Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses It's funny.  Laugh.

1300 Unopened Fry's Rebate Forms Found In Dumpster 433

blackmonday writes "The Consumerist is reporting a find of 1,300 unopened rebate submissions in a dumpster belonging to Vastech, a rebate processor hired by Fry's Electronics. Vastech's management blames it on a bad employee."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

1300 Unopened Fry's Rebate Forms Found In Dumpster

Comments Filter:
  • Bad employee (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:24PM (#20499663)
    Obviously a good employee wouldn't have gotten caught!
  • a bad employee... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SC-James ( 1142747 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:26PM (#20499677)
    How does someone not notice when you walk out to the dumpster with 1300 envelopes?
  • Executives (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Das Auge ( 597142 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:27PM (#20499691)
    Executives are employees, too.
  • That's the reason (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Judg3 ( 88435 ) * <jeremy@pa[ ]ck.com ['vle' in gap]> on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:29PM (#20499719) Homepage Journal
    ..that I don't send in rebates any more unless they are $50 or higher. Seems like 9 times out of 10 I never hear from the company again if the rebate is a smallish amount - now I know why.

    It truly is brilliant though, how hard would you try to get a small $3.50 rebate back, but it was the reason you picked that product over a competitor. So they win twice, once on getting your business and again when they don't send you the check and you don't really care.
  • Not surprising (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:30PM (#20499733) Homepage

    I've gotten into the habit of completely ignoring mail-in rebates because I've never once received one. Over the years, I've sent in maybe as many as 10 rebates, and never gotten any kind of a response.

    Of course, in the fine print of every rebate is something along the lines of, "We have no legal obligation to actually send you a rebate, even if you send this in. If we believe any piece of information is wrong for any reason, we reserve the right to trash your rebate application."

    It's a scam. If they really intended to give you the discount, they'd have an "instant rebate", meaning a price-cut in the store. The whole point of a mail-in rebate is to trick people into thinking things are cheaper than they are. They advertise "$199 w/ mail-in rebate (normally $299)". So you start thinking the product is $199 even though you'll give the store $299 when you buy it. Then, either you forget to send the mail in rebate, or they find some excuse not to honor it. You've just bought the item for $299.

  • Rebates are a scam (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mcelrath ( 8027 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:31PM (#20499739) Homepage

    Rebates are a scam that allows a company to pad their ledger with artificial profits that get refunded some time later. It's an accounting scam. They make money by having more money in the bank, earning interest, while you don't. They also count on a good fraction of people simply not filling out the rebate form. So it's a form of false advertising that allows them to advertise one price when in fact you have to give them a different amount of money.

    Don't do business with companies that offer rebates. Pay for what things are worth and screw this stupid shell game. I've not gotten my rebate many times, without explanation.

    This crap should be illegal.

  • by EMB Numbers ( 934125 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:34PM (#20499773)
    This is so clearly fraud that the MD attorney general should have completed the arrest warrant for key members of Vastech's management by tomorrow morning. With arraignment hopefully postponed until Monday morning, the managers will be well motivated to correct the situation after they post bail.

    In all seriousness, rebate letters that contain irreplaceable original receipts should be handled with the same care as bank deposits, and the same penalty should apply as would apply if a Bank manager discarded all of the night deposits for a bank branch.

    I call this fraud and criminal negligence, and if nobody is prosecuted, it will be a travesty of justice.

     
  • by Mattintosh ( 758112 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:34PM (#20499777)
    I don't buy things with mail-in rebates. If retailers want to play games, they can find someone else. If they want me to buy stuff, they can put the real price on the shelf instead of the after-rebate price. Instant rebates are a different matter...
  • Re:Not surprising (Score:5, Insightful)

    by multisync ( 218450 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:35PM (#20499787) Journal

    It's a scam. If they really intended to give you the discount, they'd have an "instant rebate", meaning a price-cut in the store. The whole point of a mail-in rebate is to trick people into thinking things are cheaper than they are.


    I'm of the opinion that the whole point of these "rebates" is to harvest the customer's name, address and whatever other information is typically requested.

    I never mail them in. I base my purchasing decisions on the price I pay at the till.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:40PM (#20499831)
    That's getting into grand theft range if not already there.

