# LAMusic



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Hi guys,

I don't post much, but I thought this could be of public interest
We pretty much all know this webstore
So I buy a brand new pedal (MXR Script Phase 90), which comes in defective
I then ask for a refund, but these guys are telling me they'll charge a 25% restocking fee
Now that's for a defective item, which should be covered by warranty 
Is it just me or that's illegal under the Ontario Consumer Law? 
Let me know what you guys think 

Cheers


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

It's illegal. I would definitely talk to the store manager. Actually, I would have talked to the store manager then and there and got it straightened out. I would also let him know the kind of adverse publicity he is getting here on GC because of the poor handling of this issue by one of his staff.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Edited after considering the new info from the OP.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Well it was a shipped order, if it makes any difference 
They said they could arrange pickup for a replacement or store credit... obviously they don't want to lose their profit
They also screwed up that order (ordered 2 packs of EB Nickel strings, they sent me 1 right and the other standard Slinky), but I wouldn't have complained for a pack of strings
Sent them a reply mail 2 days ago saying that was illegal... no answer yet, so I decided to post it here


----------



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

Why not take a replacement and call it a day?


----------



## fredyfreeloader (Dec 11, 2010)

A group of consumers united, can talk a hell of a lot louder with their wallets than one person alone. Lets see what happens.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Alex Dann said:


> Why not take a replacement and call it a day?


Because that's what they're trying to force me to do 
Out of principle


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

I don't buy anything there. If you read up on these forums you'll find that LA Music has a chequered reputation, at best.


----------



## zurn (Oct 21, 2009)

I also had a bad experience with them on an online order. I will never buy anything from them again.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> Because that's what they're trying to force me to do
> Out of principle


So let me get this straight - they have offered to replace the defective pedal at no cost, but that's not acceptable to you?


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> So let me get this straight - they have offered to replace the defective pedal at no cost, but that's not acceptable to you?


If I'm legally entitled to a full refund, then charging me a 25% restocking fee is not acceptable

After receiving a DOA item, I don't think I want any more MXR pedals for the time being.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> If I'm legally entitled to a full refund, then charging me a 25% restocking fee is not acceptable
> 
> After receiving a DOA item, I don't think I want any more MXR pedals for the time being.


You are legally entitled to a working replacement and nothing more.

Did you read their sales terms before purchasing?

With only four posts to the forum, it seems that your only purpose here is to trash LA Music...


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> You are legally entitled to a working replacement and nothing more.
> 
> Did you read their sales terms before purchasing?
> 
> With only four posts to the forum, it seems that your only purpose here is to trash LA Music...


Please point to the law that says clearly that I'm only entitled to a working replacement and not a full refund.

Sale terms are fine, but any law will override them 

My main purpose here is buying items from the Classified section (member since July 2013), and people who have sold items to me can attest to that

I'm exposing a situation, not trashing LA Music (do you work for them, by the way?)


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> Please point to the law that says clearly that I'm only entitled to a working replacement and not a full refund.
> 
> Sale terms are fine, but any law will override them
> 
> ...


You made a purchase and changed your mind. They are under no legal obligation to refund your purchase, and if they choose to are entitled to set the terms including restocking fees. Terms are published for you to read before making a purchase, and when you do make a purchase you do so in acceptance of their terms.

No I don't work for them (I live 400km away).


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> You made a purchase and changed your mind. They are under no legal obligation to refund your purchase, and if they choose to are entitled to set the terms including restocking fees. Terms are published for you to read before making a purchase, and when you do make a purchase you do so in acceptance of their terms.
> 
> No I don't work for them (I live 400km away).


I did not change my mind
The item is defective, passed on. It has ceased to be. Expired and gone to its maker.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> I did not change my mind
> The item is defective, passed on. It has ceased to be. Expired and gone to its maker.


... and as you have stated, they will exchange it. There is no problem here... move along.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> ... and as you have stated, they will exchange it. There is no problem here... move along.


There's clearly something you can't grasp...


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> There's clearly something you can't grasp...


Oh I understand completely... it's you that can't grasp that they have no legal obligation to refund your purchase, their only obligation is to fulfill the order with a working pedal which they want to do (as you have confirmed).


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> Oh I understand completely... it's you that can't grasp that they have no legal obligation to refund your purchase, their only obligation is to fulfill the order with a working pedal which they want to do (as you have confirmed).


Again, that's what you think (and you're wrong), but you can't provide any links

Go read this:

http://forums.redflagdeals.com/refunds-defective-products-consumer-protection-laws-ontario-999613/

Plenty of information in there and links to actual laws


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

Hey, your both right but I will tell you. I personally will not buy anything from any place that charges a fee if I return it. So in this case, I say "thanks for the heads up". Buyer beware.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> Again, that's what you think (and you're wrong), but you can't provide any links
> 
> Go read this:
> 
> ...


As LA Music has no obligation to you other than an exchange, I have no obligation to do your research...


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> As LA Music has no obligation to you other than an exchange, I have no obligation to do your research...


The hard headed never learn
Keep getting screwed by businesses who try to force their "sale terms" on you, it'll be your own loss


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> The hard headed never learn
> Keep getting screwed by businesses who try to force their "sale terms" on you, it'll be your own loss


Whatever...


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Business said:


> Well it was a shipped order, if it makes any difference
> They said they could arrange pickup for a replacement or store credit... obviously they don't want to lose their profit
> They also screwed up that order (ordered 2 packs of EB Nickel strings, they sent me 1 right and the other standard Slinky), but I wouldn't have complained for a pack of strings
> Sent them a reply mail 2 days ago saying that was illegal... no answer yet, so I decided to post it here


If they offered you a replacement then I don't think you can really complain. But good business practices would be to issue you a full credit. I deal with as many stores as possible who make returns quickly and painlessly. I run my business that way. It's just good business.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> The hard headed never learn
> Keep getting screwed by businesses who try to force their "sale terms" on you, it'll be your own loss


Here you go hard head:

"In Ontario, stores and other suppliers are not legally required to offer refunds or exchanges. So it’s important that you check each store’s policy before buying there."

http://www.ontario.ca/consumers/returns-exchanges-and-warranties


----------



## Clean Channel (Apr 18, 2011)

Meh, actually I'll stay out of this one. (deleted post)


----------



## Brennan (Apr 9, 2008)

Business said:


> Again, that's what you think (and you're wrong), but you can't provide any links
> 
> Go read this:
> 
> ...


I'm sorry, but you are wrong. There is absolutely no mention of a mandatory refund on damaged goods in either the Consumer Protection Act nor the Sale of Goods Act, only that the seller is legally obligated to provide the goods in the condition agreed upon before the contract was signed (ie, money changed hands). They have to make it right, but there is no law stating that they have to refund your money unless they can not provide a proper replacement (at which point the consumer is within their right to withdraw the contract and request a full refund). That said, most stores will generally refund your money for a defective product (or at least offer store credit for the full amount) ... LA Music seem to have a history of doing the bare minimum.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

dradlin said:


> Here you go hard head:
> 
> "In Ontario, stores and other suppliers are not legally required to offer refunds or exchanges. So it’s important that you check each store’s policy before buying there."
> 
> http://www.ontario.ca/consumers/returns-exchanges-and-warranties


... and in addition to this, LA Music's terms are clearly spelled out on their web site, as can be seen viewed at the trailing link.

http://www.lamusic.ca//help_answer.asp?ID=11#134


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> Here you go hard head:
> 
> "In Ontario, stores and other suppliers are not legally required to offer refunds or exchanges. So it’s important that you check each store’s policy before buying there."
> 
> http://www.ontario.ca/consumers/returns-exchanges-and-warranties


That's for "standard" returns and exchanges, not defective products
As for the sale or contract terms, any law will override them. LA Music can state whatever they want on their website, if it's illegal, it won't stand.

Brennan, your reply was much more informative. 
How about the Legal Warranty? Anything in there about refunds that you would know abouth?


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> That's for "standard" returns and exchanges, not defective products
> 
> Brennan, your reply was much more informative.
> How about the Legal Warranty? Anything in there about refunds that you would know abouth?


... and you call me a hard head?


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> ... and you call me a hard head?


Yes, you're not giving out information, just sticking to your guns
Why would you keep defending a -seemingly- horrible business anyway?

I'm much more interested in reading what information Brennan and others have


----------



## Brennan (Apr 9, 2008)

Business said:


> Brennan, your reply was much more informative.
> How about the Legal Warranty? Anything in there about refunds that you would know abouth?


Only that the vendor/manufacturer is obligated to honour the warranty as agreed upon at the point of contract. If the text of your warranty guarantees a refund (unlikely), you're good ... otherwise the vendor/manufacturer has the right to offer a repair or suitable replacement. 

Personally, I'd just take the replacement (or if you don't want to deal with LAMusic, go directly through MXR who generally have great customer service).


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> Yes, you're not giving out information, just sticking to your guns
> Why would you keep defending a -seemingly- horrible business anyway?
> 
> I'm much more interested in reading what information Brennan and others have



Oh I've given you all the answers buddy... just not the answer you want!

I'm not defending LA Music. They stated their terms up front and it turns out that you didn't read them and now you are blaming them for your ignorance.

