Money & Ethics

Strict refund policies may offend but are ethical

Discussion Policy

Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

By Knight Kiplinger

Kiplinger publications
Sunday, November 15, 2009

Q: Recently I tried to get a refund on some merchandise for which I no longer had the sales receipt. But I was told that I was out of luck and that I couldn't even get a store credit. I was offended. Do you think this policy is ethical?

A: Yes. It is reasonable for a merchant to require proof of purchase because attempted returns of shoplifted goods are rampant. Some national retailers do allow you to return an item without a receipt, even when their savvy returns-desk personnel strongly suspect a theft.

These chains apparently think that the risk of offending an honest shopper like you and losing your patronage is more costly than allowing dishonest people to rip them off. But many small merchants think that requiring a receipt for returns is an evenhanded policy that doesn't require a fallible snap judgment about a customer's integrity and also reduces fraud. Either business practice, as long as it is consistent, is ethically defensible.