    BC
  • by ackthpt ( 218170 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:41PM (#20499843) Homepage Journal

    Excerpt from the enclosed rebates:

    Congratulations on the purchase of your new Intel Core 2 Duo! To apply to recieve your $100.00 rebate in 6 to 8 weeks, please enclose your original reciept, this completed form & the original UPC from the product in a self addressed stamped envelope and send it to:

    INTEL CORE 2 DUO REBATE OFFER LONG NAMED CLEARINGHOUSE PLACE
    c/o Vastech
    888 Bestgate Road
    Suite # The Dumpster Behind Denny's
    Annapolis, MD 21401
    Yeah, be sure to check the address on those things. Also, I believe the Vatican uses Vastech to handle all their "Children's Letters to God" mail.

    Actually it was a bad employee. The employee was supposed to shread them first.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:42PM (#20499851)
    Not all of them are a scam. You just have to be willing to stand on top of them and demand with a lot of distasteful language that they pony up.

    It took me 8 months to get a 50 $ rebate once. They got so sick of me ( I went to the top of corp too) that they accidentally paid me twice to make me shut up.

    Rebates are really very simple. You just have to CATALOG every move you make, save every email, every letter, copy every form and receipt, and then mail it certified. Easy schmeesy, the law is on your side when you do that.
  • by Organic User ( 1103717 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:45PM (#20499883)
    About a month ago the fatwallet community produced a crazy rebate scheme where you profit off bundled software. The scheme originated in this thread [fatwallet.com]. The scheme has since been used for many more deals. I am just wondering if it is related? The rebate T&C say the rebate can not be for more than the cost of the product. The scheme worked by claiming rebates from the retailer (by buying a hardware and software bundle) and the software distributor at the same time and assuming they don't realize your the same person (i.e. lack of communication from the retailer and distributor). To sweeten the scheme you could buy competing software packages and use them for the upgrade rebate. If this is related then Frys must of caught onto the scheme.
  • by PeterChenoweth ( 603694 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:53PM (#20499961)
    I hate mail-in rebates as much as the next guy, and try to purchase things from vendors that don't use them whenever I can, but I have to say that I don't think I've ever had one *not* work. I totally agree that it is just some accounting trick that should be banished, but none-the-less, they've always worked for me.

    Over the years I've mailed in probably two dozen rebates for various products at brick-and-mortar places like Best Buy, Circuit City, Office Depot, Staples, AT&T/Cingular, etc. I'm referring to $25-$200+ back on things like laptops, TV's, Tivos, software, cell phones, etc. I had a Cingular rebate once that was 4 weeks overdue. One 10 minute phone call and the rebate was re-issued and arrived 3 days later. I've even done a couple of the 'come test drive the new Mazda Whatever and get a $25 gift card' rebates, and those have always arrived as well.

    OTOH, I've never bothered with the '$3.50 rebate on a $5 pack of CD-R' type things, as it's just not worth my time.

    FWIW, I've always carefully followed the directions and have received the rebates within roughly the correct time period as stated. I keep a copy of everything I sent and make a note in my calendar for 6,8,12,whatever weeks away that I should have received it and then just forget about it until then. My point is, rebates suck, but they aren't *always* a scam....

  • by sizzzzlerz ( 714878 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:55PM (#20499991)
    I've stopped buying products advertised at a price after rebate. It simply isn't worth the hassle to assemble the appropriate documentation, photocopy it, file the photocopy, and then send it in. Then, 6 to 8 weeks later, start phoning the company asking where my rebate is. All that to save a few bucks on some cheap piece of Chinese-made crap simply isn't worth my time. I'll continue to review the ads and buy something I want when it is truly on sale. As a result, I've pretty much stopped going in to Fry's since nearly everything has some sort of rebate attached to it. I never go to Best Buy either, partly for the same reason, but mainly because their prices are always high and their service sucks so bad.

    Does this matter to a place like Fry's. Admittedly, no it doesn't, but I feel better about it.

  • by Roskolnikov ( 68772 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:57PM (#20500007)
    When shopping for tech toys I always treat the rebate as secondary, the price has to be the lowest before the rebate, if the rebate is instant even better but you just can rely on the companies servicing these things
    to come through; read the fine print on most of the rebates and you will find that you are responsible for making sure the company has received and processed your rebate, once its sent you've more than likely sent the only copy you have along with the original qualifying UPC/product label, once that's lost your chances at getting the rebate fulfilled are next to nil.

    This kind of news just amuses me, it is obvious though that the company didn't do this intentionally, that kind of move would have involved shredding.

  • by gravos ( 912628 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @05:57PM (#20500019) Homepage
    When a manufacturer decides they want to offer a rebate, they almost always come to some agreement with a third party (like Rebate-zone) who prints up forms, handles submissions, and mails out checks. Typically I think this agreement involves a lump-sum payment based on the number of rebates that could potentially be redeemed (but less than [number of rebates] * [rebate value] because a significant number will never be mailed in).