Fair is fair.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> Oh I've given you all the answers buddy... just not the answer you want!
> 
> I'm not defending LA Music. They stated their terms up front and it turns out that you didn't read them and now you are blaming them for your ignorance.
> 
> Fair is fair.


I'm not looking for a particular answer, just one that is backed up with valid information

As stated earlier, the law is much more important to me than the store's terms
The store can offer an equal or more advantageous policy than what the law requires, not worse


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Business said:


> If I'm legally entitled to a full refund, then charging me a 25% restocking fee is not acceptable
> 
> After receiving a DOA item, I don't think I want any more MXR pedals for the time being.


There's nothing wrong with mXR pedals. You just got a lemon (allegedly). I think you're being silly now.


we're not lawyers,this is a guitar forum. You seem pretty entrenched in your position, so not sure what you want to accomplish in this thread. take whatever action you think you're entitled to.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Diablo said:


> There's nothing wrong with mXR pedals. You just got a lemon (allegedly). I think you're being silly now.


Maybe I am
This thread was about exposing a certain situation, and also asking about that particular law
If I'm wrong, so be it, I'll get an exchange, sell it at my expense and get a Retro Sonic Phaser


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Business said:


> Maybe I am
> This thread was about exposing a certain situation, and also asking about that particular law
> If I'm wrong, so be it, I'll get an exchange, sell it at my expense and get a Retro Sonic Phaser


Likely the best decision.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

I can see the restocking fee to avoid the tire kickers that would simply want to try something out, then return it.

I don't understand the fee when the product was faulty.
What's the purpose of the fee, other than what I have mentioned?
Is it to cover the cost of the employee to put the item back into the showcase?
You wouldn't "restock" a defective pedal anyway.

Go with the RetroSonic Phase, it's one of the best that I've tried.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Say Bob buys an item from an online retailer, tries it and doesn't like it, so he returns it for credit. The product packaging has been disturbed, the item has a fingerprint on it's previously virgin exterior, there is a cat hair stuck to the bottom, but it is otherwise blemish free.

Sam buys the same item from the same online retailer. The retailer ships the same item that Bob returned to Sam. Sam notices the fingerprint and cat hair and now he is pissed because he wasn't shipped a 'new' item. He returns the item for full credit, then goes on the internet and flames the retailer for shipping him a "used" item.

Frank buys the same item from the same online retailer, because the retailer is offering Bob and Sam's returned item at a discounted price because the package was opened (but the fingerprint and cat hair is removed). Frank received the item and is pleased with the purchase, but the retailer lost money because of Bob and Sam's returned shipping expense, and the eventual discounted sale.

Now Jim buys an item from another online retailer. It arrives and everything is fine but his wife freaks out because the baby needs a new pair of shoes. He's gotta return the item, but in his haste didn't realize there is a restocking fee. Unfortunately he accidentally drops the item and now it doesn't function. 
Jim's a good guy... really... but he's gotta get his money back else his wife will divorce him... he concocts a tail that the item was faulty to try to convince the retailer to take the item back with full refund. Per their policy, the retailer offers to exchange the damaged item, but unfortunately that doesn't save Jim's marriage. Jim snaps and in retribution goes online and flames the retailer over their clearly stated sales policy and blamed them for his failed marriage instead of his hasty purchase decision. Whether the retailer accepts the return, or exchanges the damage item, the retailer looses money.

So in those vignettes, a reasonable person can in the least gain an appreciation for why a retailer may need to charge a restocking fee to either increase consumer commitment to their purchase, or recover incurred expenses for consumers who back out of the purchase at no fault of the retailer.

And by the way, I've purchased an amp and multiple pedals from LA Music over the years. All were positive transactions. For every negative transaction, there will be 1000 positive transactions you never hear about.

I don't envy the position of many small retailers. Cut them some slack.


----------



## limelight65 (Jun 2, 2014)

and that is the reality of the situation and the common sense reasoning.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

I had something similar happen a few years ago. Bought a ModTone Phaser with very little trial in the store (my own fault, I know) - a mom'n'pop operation I'd never been to before. I got it home, played with it a bit and just hated it. Called the store back and asked if I could return it - nope, replacement or store credit. So I kept the pedal, gifted it to a buddy a short time later, and never returned to the store or looked at ModTone stuff again.

I assumed because L&M offers a 30 return that everyone did. They don't have to - but there are 'costs' to not having a competitive return policy, IMO. I still buy lots of stuff at L&M, partially because of their generous return policy. I haven't been back to that mom'n'pop op since the pedal thing.




Steadfastly said:


> Likely the best decision.


I agree.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> Say Bob buys an item from an online retailer, tries it and doesn't like it, so he returns it for credit. The product packaging has been disturbed, the item has a fingerprint on it's previously virgin exterior, there is a cat hair stuck to the bottom, but it is otherwise blemish free.
> 
> Sam buys the same item from the same online retailer. The retailer ships the same item that Bob returned to Sam. Sam notices the fingerprint and cat hair and now he is pissed because he wasn't shipped a 'new' item. He returns the item for full credit, then goes on the internet and flames the retailer for shipping him a "used" item.
> 
> ...


Cool story bro

I rarely ever buy new. I've never returned a product because I don't like it. I buy used, if I don't like it, I just resell it. 
And thanks for implying I'm making this "tail" up, as you wrote it.
Plenty of stories about bad customer service from LA Music... like that time I bought that guitar and didn't hear from them for a whole month because the guitar was not in stock... and of course they had charged my credit card


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

dradlin said:


> Say Bob buys an item from an online retailer, tries it and doesn't like it, so he returns it for credit. The product packaging has been disturbed, the item has a fingerprint on it's previously virgin exterior, there is a cat hair stuck to the bottom, but it is otherwise blemish free.
> 
> Sam buys the same item from the same online retailer. The retailer ships the same item that Bob returned to Sam. Sam notices the fingerprint and cat hair and now he is pissed because he wasn't shipped a 'new' item. He returns the item for full credit, then goes on the internet and flames the retailer for shipping him a "used" item.
> 
> ...


That's it! I am never buying online again. I value my marriage too much to put it in jeopardy.:smile-new:

PS: Good illustration.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> And thanks for implying I'm making this "tail" up, as you wrote it.


Don't read too much into it, I wasn't implying that.


----------



## Accept2 (Jan 1, 2006)

This thread makes me happy that I dont own a music store............


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Love the exchange. Without getting too heated there was some snootiness back and forth and dradlin pretty much trumped you.

THEN, you hit us with this:


Business said:


> LA Music... like that time I bought that guitar and didn't hear from them for a whole month because the guitar was not in stock... and of course they had charged my credit card


...and I think "they did that to you and you bought from them again??!!"

I couldn't help but think of this:









So...sorry that this happened to you but it was a lesson that you were supposed to learn last time they bent you over.

That said, all the best.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

How did I miss this epic thread??? defending the indefensible... it doesn't get any better.

Who cares if this guy joined simply to trash LA, their rep of being so tight it's stupid is well documented, this one is typical of their mindset and 1920's business practices - lose a customer and piss of many so they can make the $4.62 profit from that sale...


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

smorgdonkey said:


> Love the exchange. Without getting too heated there was some snootiness back and forth and dradlin pretty much trumped you.
> 
> So...sorry that this happened to you but it was a lesson that you were supposed to learn last time they bent you over.


Of course, I would disagree that he "trumped" me

The times I ordered with LA Music after the guitar incident were
1- When they were the only one offering a certain product
2- When a certain product was cheaper than anywhere else by a good margin

Each and every time I've ordered, I contacted them first to inquire if the said product was in stock
And everybody who orders there should do too, because they'll take your money and give you no news, whether they ship or not

So if they "fooled" me, may that be a lesson to all you guys, so they don't fool you


----------



## boyscout (Feb 14, 2009)

There is the law, fairly well represented by some here and unfortunately not in the OP's favour. Then there is customer service, something that does not seem well-represented in this instance or in one of my own with LA Music.

I called LA Music to confirm that they had in stock a Radial DI box seen on their web site. I asked the young man who answered the phone to find it in the store and tell me if it was like-new, factory fresh. After a few minutes on hold, he confirmed that it was.

I set out on the normally-one-hour drive to pick it up, but was soon in a fierce blizzard that snarled traffic horribly. I really wanted the box for a setup the next day so I persevered, arriving there almost 2.5 hours later. The box for the device was so badly worn it was barely holding together, and the device itself was scratched top and bottom. They offered no discount, just flipped me a quick 'sorry', so I didn't buy it, changed my plans and ordered one elsewhere. I have never even looked at LA Music's web site since, and I annually spend low-five-figure sums on music gear.

I had a nearly-identical experience (no blizzard!) with Long & McQuade Scarborough about a year before this incident. Staff in these stores either don't know or don't care that if you tell lies to a customer or otherwise make them feel cheated, they (a) won't want to deal with you again which will cost at least hundreds and probably thousands of dollars over the subsequent years and (b) they will tell others about being cheated by you, possibly costing much more.

For the OP LA Music could have given up their usurious 25% re-stocking fee (any potential customer should think about why a business would have such a punishingly-high return penalty!) and refunded with an apology for shipping him a defective product. Instead the company is getting negative attention it richly deserves and they will lose WAY more money than they think they've saved by shoving off their customer.

