hold that CUSA is liable to either pay the rebate or to allow consumers to return the goods for a full refund.

The advertisement was in writing and publicly distributed. CUSA would at least be guilty of false advertising if the manufacturer didn't honor ANYone's rebate claim. In many states, anyone who falsly advertises a deal must make restitution in full or at least return the customer's initial investment. Your sales receipt and rebate form are a binding contract. You did your part, so should they.

Note that many retailers put the same small print that "limits" their liability on their receipts in every state they do business. Many states have consumer laws that invalidate that small print. Those states often hold the retailer liable for the "deal", eliminate time constraints and/or require the retailer to at least return the consumer to his initial condition prior to the purchase (a full refund).

...just some food for thought without getting too specific or legalease. It may not hold everywhere. Simply put without getting legal, a big company should make a good faith effort to make sure that their customers don't get screwed for dooing business with them. No big retailer wants to lose customers due to a dishonest manufacturer. Who does the retailer value more, his customers or a dishonest manufacturer. If he just wants to make that innitial sale and continues to allow that manufacturer to screw his customers, then he IS complicit.

I used to work for an OEM. We often offered rebates that came out of all or most of OUR profit to clear old stock off the shelves, maintain shelf space dominance and keep the retailer happy. It was ALL FREE profit for the retailer. Of course the retailer would go along with it. If the retailer is participating in such a double dip deal, while knowing that the manufacturer isn't paying rebates, the retailer is complicit. Once the retailer realizes fraud is taking place, he has to step-up to acknowledge possible criminal activity AND/OR put an end to their particpation OR be held liable.

Sorry to go on so long

 

[NasdaqTrader889]

NM

 

[Bmott]

bump to the top, Everyone should read this.

 

[mrrman]

thats why I never buy anything with a rebate...to many horror stories

 

[razor2025]

Rebates are SCAM period. End of story. Too bad the government loves the extra sales tax, and retailer who loves to scam the money out of customers.

 

[PsychoTech]

I must be one of the lucky ones, I would say I have gotten 98% of rebates (only one I got duped on was Best Buy/Cingular Phone deal...). And I have done at least a hundred, I am sure much more. And while they are a pain, the main reason the companies still do this is with hopes of people not sending them in and that money left over being pure profit. I am sure the "rebate" accounts are entirely marketing deductible, any monies left over becomes Surplus. Assuming everyone is filling out their rebates correctly and in time, I am surprised that people here have had so many problems.