    Surely you see the conflict of interest here. The rebate operation has no business with you, the customer, except that they have to mail you part of their lump sum if you mail in your goodies. They don't really care if they make you angry, because you are not their customer. They are "Rebate Operation Inc.", and "Sony" or "Toshiba" or whoever the heck you actually bought your product from is who gives them their dough. Since they couldn't care less if they inconvenience you, the guy who is trying to steal a chunk of their change, it is exceedingly common that you will get a rebate denial with some bogus explanation like "No UPC included" or "Receipt illegible" or the world-famous "Postmark date incorrect" even if you've followed the directions perfectly and submitted well before the deadline.

    These headaches, combined with the possibility of the postal service losing your check, make it largely worthwhile to ignore any product with a mail-in rebate unless you are willing to pay the full price.
  • by asphaltjesus ( 978804 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @06:09PM (#20500145)
    I'll go with your assumption that there is somewhere a statute that is violated. What's the penalty for this crime? Probably a slap on the wrist.

    I'll go with you one further and assume there is a serious crime, with lots of precedence that some prosecutor can win:

    Let's say the rebates are for $20: $26,000 is the amount of the crime. Let's say the rebates are for $50: $65,000 is the amount of the crime. What's the cost to prosecute? Way more than $65,000 after judges, courtrooms and prosecutor costs are estimated. That's not even considering what happens when the rebate processor lawyers-up and drags this thing down and out.

    The company gets a day of bad press and that's about it. HP's CEO/board members got away with far, far worse with practically no penalty whatsoever. Certainly nothing that won't be forgotten in a couple of years.

    Laws are to prosecute the individuals and corporations without enough money to lawyer-up.
  • by MobyDisk ( 75490 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @06:17PM (#20500263) Homepage
    Everybody here hates CEOs and likes to hold them liable for everything. I want to hold the individuals responsible. A CEO can't track every little thing every employee does. If I have a company with 10k employees and an employee trashes somebody's rebate form, you can't hold the CEO responsible. Hold the employee responsible.

    This is especially true when I hear of engineers writing rootkits or spyware for a company. I want the balls of the engineer who wrote that code. Likewise, if somebody trashes rebate forms, take it out of their pay checks. These are cases of malicious, intentional damage to a customer and the individual should be held responsible for their actions.
  • by Gospodin ( 547743 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @06:23PM (#20500325)

    They don't really care if they make you angry, because you are not their customer.

    Well, they should care, because if they make me angry at the company that hired them, it's less likely that company will hire them again. The company I am doing business with usually has some interest in good PR.

    Incidentally, I bought a printer in May that came with a $100 mail-in rebate. I just received the check this week. I had written that one off a month ago!

  • by Bigjeff5 ( 1143585 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @06:45PM (#20500601)
    D'oh! Preview button, gotta remember that. Such clauses are usually considered unenforceable by the courts, and the rebate company would have to honor it regardless.
  • by Original Replica ( 908688 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @06:47PM (#20500625) Journal
    what really amazes me are people like yourself who actually believe that the CEO didn't do this himself.

    Regardless of if the CEO actually did the physical work,the CEO should be held responsible. Here's how I see it, if an employee does something good and the company makes $$$, what share of that does the employee get and what share does the CEO and other upper management get? Why should the distribution of criminal guilt be any different? All of the rewards and none of the responsibility just doesn't ring true to me.
  • Responsibilities (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 06, 2007 @07:19PM (#20501017)
    There is a chain of responsibility and ultimately the buck ends somewhere - with the CEO.

    Yes, the employee should be fired for doing this because they didn't do the work properly.

    Now someone managed that employee. If an employee was able to do that and their manager didn't notice, isn't their manager also being negligent because they haven't been paying attention to what their employees are doing?

    Recurse back up the tree and ultimately you get to the CEO. It all starts with the CEO through his choice of employees.

    What's not clear in situations like this is whether or not the employee was indeed being lazy or following some "company policy". From the comments I've read here, it doesn't sound like laziness to me, so it becomes policy. Someone approved that policy and that approval ultimately rests with the CEO. He needs to appoint competent people to do their jobs. If he can't do that then he needs to be excused, along with the others in the chain that are also incapable of doing their job.

    This type of rationale is why people will call for political leaders to resign when things go awry and is why 'W' should resign.