Someone above has expressed sympathy for the plight of Canadian retailers. I was a fairly-determined Canadian customer for years, until I just couldn't justify it any more. In my experience, many of their woes are self-inflicted as they try to take advantage of a not-very-competitive marketplace and fairly-complacent customers who don't push them to do better. My sympathy is with the OP.

Let the flames begin (continue!)


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

Read here, and if you search google you'll find complaints about them doing the same schitt since the beginning of the internet...


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

nkjanssen said:


> The law is that, in a consumer transaction like this, if the retailer delivered a defective product, the consumer is entitled to a refund. It's a breach by the seller of a fundamental term of the sale contract. The seller can't legally charge a restocking fee in those circumstances.


Finally, thank you.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

nkjanssen said:


> The law is that, in a consumer transaction like this, if the retailer delivered a defective product, the consumer is entitled to a refund. It's a breach by the seller of a fundamental term of the sale contract. The seller can't legally charge a restocking fee in those circumstances.


I wish that was clearly written somewhere in a legal document
Sadly, those are vague at best


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## deadear (Nov 24, 2011)

Answer is clear to me. Walk into your local retailer and buy what you want. Do not even look at on line retailers.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

deadear said:


> Answer is clear to me. Walk into your local retailer and buy what you want. Do not even look at on line retailers.


Online: 5% GST
In store: 15% GST+ PST


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Business said:


> Of course, I would disagree that he "trumped" me
> 
> The times I ordered with LA Music after the guitar incident were
> 1- When they were the only one offering a certain product
> ...


So...they burned you once and you shopped with them multiple times after that.

I stand corrected - you "trumped" yourself.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> The law is that, in a consumer transaction like this, if the retailer delivered a defective product, the consumer is entitled to a refund. It's a breach by the seller of a fundamental term of the sale contract. The seller can't legally charge a restocking fee in those circumstances.


I am no legal professional, though as I read things the consumer is entitled to a refund OR replacement.

A replacement has been offered by the seller, therefore meeting their legal obligation.

If the seller was unable to supply a defect free replacement, then they would be obligated to refund the buyer. That however is not the OP's case.

http://www.legalline.ca/legal_answe...goods_or_services/buying_defective_goods.html

This thread is about trashing LA Music and attempting to smear consumer law to justify outrage.

I have no affinity for nor am I defending LA Music. Fair is fair, that is all.

It is typical these days, people blaming others for acts of their own haste or ignorance.

OP, take the exchange and move on.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> This thread is about trashing LA Music and attempting to smear consumer law to justify outrage.
> 
> I have no affinity for nor am I defending LA Music. Fair is fair, that is all.
> 
> ...


Face the facts, LA Music has terrible customer service

What is typical these days is victim blaming 
Like I'm the one responsible for the bad customer service because I gave the store a second chance

I will indeed exchange the item if I'm not legally entitled to a refund


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

It's clear as day that you changed your mind. If I want a pedal, I get the pedal. I don't huff n' puff about my rights when they provide a solution like they did.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> It's clear as day that you changed your mind. If I want a pedal, I get the pedal. I don't huff n' puff about my rights when they provide a solution like they did.


Why would it matter if I changed my mind if the law says I can get a refund for a defective product?

BTW, I own 3 other Custom Shop Script Reissues... so why would I change my mind about that particular one?


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> Why would it matter if I changed my mind if the law says I can get a refund for a defective product?


Incorrect sir... the law doesn't say that. The lawful remedy is through warranty replacement. Only if they cannot supply a replacement that functions as advertised are you eligible for a refund.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> Incorrect sir... the law doesn't say that. The lawful remedy is through warranty replacement. Only if they cannot supply a replacement that functions as advertised are you eligible for a refund.


After reading the legaline link you posted, that's not my understanding 

"If the defect is a breach of a "condition" or fundamental term of the sale, you can choose to treat it as an event that voids or nullifies the contract. You can return or refuse the defective product and the seller should return your money. If the defect is a breach of a warranty or a misrepresentation of what was promised, the seller is only obligated to either repair or replace the product."


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

Business said:


> Why would it matter if I changed my mind if the law says I can get a refund for a defective product?
> 
> BTW, I own 3 other Custom Shop Script Reissues... so why would I change my mind about that particular one?


maybe you realized that you had too many?

:sFun_dancing:


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> After reading the legaline link you posted, that's not my understanding
> 
> "If the defect is a breach of a "condition" or fundamental term of the sale, you can choose to treat it as an event that voids or nullifies the contract. You can return or refuse the defective product and the seller should return your money. If the defect is a breach of a warranty or a misrepresentation of what was promised, the seller is only obligated to either repair or replace the product."


What you have is an isolated instance of single broken product. A defective product is one that is defective by faulty design and even a replacement can't perform as advertised. It is important to understand that distinction.

Your pedal can be exchanged with an alternate fully functional pedal that fully meets intended design and advertised performance... it is not a defective product, it's simply broken.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> What you have is an isolated instance of single broken product. A defective product is one that is defective by faulty design and even a replacement can't perform as advertised. It is important to understand that distinction.
> 
> Your pedal can be exchanged with an alternate fully functional pedal that fully meets intended design and advertised performance... it is not a defective product, it's simply broken.


Now you're just making stuff up

"In Product Liability, a defective product is one that cannot be used for the purposes intended or is made dangerous as a result of a flaw or imperfection. Such a defect might exist in the entire design of a product or in the production of a particular individual product. A _latent defect_ is one that is not readily observable by the buyer of an item, whereas a _patent defect_ is obvious or immediately apparent upon observation."


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Business said:


> Now you're just making stuff up
> 
> "In Product Liability, a defective product is one that cannot be used for the purposes intended or is made dangerous as a result of a flaw or imperfection. Such a defect might exist in the entire design of a product or in the production of a particular individual product. A _latent defect_ is one that is not readily observable by the buyer of an item, whereas a _patent defect_ is obvious or immediately apparent upon observation."


Look at it this way... If you ordered a blue pedal and they shipped you a red one and could not ship you a blue one in exchange, then the would be legally obliged to refund your purchase because they could not meet the original purchase terms.

In your case, they can and are willing to meet the original purchase terms through a replacement, therefore meeting their lawful obligation.

It's that simple.

I'm tapping out....


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

dradlin said:


> Look at it this way... If you ordered a blue pedal and they shipped you a red one and could not ship you a blue one in exchange, then the would be legally obliged to refund your purchase because they could not meet the original purchase terms.
> 
> In your case, they can and are willing to meet the original purchase terms through a replacement, therefore meeting their lawful obligation.
> 
> ...


Blue pedal instead of red one: breach of warranty = exchange
Defective item: breach of contract = refund or exchange


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

This thread is useless without lawyers.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

adcandour said:


> This thread is useless without lawyers.


Brilliant! 

Nominated as one of the best posts for 2014.

Congrats!

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

adcandour said:


> This thread is useless without lawyers.


Yes, where ARE the lawyers when you need them?


----------



## DrHook (Oct 28, 2013)

Business said:


> Yes, where ARE the lawyers when you need them?


By virtue of that statement, you've just declared yourself a non expert which means you're just expressing your opinion and interpretation of both the law and your rights as a consumer. So take the aggressiveness down a notch or two and let's all play nice and RESPECT that people are entitled to their opinions.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

adcandour said:


> This thread is useless without lawyers.


A lawyer would tell the OP to take the offered exchange and be happy with the result, which he wanted in the first place (a functioning mxr pedal) before spite overwhelmed him...


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

DrHook said:


> By virtue of that statement, you've just declared yourself a non expert which means you're just expressing your opinion and interpretation of both the law and your rights as a consumer. So take the aggressiveness down a notch or two and let's all play nice and RESPECT that people are entitled to their opinions.


Of course I'm no expert, that's why I'm asking people 
Sorry if some of my comments came off as aggressive, it wasn't my intention at all
I feel I'm being attacked in this thread (for whatever reason) more than I'm attacking people


----------



## Dr.StephanHeimer (May 1, 2006)

So let's see if we all got this straight. 

OP usually buys used gear but orders a brand new MXR pedal (which he already has 3 of) from store he acknowledges has terrible service and policies. Pedal arrives broken, store offers to replace defective pedal OP declines and wants refund because now all MXR pedals are bad and store is trying to oppress and impose their policies on him. 

OP states that this is illegal and store policy goes against a law that apparently is not written anywhere, also he links to another forum with a bunch of blog posts which do not do anything to prove his point. Another member links to a government website clearly indicating OP is wrong. OP now claims combination of legal documents are "vague at best" yet his own interpretation of the law is correct. 

OP tries to lawyer up. 

Moral of the story, don't feed the trolls kids!


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Dr.StephanHeimer said:


> So let's see if we all got this straight.
> 
> OP usually buys used gear but orders a brand new MXR pedal (which he already has 3 of) from store he acknowledges has terrible service and policies. Pedal arrives broken, store offers to replace defective pedal OP declines and wants refund because now all MXR pedals are bad and store is trying to oppress and impose their policies on him.
> 
> ...


Wrong

I ordered a pedal, which I own 3 other different models of the same brand (Dyna Comp, Phase 45, Distortion+, all script reissues) from a store I've had one bad experience with. Reading from this thread, I've found out they had a bad reputation, which I didn't know about.

The linked government website clearly does not indicate I'm wrong. From what I can read, I would be right. Other members seem to agree. I'm asking for clarification from someone who knows the law better than I do, because my own interpretation might not be right.


----------



## Dr.StephanHeimer (May 1, 2006)

And the story slightly changes (again) the mark of a true troll.

As per https://www.ontario.ca/consumers/returns-exchanges-and-warranties

"In Ontario, stores and other suppliers are not legally required to offer refunds or exchanges. So it’s important that you check each store’s policy before buying there."

Aka: If the store really wanted to they could say you have to take it up with MXR for warranty service (which would be either repair or exchange). 

Pretty clear to me!


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Dr.StephanHeimer said:


> And the story slightly changes (again) the mark of a true troll.
> 
> As per https://www.ontario.ca/consumers/returns-exchanges-and-warranties
> 
> ...


It's clear to you because you fail to realize that this scenario applies to fully functional items, not defective items
You really think "stores and other suppliers are not legally required to offer refunds or exchanges" for a defective item?
Which means any store could legally sell you any broken crap and not offer any exchange or refund
And you're calling ME a troll?


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Business said:


> My main purpose here is buying items from the Classified section (member since July 2013), and people who have sold items to me can attest to that


Congratulations.
You went from a non posting user of the classifieds to the biggest whiner on the forum.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

smorgdonkey said:


> Congratulations.
> You went from a non posting user of the classifieds to the biggest whiner on the forum.


Of course, I'm the one whining, but you're the one who wants to make this personal 
Keep your personal attacks for someone else and go "contribute" to another thread


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Business said:


> Of course, I'm the one whining, but you're the one who wants to make this personal
> Keep your personal attacks for someone else and go "contribute" to another thread


You are whining. You keep whining that people don't interpret the law the way that you do.

It isn't personal. You ARE a whiner and you should have learned the first time you got burned but you didn't.










...but anyway...now I will take your advice & go and contribute to another thread since you keep reading stuff that you refuse to comprehend.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## TA462 (Oct 30, 2012)

Well that was some good reading right there. 9 pages of :thread:, lol. The OP should be happy he is getting offered a replacement.


----------



## djmarcelca (Aug 2, 2012)

There are some businesses that do not accept returns of any kind when it comes to electronic items. 
Namely my day job: fixing cars. 
If I order an electronic part, I own it. Period. No refunds, no exchange. 
The logic is: there's no way for the seller to know if I have half a brain and did not supply excess voltage, etc to the item. 

That being said:
broken vs defective. 

Broken: item doesn't work due to physical damage or faulty workmanship. 
defective: item doesn't work due to unseen internal dange or faulty workmanship


2 sides of same coin. 
The O.P. Stated from the beginning, the pedal did not work upon arrival in new factory condition

By any reasonable standard it is defective. 
Broken would require obvious physical damage. 

Before the cartographers jump up and say, "how would you know you're in Alberta," for the record I grew up in Ontario, in the GTA. 

Theres no no reason a non functioning item cannot be refunded, other than the store saying to the customer : F.U. 

The last time I filed in small claims in Ont was 1998, it was 75.00 to file a claim. 

If the O.P. Is that pissed and determined to get his refund...... 
File a legal claim, and deliver it (serve notice) to the store. It's cheap, easy and you can demand your payment, shipping and all associated court legal, lost wages, hell even your internet bill 

if you're that pissed, don't complain on a forum. 
Do something about it.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> Incorrect, sir. The law does say that.
> 
> This is not a breach of warranty, it's a breach of condition. You've misinterpreted what you've read. Trust me on that.
> 
> ...which doesn't necessarily mean the OP handled it the way I would have. But still, if a retail seller sells a consumer a non-functioning product, the consumer is entitled to refuse the item, void the contract and obtain a refund, not just obtain a replacement. That's the law in Ontario and most other provinces.


In both cases (breach of warranty and breach of condition) the buyer has a right to claim for "damages" (not a refund specifically). It seems there are no real "damages" here other than the buyer being without a functioning pedal. The seller offered to exchange the pedal at their expense to settle the claim, which would be viewed by a court of law as a reasonable attempt of resolution, and refusal to accept the exchange would be viewed by a court of law to be unreasonable. The court would rule in favour of the seller, since the seller was reasonable and the buyer would get what he paid for.

I'm no lawyer, judge, or legal expert, but applying past first hand business experience involving lawyers in a legal dispute suggests to me that's how this would play out, and why I think any lawyer would advise the OP to take the offered exchange. My limited experience doesn't make me an expert... take what I say with a grain of salt, as anyone should expect asking for legal advice in a guitar forum.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Business said:


> Face the facts, LA Music has terrible customer service
> 
> What is typical these days is victim blaming
> Like I'm the one responsible for the bad customer service because I gave the store a second chance
> ...


Re : second chance, It's as much MXRs fault as LA Musics, in this case. I'm sure LA would have rather the pedal worked and everyone go about their happy way.
TBH, LA are really as much a "victim" in this as you are.

so while most of what you posted above is true, this particular incident may not be the best example of any of it. So I. Not sure if your sanctimonious tone is a bit exaggerated.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## JeremyP (Jan 10, 2012)

This thread is awesome. I would never put this much time or energy into a defective phase pedal. Guess I am just lazy cause I would have made a raspberry sound and took the replacement


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> And breach of condition also allows the buyer to elect to void the contract and claim a refund rather than damages. I do know what I'm talking about here. You can believe me or not, but you are incorrectly stating the law.


Please identify the clause in the act that states the seller can demand a refund on a breach of condition.

In the case of breach if condition the seller can rescind the contract and sue for damages, but I see nowhere that specifically a refund can be demanded over all other reasonable means of settlement.

Furthermore, whether the faulty pedal is a breach of warranty or condition is a grey area. Of course the seller will argue breach of warranty and the buyer will argue breach of condition... a judge would have final say.

However, consider from the Sale Of Goods Act:

"Stipulation which may be condition or warranty
(2) Whether a stipulation in a contract of sale is a condition the breach of which may give rise to a right to treat the contract as repudiated or a warranty the breach of which may give rise to a claim for damages but not to a right to reject the goods and treat the contract as repudiated depends in each case on the construction of the contract, and a stipulation may be a condition, though called a warranty in the contract."

The essence of the sellers terms and conditions (the contract terms that the buyer accepted, i.e. the construction of the contract) and with the absence of any other agreement, clearly identifying exchange or return for store credit as satisfaction guarantee and establishes the faulty pedal as a breach of warranty.

I'm fully open for correction, as my only goal in all of this is to understand my rights and back my understanding by the written law.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> I'm travelling, but if you're actually interested I could give you a full dissertation on condition vs. warranty and the implications of breach of each later in the week.


That would interest me, for sake of fully understanding. However wouldn't ask you to go to a great length to do so.

My understanding is that the benefit of the contract has not been removed from the buyer (owning a functioning pedal) by the initial delivery of a non-functioning product, the sales contract came with an exchange guarantee, the seller has offered and can deliver a replacement in a timely fashion, there was no delivery timing stipulation in the sales contract, and the situation does not fundamentally change the sales contract, that the case would be a breach of warranty not condition.

Consider too, since shipping a replacement is part of the terms of the sales contract a breach has not occurred. If the seller refused to ship a replacement then there would be a breach and the buyer could cry foul.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

Years ago (we're talking early 80's here) while picking up an ontario vendors permit (pst exemption #) from a govt office I had to sit through a meeting about the rules in ontario - here's my take based on what they told me - All LA music had to do was test that pedal before sending it out, once they sent out a non-functional product the sales contract is breached and at that point the buyer can elect to walk and expect all his money.

Another good example - LA's website is famous for saying the item is in stock (when it may be at Yorkville or in the US but isn't actually in their store), taking the money in full and then ordering the product, they don't even bother to tell you it'll be 3 or 4 weeks delivery, you call a week later and find out what's going on and decide you don't want to wait, then they tell you a re-stocking fee or store credit are the only options, both of which are bullshit.


----------



## TubeStack (Jul 16, 2009)

JeremyP said:


> This thread is awesome. I would never put this much time or energy into a defective phase pedal. Guess I am just lazy cause *I would have made a raspberry sound and took the replacement*


Ha, me too.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Jimmy_D said:


> All LA music had to do was test that pedal before sending it out...


There is no evidence here that didn't happen...


----------



## boyscout (Feb 14, 2009)

Jimmy_D said:


> <snip> Another good example - LA's website is famous for saying the item is in stock (when it may be at Yorkville or in the US but isn't actually in their store), taking the money in full and then ordering the product, they don't even bother to tell you it'll be 3 or 4 weeks delivery, you call a week later and find out what's going on and decide you don't want to wait, then they tell you a re-stocking fee or store credit are the only options, both of which are bullshit.


I've had this experience with them too, without the restocking fee discussion because I elected to wait for the product to arrive. Very scummy, but like a Canadian customer I sucked it up. No more.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

dradlin said:


> There is no evidence here that didn't happen...


Oh, I figured it was a given as the op said the thing was defective from the get go...


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Mr Boggie (Dec 4, 2012)

They are not the only ones in town with a restocking fee. It does say it in the t's & c's often but disheartening never the less.