  • a bad employer (Score:2, Insightful)

    by the_fat_kid ( 1094399 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @07:24PM (#20501067)
    no one notices it because they saw you do the same thing last month, and the month before that, and every month since they were hired.

    rebates are a BS way of advertising. If they want to lower the price of some thing, great! I'm all for that.
    Just don't tell me that if I pay full price now you will give me some money back in 6 to 8 weeks.

    I try to ignore the false price they like to post on the shelf, that includes the rebate, and look closely to see how much I'm realy paying.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 06, 2007 @07:27PM (#20501109)
    I'm posting this anonymously, but I can tell you that I don't mind rebates, and I have many consulting clients who just love them.

    It has to do with taxes and claimed expenses.

    Suppose my client buys $200 worth of utility software, but it comes with a $100 rebate.

    The client files the receipt away for his accountant showing a business expense of $200 for the software. That's a $200 business expense come April 15. Business expenses can really add up.

    The $100 rebate check arrives 3 months later. It gets deposited. There's no associated W2 or Form 1099 from the rebate company declaring this income to the IRS. The recipient is supposed to declare this rebate check, but it almost never happens.

    The result is a win-win for the client: a $200 business expense deduction for $100 worth of software. They'll just have the office manager stay on top of the rebate company and keep track of the paperwork.

    It gets even better when things are "free" after multiple rebates: a $30 deduction for a $30 blank DVD spindle that actually cost them nothing. After taxes they actually *make* money from that purchase.

    *I* declare all such rebates on my taxes, of course.

    I'm not saying such activities are legal. Just that they happen.

  • by phliar ( 87116 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @07:51PM (#20501353) Homepage

    Why would the CEO not be responsible for the actions of his company? I didn't send the rebate form to that disgruntled employee, and it's no concern of mine why my rebate ended up in a dumpster. And not the CEO of that outsourced firm, but the one that sold the original item to the consumer. (Just like that rootkit writer -- if he did it for a company, the company is responsible. Sure, the writer needs lessons in ethics, but the company that paid him is the true villain.)

    But taking responsibility is so out of style! Just hire a PR firm to fix up the bad publicity, grease a few politicians' palms, and give that CEO another bonus!

  • by vondo ( 303621 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @08:16PM (#20501587)
    <naive>Well, they should care, because if they make me angry at the company that hired them, it's less likely that company will hire them again.</naive>

    These rebate companies bid for the original company's business by emphasizing their low payout rates. If the finances work the way the OP suggests, then the company that rejects the most can underbid the competition. If the manufacture pays the rebate plus processing fee, it's also less expensive for the manufacturer.

    I buy things with rebates, notably Canon camera gear where the rebate can be hundreds of dollars. But, I always make sure I'll be happy with my purchase if I get bupkis. And, for these large rebates save all the documentation and fight like hell if they try to deny you. You will get it eventually.
  • by number11 ( 129686 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @08:26PM (#20501683)
    Everybody here hates CEOs and likes to hold them liable for everything. I want to hold the individuals responsible. A CEO can't track every little thing every employee does. If I have a company with 10k employees and an employee trashes somebody's rebate form, you can't hold the CEO responsible. Hold the employee responsible.

    The company is the one that pockets the profit. I say, hold the company responsible. Don't be any harsher on them than on an individual. If stealing that amount would put an individual in jail for 30 days, incarcerate the company for 30 days. Send the marshals around to freeze their bank accounts and padlock their doors for 30 days. First time that happens to a Fortune 500 company, that will make people sit up and pay attention.
  • by griffjon ( 14945 ) <.GriffJon. .at. .gmail.com.> on Thursday September 06, 2007 @09:17PM (#20502061) Homepage Journal
    This is a better strategy, nonetheless, if the mail-in is high enough, I'll go through with it. Filing Better Business Bureau complaints is a great way to get service.
  • by glwtta ( 532858 ) on Thursday September 06, 2007 @11:54PM (#20503303) Homepage
    My point is, there are ways you can get that rebate without incurring any cost to you.

    Unless you count time and dignity.

    (Oddly enough, I place both of those above a nigh-free CDR spindle)
  • by fantomas ( 94850 ) on Friday September 07, 2007 @03:45AM (#20504617)
    If the manufacturer actually pays out the $30.00, then that's a bonus

    Heck that's shady business practice. You accept this kind of corrupt behaviour in your country? Hmm, your place is more messed up than I thought it was. Personally I'd be hassling my political representative to get the law changed so said companies get hauled over hot coals metaphorically speaking if they don't honour their promises.