----------



## Davestp1 (Apr 25, 2006)

I'm exhausted  after reading this thread from start to finish for the first time just now. I'm glad I pretty much buy used stuff and mostly in person so I can try it first and rarely deal with stores that sell new stuff. I can always sell it if I change my mind....


----------



## GUInessTARS (Dec 28, 2007)

Wow, this has been quite an opinion fest.
Glad I didn't get sucked into this one.

Awwwww,
Dammit, you guys.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

GUInessTARS said:


> Wow, this has been quite an opinion fest.
> Glad I didn't get sucked into this one.
> 
> Awwwww,
> Dammit, you guys.


What this thread needs is more people posting without opinions


----------



## J-75 (Jul 29, 2010)

Duster said:


> I don't buy anything there. If you read up on these forums you'll find that LA Music has a chequered reputation, at best.


This is true.


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

Come on folks, try to be friendly!


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

(Sung to music) _"Troll la la la, la la la la..."_


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

gtone said:


> (Sung to music) _"Troll la la la, la la la la..."_


Is that in the key of C?


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

So the OP, who lives in Quebec, buys a pedal from a supplier in Ontario to save the PST portion on the purchase and then appeals to well, us, to uphold a law that may or may not exist. We, in our infinite knowledge argue that the law clearly does - or does not exist.

Meanwhile the OPs only real course of action is to speak to at least two lawyers (one for Ontario and one for Quebec) to try to legally obtain a refund. 

Well, if the OP initiated the transaction to save the PST in the first place, I'll assume that he's kinda cheap and we're the best lawyers he's willing to pay for.

Tell you what - I'll be the judge.

The OP seems to have left the courthouse so I'm throwing out his case.


----------



## Cartcanuck (Oct 30, 2012)

First, I just received a package from LA Music that I ordered before this thread started. Nothing major, a SKB case for my multieffects board and and small guitar stand. The transaction was perfectly fine, went quickly, and was shipped and received exactly as I requested. But this was small ticket stuff and stuff that isn't likely to be defectived in any way. So maybe I got lucky. I'll likely stick with my boyz at Axemusic after reading this thread. 

Second, thanks *nkjanssen* for your great post. That was very informative.


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

I have had nothing but great experiences with Long & McQuade, The Guitar Shop, and The Guitar World in Mississauga


----------



## the_fender_guy (Jul 22, 2008)

Cartcanuck said:


> First, I just received a package from LA Music that I ordered before this thread started. Nothing major, a SKB case for my multieffects board and and small guitar stand. The transaction was perfectly fine, went quickly, and was shipped and received exactly as I requested. But this was small ticket stuff and stuff that isn't likely to be defectived in any way. So maybe I got lucky. * I'll likely stick with my boyz at Axemusic after reading this thread.
> *
> Second, thanks *nkjanssen* for your great post. That was very informative.



The OP ought to be pleased with the result of his thread.


----------



## Cartcanuck (Oct 30, 2012)

the_fender_guy said:


> The OP ought to be pleased with the result of his thread.


Maybe. It' wasn't his post that led to that comment. I've had great luck with Axemusic in the past but they didn't sell the case I needed. I like the service I get there and if I can get what I need from them, I do (plus 1 tax and cheap shipping). My second choice is L&M. 

Frankly, I don't necessarily agree with the OP's arguments, but other posts I've read as well as other feedback I've read lead me to be wary if it's a bigger ticket item I'm shopping for. I won't rule LA Music out, but they won't be my first choice. They weren't my first choice in my most recent purchase, but they could provide me with what I needed. If the same situation arose again and my first two shopping choices came up empty, since my experience with them was good, they just might get my business again. 

But the one thing this thread has taught me (and hopefully taught or reminded most people) is to cover my a$$ when it comes to major purchases online, read the terms and condition, and know my rights. The first part of this is to shop where you have had the most success in the past. And I will.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

the_fender_guy said:


> The OP ought to be pleased with the result of his thread.


I'm not sure where you're getting at


----------



## jayjacque (Sep 2, 2012)

I don't know, maybe 6 pages ago, somebody brought out that if something is broken, then how can it be re-stocked? I agree with the OP's position, that that seems very unfair. It's the principle of the thing. I've had a borderline negative experience with LA Music a few years ago, where I had sent money and waited about 2 months for a $300 guitar to come in. When I got tired of waiting, they refused to refund, instead gave me store credit. At the time it was ok, since there were a few other things they had that interested me, but I told myself I would be very careful with them in the future. 

Why is someone telling their negative experience about gear and someone who sold it to them, not ok on a forum containing both good and bad reviews and opinions about gear? He told a simple believable story and asked people what they thought his rights might be in not getting charged the restocking fee. He gets called a troll (several times), is accused of just posting to bash a supplier, and gets found guilty of the serious crimes of not having enough posts, for buying out of province to save a few bucks in tax, and for buying other items from said store (things most all of us have done btw). And those times he condescendingly gets told to "move on", is it possible he kept responding because several people kept badgering him? I'm pretty sure saying that won't win me many friends here, but sorry, it just ain't right to jump on someone who was just looking for some helpful advice or a tad bit of sympathy.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

In the end the OP is 100% right so who gives a schitt that a few guys don't agree with him... they're wrong anyway, LA has a proven track record of doing exactly what the OP says they did.


----------



## gtone (Nov 1, 2009)

Jimmy_D said:


> In the end the OP is 100% right so who gives a schitt that a few guys don't agree with him... they're wrong anyway, LA has a proven track record of doing exactly what the OP says they did.


Plenty here that think the offer to exchange the pedal is ample, notwithstanding that some here feel every retailer should provide a no-questions asked return policy (guess lots have never been in business for themselves and see the abuses of these kinds of policies). OP changed his mind on purchase, wants full unconditional refund and that wasn't in the terms of sale. A contract is a contract.

Civil law is not black and white, as the OP will find if he presses this to legal action (he won't, however, that's why his constant droning sounds like trolling to us). An offer to mitigate the issue was made by LA Music and that put's pressure back on the OP. Even if pressed based on principal, cases like this rarely make it to court (not worth the time/effort), and if this one did, I wouldn't fancy his chances of him seeing the remedy that he seeks.

Not saying I defend LA Music's business practices, but he's the one who chose to do business with them notwithstanding what he already knew/suspected about them. This makes him look like a whiner trying to somehow vindicate himself, win favour here for his cause and/or cause damage to someone's business (which, he'd better be careful about, as his contributions here might be considered prima facie evidence of libel/slander). Time to move on...


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

jayjacque said:


> Why is someone telling their negative experience about gear and someone who sold it to them, not ok on a forum containing both good and bad reviews and opinions about gear?


It's a principal thing (to use your words)... there are two sides to every story.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

gtone said:


> Plenty here that think the offer to exchange the pedal is ample, notwithstanding that some here feel every retailer should provide a no-questions asked return policy (guess lots have never been in business for themselves and see the abuses of these kinds of policies). OP changed his mind on purchase, wants full unconditional refund and that wasn't in the terms of sale. A contract is a contract.
> 
> Civil law is not black and white, as the OP will find if he presses this to legal action (he won't, however, that's why his constant droning sounds like trolling to us). An offer to mitigate the issue was made by LA Music and that put's pressure back on the OP. Even if pressed based on principal, cases like this rarely make it to court (not worth the time/effort), and if this one did, I wouldn't fancy his chances of him seeing the remedy that he seeks.
> 
> Not saying I defend LA Music's business practices, but he's the one who chose to do business with them notwithstanding what he already knew/suspected about them. This makes him look like a whiner trying to somehow vindicate himself, win favour here for his cause and/or cause damage to someone's business (which, he'd better be careful about, as his contributions here might be considered prima facie evidence of libel/slander). Time to move on...


gtone, you just probably made the most sensible and appropriate post in the entire thread.


----------



## Maxer (Apr 20, 2007)

While we're on the topic, what's most people's experiences with LAMusic? I've only been once to look for a Guild S-100 re-issue and didn't stay long but it was a pretty big place. I'm thinking of ordering a Vox Lil Night Train Gold set from 'em. I gather most of you who've shopped there are mostly satisfied? Just want to be reasonably certain before I pull the trigger.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Here we go again... thought this thread was dead.

The only update I have is:

Called them last Tuesday afternoon. Dude said he would transfer me to the customer service person. After a minute, dude comes back on the line and says "Guy must be out to lunch, leave your number and he'll call you back". Haven't heard back from them yet, haven't tried calling them back either.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

gtone said:


> Plenty here that think the offer to exchange the pedal is ample, notwithstanding that some here feel every retailer should provide a no-questions asked return policy (guess lots have never been in business for themselves and see the abuses of these kinds of policies). OP changed his mind on purchase, wants full unconditional refund and that wasn't in the terms of sale. A contract is a contract.
> 
> Civil law is not black and white, as the OP will find if he presses this to legal action (he won't, however, that's why his constant droning sounds like trolling to us). An offer to mitigate the issue was made by LA Music and that put's pressure back on the OP. Even if pressed based on principal, cases like this rarely make it to court (not worth the time/effort), and if this one did, I wouldn't fancy his chances of him seeing the remedy that he seeks.
> 
> Not saying I defend LA Music's business practices, but he's the one who chose to do business with them notwithstanding what he already knew/suspected about them. This makes him look like a whiner trying to somehow vindicate himself, win favour here for his cause and/or cause damage to someone's business (which, he'd better be careful about, as his contributions here might be considered prima facie evidence of libel/slander). Time to move on...



What part of "when LA gave him a defective pedal he's able to say - I want a refund - and there's fvck all LA can do" did you miss.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dolphinstreet (Sep 11, 2006)

Perhaps "restocking fee" is a poor choice for describing the fee? Since obviously they are not going to restock a dead pedal. Perhaps their practice is to charge a "whateveryouwannacall it fee" for dealing with refunding someone for a situation like this?

Regardless, I'm sure they have their backs covered in the end, in the fine print somewhere.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> Even if a shop could legally refuse a refund for a defective product...


What is your recommendation to the OP?


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

Maxer said:


> While we're on the topic, what's most people's experiences with LAMusic? I've only been once to look for a Guild S-100 re-issue and didn't stay long but it was a pretty big place. I'm thinking of ordering a Vox Lil Night Train Gold set from 'em. I gather most of you who've shopped there are mostly satisfied? Just want to be reasonably certain before I pull the trigger.


when I used to live in Mississauga, it was my favorite guitar shop. Ive bought things before without issue. Never had to return anything. Taken guitars in for service there as well, no issues.
Similarly, ive walked across the street to The Guitar shop and shopped there as well, had them change some pickups in a guitar for me and do a setup. No issues either.
for some reason...people trash the former place and rave about the latter...both seemed about the same to me, nothing special/extraordinary in either case...although I thought the selection at LA was superior.

Im not compiling any stats, but it seems to me that most of LA's unhappy customers were those that bought online....as ive never done that, I cant comment. But im sure theres something to it.

given the choice, id shop at Cosmo anyways (online or onsite)


----------



## Maxer (Apr 20, 2007)

Thanks, Diablo. I think you're right - it's mostly in the online side where things maybe get hinky.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

It makes sense to accept an exchange if you want the item, but at the same time if you don't, it's your prerogative if they've messed up. 

The issue here is guys that run their business like LA does, they constantly put themselves in a position where you can legally demand a refund in full, but they invoke their supposed sales "rules" and you're hooked - once they have your cash it will never come back, which is fine with me, except when you are legally entitled to a full refund.

So if someone calls out a retailer that has made a career out of pulling this shit, then I say pile on.


----------



## sadowsky13 (Feb 26, 2007)

Ultimately it is poor customer service. I don't have a problem hearing about people's experience and it may make someone dealing with them in the future aware of it and more cautious. I have purchased from them before and not had an issue with the service I got but find the information useful. People seem to be getting their underpants in a knot over nothing. Let him tell of his experience and let's all chill! I think most of us are smart enough to figure out there are two sides to every story!


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

What?!? This thread again?

I'm gonna go get my bad rash cream.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Jimmy_D said:


> What part of "when LA gave him a defective pedal he's able to say - I want a refund - and there's fvck all LA can do" did you miss.


if there was 'f all' they could do', they would have refunded him by now.

What part of reality did you miss?


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

smorgdonkey said:


> if there was 'f all' they could do', they would have refunded him by now.
> 
> What part of reality did you miss?


I didn't miss anything if he went to court he'd get his money back, that's the law, but if the store wants to force the issue then he would have to go to court to actually have it in his hands... that's how it works, you guys even had the benefit of a lawyer confirming this for you.

Why is that so hard to accept?


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

dolphinstreet said:


> Perhaps "restocking fee" is a poor choice for describing the fee? Since obviously they are not going to restock a dead pedal. Perhaps their practice is to charge a "whateveryouwannacall it fee" for dealing with refunding someone for a situation like this?
> 
> Regardless, I'm sure they have their backs covered in the end, in the fine print somewhere.


ya, they might want to call it a "_we think we have a lot of dodgy customers that will want to return things on a whim and say they are defective, thus wasting our time/resources so we want to deter them from that_ fee"....but its not as catchy


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Jimmy_D said:


> I didn't miss anything if he went to court he'd get his money back, that's the law, but if the store wants to force the issue then he would have to go to court to actually have it in his hands... that's how it works, you guys even had the benefit of a lawyer confirming this for you.
> 
> Why is that so hard to accept?


It isn't hard to accept, it's that a place like that doesn't have to do anything unless someone is prepared to really put the effort (and the expense) in.

The big thing is that the OP got F'd by them before and now he's surprised that they did it again(?!!). If he's prepared to fight and/or go to court over it, then yeah, I guess he may well win but is it worth it?

I got this thing - if some business or seller/buyer Fs me, I don't have anything to do with them anymore. It's easy.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

I don't know that the OP really needs to go to court on this one. he could prob do a chargeback on his credit card. still a PITA, but at least no legal fees.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Considering that MXR has shipped thousands of Phase 90 pedals over multiple decades to thousands of satisfied customers, I cannot accept that the product overall is not fit for merchantability. 

It seems to me that the essence of the law is to protect a buyer in restricting a seller from selling goods that are falsely represented, and/or of such poor quality that it is not fit for intended use.

Clearly in the case of the MXR pedal, evidenced by thousands of satisfied customers spanning decades, the pedal is proven to be fit for merchantability. In the specific case of the OP's pedal, it is an isolated situation where one pedal amongst thousands is non-functioning. 

Furthermore, it is not established as a matter of fact that the OP did not damage the pedal. The seller may have even verified function before shipping. We have only heard half the story.

Lastly, the sales contract included language outlining the return-for-exchange option (or credit) if less than 100% satisfied, and the product comes with a manufacturer's warranty. Perhaps the language is not binding... I don't know.

I have a hard time accepting that one instance of a presumably DOA pedal is a conditional breach of contract with a well proven product and a no-cost exchange readily available.

I appreciate that presumably a legal professional has chimed in brought some clarity to the applicable law, and I've learned some things through his contribution to this thread. Not to disagree with that, keep in mind that the courts are full of lawyers who disagree and argue opposing sides of disputes daily, and the law is a guide until enforced in a court of law.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

the "product overall" is of no consequence to the individual consumer. all that matters is the item that is being specifically purchased. if it is implied that it is in working condition, and is not, I don't see how that could be considered merchantable.
If in the 70's Ford said "most Pintos will never explode, so the handful of ones that did, shouldn't be complaining, because overall theyre good cars! " would we find that acceptable?

whether or not the OP damaged the pedal is another matter. that would be up to LA to prove, not presume. And from what ive read in here, their terms do not allow for such an investigation or exception.

finally the contract does not override the consumer protection act.
lots of businesses try to pull fast ones with this...most likely to deter or minimize claims....like on the back of a concert ticket where it says basically if anything happens you have no recourse. But that's false...if a tragedy occurred like the stands collapsed and the event promoter or stadium was at fault, you can bet theyd be held liable in spite of whatever nonsense they print on the back of a ticket.
its the same way a landlord cannot make up their own rules that contravene the landlord tenant act.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

From the Canadian Bar Association:

"What should you do if you discover the goods you’ve bought are defective?

You should immediately return the goods to the seller. Request an exchange for replacement goods. If a replacement product isn’t available, ask for a refund. If the product isn’t suitable for its use, then you’ll only want a refund. Also, don’t continue to use the defective goods until you return them or after demanding a refund or exchange. If you continue to use the defective product, you could and probably will lose the right to return it."

http://cbabc.org/For-the-Public/Dial-A-Law/Scripts/Credit-Debt-and-Consumer/257.aspx


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> OK what would your contrary argument be, then?


The essence of the law is to protect the buyer and ensure he gets what he pays for.

MXR can demonstratively deliver a fully functioning pedal, as they have done for decades for thousands of other buyers.

A simple exchange, at no cost to the buyer, and he has what he paid for... the buyer is protected and essence of the law upheld.

The law gives right to replacement or refund... replacement satisfies law.

The buyers concerns about fitness of merchantability are warrantless, and rather has changed his mind regarding the purchase.

The item was inspected prior to shipping (it is not know that it wasn't) and know to be functional. Unfortunately the buyer damaged the item, but still offered in good faith to replace at no cost to buyer.

Buyer has been uncooperative in reaching a reasonable response, and burdened the defendant with legal expenses over a frivolous claim.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> No it doesn't, but clearly nothing I say will change your mind on that. You're absolutely certain you understand this better than I do, and that's fine. Believe what you'd like. It's of no consequence to me.
> 
> What you just wrote is not a legal argument, by the way. It's a suggestion for a reasonable compromise. As I said before, I personally would have been fine with an exchange. But the OP is not and he's not legally obliged to accept it as a compromise. Courts determine rights, they don't mediate compromises.


It's a close to a legal argument that one can expect from a layman on a guitar forum, and basis for a suitable defense in a small claims court. I don't anticipate that you would concede to any point that I make.

Courts don't break contracts when the contract terms can be met to the full benefit of both parties, and there are rights to be protected on both sides of the dispute.

The link I provided to The Canadian Bar Association clearly identifies replacement as the first remedy, with refund only when replacement is not available. How about addressing the quoted info from that link?

Other than vague references to a couple acts and your claimed knowledge of them, you haven't provided any incontrovertible proof that refund can be demanded and a replacement refused. I believe that you know, but show me where. 