    Actually, I don't really get the 'rebate' idea really - how does it work legally? Why don't they just get told by the law to sell the 70 dollar hard drive with a 30 dollar rebate for 40 dollars at point of sale? I understand how it works from their point of view - that not everybody will claim their rebate, so they win - but this seems very dodgy business practice. How is it structured? do you buy the drive for 70 dollars and inside the box is a slip you post off and they supposedly post back the rebate? Is this common practice?

    cheers
  • by Mr2001 ( 90979 ) on Friday September 07, 2007 @05:00AM (#20504975) Homepage Journal

    Please show me any any such comparisons. I would be very interested in a formal study comparing private/government efficiency. All anecdotal evidence I've heard, and my personal experience, is that government tends to be much less efficient than private industry.
    Health care is the one that comes to mind. Most western countries with national health care systems spend less of their GDP on health care, yet they cover more people, have lower infant mortality and longer lifespans, and overall, get a lot more for their money than we do. Even in the US, Medicare has much lower overhead than private insurers: something like 6% vs. 30%.

    (I don't have citations off the top of my head. I suppose I could look them up if you want them, but they shouldn't be too hard to find.)

    I see that you mentioned health care later in your post, but I don't think the factors you mentioned are enough to explain the sorry state of our system compared to others. We're hardly the only country that regulates doctors or allows malpractice suits.

    Telecomm/utilities are a natural monopoly, so you do need some type of regulation to keep the customers from getting screwed by the local monopoly.
    It's not just about monopolies, it's about providing services even when there's no profit incentive. The problem with small communities that couldn't get phone service wasn't that it'd be too expensive to run multiple sets of wires for competing phone companies... it was too expensive to run even one set. Phone service could not be provided there at a price that would allow the phone company to turn a profit. Without government intervention, it simply wouldn't have been available there, but we the people decided telecom was important enough to subsidize.
  • by thue ( 121682 ) on Friday September 07, 2007 @06:10AM (#20505297) Homepage
    Nice out of context quoting.

    And I don't see what connection there is between the quality of the consumer laws and the tax bracket. You could have the same laws, while retaining your current tax rate, if you just were better at electing your politicians.
  • by NMerriam ( 15122 ) <NMerriam@artboy.org> on Friday September 07, 2007 @06:11AM (#20505309) Homepage

    they, like casinos, don't need to cheat to make money.


    It took a LOOOONG time for casinos to learn that there was more money to be made over the long term from unquestionable integrity than there was from rigging games. I don't believe the rebate industry has learned this yet, because it's too tempting to just sit on a few percent more of the rebates and add them to profit. If someone calls to complain, process theirs, but most people will never call.
  • by bentcd ( 690786 ) <bcd@pvv.org> on Friday September 07, 2007 @07:16AM (#20505633) Homepage
    A mail-in rebate is one manifestation of the concept of market segmentation. The basic idea is that you have a product that costs you $10 to manufacture and distribute and figuring in your fixed costs and such you break even at $12, so you can sell it at, say, $15 and be profitable. What irks you, however, is that you /know/ that there are people out there that would buy it at $25 because it's so useful. If you set the price at that level, however, you lose all those customers that wouldn't pay more than $15 (because they're poor or whatever). So what you do is set the price at $25 and include a $10 mail-in rebate. The rich people will buy it at $25 and probably ignore the rebate (money isn't that valuable to them) while the poor people will find it opportune to spend the time to mail in the rebate request, spend some time on the phone to nag about not having received the money etc.

    It would have been more ideal to have two different formal markets, of course, one for poor people and one for rich people and then have different prices in those two markets. This is often not feasible in practice.
  • Re:Bad employee (Score:2, Insightful)

    by SnapShot ( 171582 ) on Friday September 07, 2007 @10:21AM (#20507411)
    A good employee would have opened the envelopes, copied all the personal information into the junk mail, telemarketing, and spam lists and THEN shredded the rebate forms.

    What do you think these rebates are for, anyway?
  • by PitaBred ( 632671 ) <slashdot&pitabred,dyndns,org> on Friday September 07, 2007 @10:45AM (#20507677) Homepage
    I've learned even better: Stop dicking with mail-in rebate bullshit, and buy my stuff online. I'm not an animal to be trained to jump through hoops, thank you very little.
  • by wizzahd ( 995765 ) on Friday September 07, 2007 @11:50AM (#20508739)
    Because no online store offers mail-in rebates [newegg.com].
  • by cnock ( 163362 ) on Friday September 07, 2007 @02:08PM (#20511477) Journal
    A third purpose: to gather names, phone numbers, email address, and physical addresses of people who buy their products. Then their spam and telemarketing are legal due to the "established business relationship".

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...