Everything I read from multiple government source say replacement or refund.

Let's hear your argument otherwise...


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

After reading all of these posts, I wonder if LA Music, who I'm fairly certain must of heard about all this negative publicity, is saying to themselves "That will teach him for trying to return that pedal"


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> If this didn't explain it, then I have no idea how to explain it to you in terms you'll understand...
> 
> http://www.guitarscanada.com/showthread.php?65937-LAMusic&p=574675#post574675
> 
> That explanation includes actual excerpts from relevant statutes and citation of reported cases that interpreted those statutes (i.e. actual law)...


The link that you provided is a reference to this thread? Where are the cases and statutes?

I'm trying to accept your interpretation but other than "trust me, I know" with a hint that you may be a legal professional, I haven't seen your argument that a refund can be demanded and replacement denied. Please... show me were in the acts. If I missed it somewhere I apologize.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## FreewayJam (Sep 4, 2012)

Maxer said:


> While we're on the topic, what's most people's experiences with LAMusic? I've only been once to look for a Guild S-100 re-issue and didn't stay long but it was a pretty big place. I'm thinking of ordering a Vox Lil Night Train Gold set from 'em. I gather most of you who've shopped there are mostly satisfied? Just want to be reasonably certain before I pull the trigger.


Their customer service sucks / is non-existent. Their practices are sketchy at best, and they charge top money on everything, never see a decent price for anything.
Case in point : Bought a brand new Fender Strat from their store, that would be retail store, not online. Paid full price, asked about setting the
guitar up, was told they are set-up at the factory. Had a look over the guitar in store, did not see anything bad etc..
Got home, and over the course of the next couple days set about trying the guitar out, and setting it up. Found that the low E string at the nut,
was riding quite high, as the slot for the string had not been cut quite wide or deep enough, to allow the string to sit / rest properly within the
nut.
Figured no problem, just bought the guitar from LA Music, take it back to them for a quick, easy fix, hopefully it might be overnight, or maybe a couple of days.
Got there, and told them of the issue, and should i leave it with them / when could i expect it back ?
Was told a week, and that there would be a minimum charge of $25 ! I said i just bought it brand new, they replied it didn't matter, if the tech had to 
change the strings the charge applied. I said it was 1 string, didn't matter. After much arguing ( which i could not believe i even had to do ) the manager
said if the tech could do it without removing the string he would WAIVE the charge ! ) It seemed like an easy fix and that the string needn't be removed 
anyway, so i said fine. I asked would it be possible to get it back any sooner ? Nope, they will call in a week,
maybe a bit sooner, when its ready. 
Felt i had no choice so i left it. 9 days later, still no call. So i drove over to the shop, and asked if it was ready to pick up. After 20 mins or so, i was told that yes,
it was done , and ready, just give them a minute, and someone will bring it out. What about any charges ? They would discuss that when the guitar came out.
Another 5-10 minutes, and it finally comes out, and i'm told, i'm 'lucky', there were no extra charges, they did it all for no charge ! Great !
Got the Strat back and i don't even think it was taken out of the gig bag. NOTHING had been done, or even attempted !!
I think that this, along with what i have heard countless times from others and read about as well, clearly shows what kind of place LA Music is.
Never again..... until a couple year's later.... searching for....see below. 

As well, i believe it was pointed out in an earlier post, but there online site is a joke. I think they list every single item available from any and every manufacturer, 
whether they have it in stock or not, and will quite happily let anyone go through there checkout and process the order and take PAYMENT IN FULL, when they 
do not have said item in stock.
This past year i was searching for a Foot Switch for an amp. There was not one to be found anywhere in North America, anywhere. Then a search landed me on 
LA Music's site, and there was the pedal listed, ( ( over $12 more than it was listed anywhere else, which is a lot on a $40-$45 item ) but i wanted / needed it
so was ready to put the order in. Then i thought it strange that they would have it, as it was LA Music, so i emailed asking about the status of stock. Took 3 days
to get a reply, but i was told they were on there way, and would be in stock in 10 days, 2 weeks at best, so i SHOULD go ahead and put the order through, IE pay for it,
to insure i would get one when they arrived, as lots of people were looking for them. I passed, as i decided to wait until they came in.
Afterwards, emailed the manufacturer, asked about availability of said Foot switch, was told they would be shipping to N.American retailers in approx. 15-16 weeks !!
Little different than what i was told at LA Music when i asked them directly when i could expect it if i made the order.
Outright lied to me to try and get me to place and pay for the item knowing it would be months before it came in. Wow. Checked back in monthly for about 6 months with
the store to see when it was finally there, and it was a little over 6 mos. ( i had since bought one elsewhere, but wanted to see what it would be )

That is how they operate, and again, have heard it over and over again for years from other people, which amazes me, in a tough market, how they stay in business.
But i will never drop a single cent in that store or anything they are affiliated with ever. I live 3 or 4 blocks from their location, and would drive 100 miles for a .99 cent
item to avoid even setting foot in their premises, i think sums up how i feel about them.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> The link is to a prior post in this thread. Again, if you can't understand it, I don't think there's anything else I can do.


When viewed on my phone app, the link takes me to the original post. Checking on my computer I can see it links to post #97, and I had not previously seen that post.

OK... I'll accept your representation of the law to be correct in interpretation.

Considering large scales of production, it is not unusual for a production item to occasionally have an instance of a defect. It happens every day and a simple replacement is a commercially normal and generally accepted remedy without needing to rescind a sales "contract".

I have a hard time wrapping my head around the notion that an MXR Phase 90 pedal could be deemed unfit for merchantability when a replacement is readily available. I could understand if no suitable replacement was available, or if the product worked but not as advertised. It seems the law is too broad in this regard. But it is what it is...

Acting in good faith, LAMusic offered a commercially normal remedy to what is not an unusual problem. The reciprocal good faith gesture would be to accept the replacement and enjoy the pedal.


----------



## sadowsky13 (Feb 26, 2007)

dradlin said:


> When viewed on my phone app, the link takes me to the original post. Checking on my computer I can see it links to post #97, and I had not previously seen that post.
> 
> OK... I'll accept your representation of the law to be correct in interpretation.
> 
> ...


dude quit beating a dead horse, This horse is dead, buried and your beating it's grave! You can't get your head around it... Ok. That doesn't make others wrong. Coles notes version of this whole thread is customer service appears to be lacking regardless of what side if the debate you are on.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Ever try to return a new car for a full refund because it breaks? No dealership would go for that, and the manufacturer would certainly claim the right to repair before replacing..........long before any lemon-laws can be invoked.

So how does the CPA differentiate between a pedal and a car?


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## EchoWD40 (Mar 16, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> No difference. If a new car is delivered to you and it doesn't work right from the get-go, that's a breach of condition. You didn't get what you bargained for (a functioning car). If you use it for a while and then it breaks down, it's a warranty issue (i.e. you got what you bargained for but the reliability was not as promised). Same as with a pedal.


you're wrong.


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> In what way?


https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/oca-bc.nsf/eng/ca02324.html

Not saying your wrong, just adding to the discussion...


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

This is not only an epic thread, it's pretty entertaining... I gotta find that popcorn eating gif.

Here's one for the guys who are a little bewildered with the issues at hand.

[video=youtube;BV-ASc0qkrM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BV-ASc0qkrM[/video]


----------



## Guest (Sep 10, 2014)

Jimmy_D said:


> .. I gotta find that popcorn eating gif.










google is your friend.


----------



## jayjacque (Sep 2, 2012)

That explains a lot. If nothing else this thread gave them some negative advertising which, for most retailers, is a pretty bad thing.



FreewayJam said:


> Their customer service sucks / is non-existent. Their practices are sketchy at best, and they charge top money on everything, never see a decent price for anything.
> Case in point : Bought a brand new Fender Strat from their store, that would be retail store, not online. Paid full price, asked about setting the
> guitar up, was told they are set-up at the factory. Had a look over the guitar in store, did not see anything bad etc..
> Got home, and over the course of the next couple days set about trying the guitar out, and setting it up. Found that the low E string at the nut,
> ...


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

nkjanssen, if you would oblige me on one question to confirm my understanding...

Suppose Buyer places an online order for a pedal, a set of strings, and a guitar case.

Buyer receives the order, strings up his guitar then put it in his new case. All is good.

Now Buyer goes to try his new pedal... it's DOA.

Buyer had accepted and benefited from the strings and case, and so can no longer rescind the sales contract because of the DOA pedal... he can only exchange the pedal. Acceptance of other items on the order would shift the DOA pedal to a breach of warranty rather than a breach of condition.

On the contrary, if Buyer had fully inspected each item first, found the DOA pedal, immediately rejected and returned all goods because of the DOA pedal, then it would be his right to rescind the contract on the basis of breach of condition.

Is that a correct understanding?

Thanks, if you choose to respond.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

dradlin said:


> nkjanssen, if you would oblige me on one question to confirm my understanding...
> 
> Suppose Buyer places an online order for a pedal, a set of strings, and a guitar case.
> 
> ...


Hmmm...not sure where your going with this, but I don't think that would be correct.
I think it would be looked at as separate contracts for each item on the invoice/in the delivery.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Diablo said:


> Hmmm...not sure where your going with this, but I don't think that would be correct.
> I think it would be looked at as separate contracts for each item on the invoice/in the delivery.


Yes, that is the root of my question... a single contract or individual contracts.

I'm not going anywhere with this, other than to seek understanding.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

dradlin said:


> Yes, that is the root of my question... a single contract or individual contracts.
> 
> I'm not going anywhere with this, other than to seek understanding.


ya, I would think its individual contracts...unless you were knowingly buying a "kit", "bundle" or "lot" etc of something(s).

the fact of it going on one order/shipment etc shouldnt impact the buyers rights.
it works the same for the store....if they ordered a shipment of les Pauls from Gibson, and one came in defective, it wouldn't obligate them to return the entire shipment...or be stuck with them all if they happened to have already sold one.


----------



## ampjunkie (Jul 30, 2009)

Getting back to the thread on LA Music (no law questions) ...

I did buy some stuff from the retail store and they were friendly enough and it was a pleasant transaction. I would definitely go with a name brand that had a good warranty and customer service program -- just in case the store drops the ball.

For online -- it's iffy. I asked about a 7-string, and they wanted me to buy it -- full price deposit since they had none in stock -- so they could order it. I know these stores have to do this, but from a customer point of view -- no way.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Diablo said:


> ya, I would think its individual contracts...unless you were knowingly buying a "kit", "bundle" or "lot" etc of something(s).
> 
> the fact of it going on one order/shipment etc shouldnt impact the buyers rights.
> it works the same for the store....if they ordered a shipment of les Pauls from Gibson, and one came in defective, it wouldn't obligate them to return the entire shipment...or be stuck with them all if they happened to have already sold one.


It may be that unless there is a severability clause in the sales contract, it has to be treated as a single contract?

Sale Of Goods Act, s 12.3
Where a contract of sale is not severable and the buyer has accepted the goods or part thereof, or where the contract is for specific goods the property in which has passed to the buyer, the breach of any condition to be fulfilled by the seller can only be treated as a breach of warranty and not as a ground for rejecting the goods and treating the contract as repudiated, unless there is a term of the contract, express or implied, to that effect.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

LAMusic outsourced their lawyers and they are the ones who wrote the policies.

They are just as good as North American lawyers and in fact have even written policies for famous big brand manufacturers and retailers. It's law and policy, not rocket science.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)

Another update:

Just called them and spoke with Josh Reid (who first answered my email)
He stated store policy, then said he would ask "Rob" about a refund
He said that, meanwhile, I could send the pedal back to them (at my own cost) and they should have an answer from Rob by then

They must really think I'm an idiot... like I'm going to pay to send the item back to them and wait for "Rob's answer"
20$ says I don't hear back from them before the end of the month


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Business said:


> Another update:
> 
> Just called them and spoke with Josh Reid (who first answered my email)
> He stated store policy, then said he would ask "Rob" about a refund
> ...


These guys sound like a bunch of monkeys.
Are they_ trying _to drive business away?

Maybe it's more relaxing in the store if there's no pesky customers to deal with.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

dradlin said:


> It may be that unless there is a severability clause in the sales contract, it has to be treated as a single contract?
> 
> Sale Of Goods Act, s 12.3
> Where a contract of sale is not severable and the buyer has accepted the goods or part thereof, or where the contract is for specific goods the property in which has passed to the buyer, the breach of any condition to be fulfilled by the seller can only be treated as a breach of warranty and not as a ground for rejecting the goods and treating the contract as repudiated, unless there is a term of the contract, express or implied, to that effect.


As related to your example of a consumer purchasing multiple products, I think you're way over thinking this.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Diablo said:


> As related to your example of a consumer purchasing multiple products, I think you're way over thinking this.


You are right... it's much better to under think things, especially when it comes to your rights.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

This is just great... still desperately beating that dead horse... excellent.

Let me simplify things for you, in canada just because some store owner has "sales rules", it doesn't mean those rules would stand up in a court even though he operates by them every day... 
Consequently, unless you go to a court you might not get your money back when it's due...
Oh ya, the other thing is if you shop at LA or any other store run in a similar manner you may get burned.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

dradlin said:


> You are right... it's much better to under think things, especially when it comes to your rights.


Sigh....:confusion:


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Jimmy_D said:


> This is just great... still desperately beating that dead horse... excellent.
> 
> Let me simplify things for you, in canada just because some store owner has "sales rules", it doesn't mean those rules would stand up in a court even though he operates by them every day...
> Consequently, unless you go to a court you might not get your money back when it's due...
> Oh ya, the other thing is if you shop at LA or any other store run in a similar manner you may get burned.


WTF are you here reading the thread for? ...must have a few licks still to get in on the horse too!


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Just out of curiosity, did anyone get a 'you win' PM?


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

dradlin said:


> WTF are you here reading the thread for? ...must have a few licks still to get in on the horse too!


WTF??? I'm reading the thread for all the reason previously noted, perhaps you should read the thread... it's entertaining, it's epic, it's unreal... and finally - because I love seeing you beat that horse right into oblivion.

Edit: Jim likes this thread. (because you can't like your own post, no...wait... you can)


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

smorgdonkey said:


> Just out of curiosity, did anyone get a 'you win' PM?


you should have... first you called it, once bitten twice not so smart. second you pointed out the flogging of the deceased mare was coming.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Jimmy_D said:


> ...because I love seeing you beat that horse right into oblivion.


Damn you horse (kick, thrash, whip)!

Happy now? Whatever..,


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

Jimmy_D said:


> you should have... first you called it, once bitten twice not so smart. second you pointed out the flogging of the deceased mare was coming.


No, I really did get a 'you win' PM...but not from anyone I had any back and forth confrontation with really. Bizarre.


----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

/thread

It appears to be headed into uncharted territory, amazing...


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

I'm waiting for the movie version of this to come out. 

I'm too lazy to read (and try to understand) the whole thread.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)




----------



## Jimmy_D (Jul 4, 2009)

This guys brutal... he appears to be beating my little pony.


----------



## Business (Jul 30, 2013)




----------



## Guest (Sep 12, 2014)




----------



## Option1 (May 26, 2012)

Neil


----------



## deadear (Nov 24, 2011)

Would fit the situation with the store.https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7013/6427366861_590f7cf660_z.jpg It is not possible


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

Weeks ago when the issue of returns and consumer rights was discussed in this thread, I sent an email to the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services to get clarification on consumer rights in regards to returns of defective goods. A response just came back from the Ministry.

The question I asked was:

"Can you please clarify my rights in the situation that I purchase an item only to find when I get home that the item is defective. Can I demand a full refund from the retailer, or do I have accept a new/functioning replacement if offered by the retailer?"


The reply came back from the Ministry as follows:

"Thank you for contacting the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services. 

In Ontario, there is no legislation regarding refunds, exchanges or deposits. Businesses may set their own policies. A company may refuse to refund or exchange goods under their policy. They may offer to accept the return of merchandise and give an in-store credit note. If a store has a return or exchange policy the Ministry recommends that you ensure it is in writing and on your receipt. 

Here are some questions you may want to ask next time you make a purchase:

-do you offer full or partial refunds, exchanges or store credit?

-what do I need to bring as proof of purchase – the receipt, sales tags, original packaging etc.?

-are there any extra fees to return an item, like a restocking fees etc.?

-are there rules about returning seasonal items after a certain period of time?

-can personal items, such as jewellery or lingerie, be returned?

-can an item be returned if it’s been opened or used?

The Ontario Consumer Protection Act indicates that:

The implied conditions and warranties applying to the sale of goods by virtue of the Sale of Goods Act are deemed to apply with necessary modifications to goods that are leased or traded or otherwise supplied under a consumer agreement. If a business is willing to provide you with a working item then it would appear that they have fulfilled their obligations under the law."

So according to the Ministry response, LA Music is operating within the law and their consumer agreement posted online is valid.

Decide for yourselves what to accept as law, and what to do if you find yourself in a similar situation.


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

Thanks for all your help going the extra step to clarify our consumers rights but I think I've got it covered. I've posted it in fine print.

"I personally will not buy anything from any place that charges a fee if I return it."


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

dradlin said:


> Weeks ago when the issue of returns and consumer rights was discussed in this thread, I sent an email to the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services to get clarification on consumer rights in regards to returns of defective goods. A response just came back from the Ministry.
> 
> The question I asked was:
> 
> ...


c is for cookie.


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

adcandour said:


> c is for cookie.


I've got a few letters that come to mind too..,


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

dradlin said:


> I've got a few letters that come to mind too..,


"c is for cookie" may have been an artsy way of saying "that's good enough for me".


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

smorgdonkey said:


> "c is for cookie" may have been an artsy way of saying "that's good enough for me".



I must have missed that episode of Sesame Street.


----------



## Guest (Sep 18, 2014)

[video=youtube;BovQyphS8kA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BovQyphS8kA[/video]


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

dradlin said:


> Weeks ago when the issue of returns and consumer rights was discussed in this thread, I sent an email to the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services to get clarification on consumer rights in regards to returns of defective goods. A response just came back from the Ministry.
> 
> The question I asked was:
> 
> ...


This is for Ontario. If you recall the OP initiated his order in Quebec (to save on the PST I think). So I expect the inter-provincial thng muddies the water even more.


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

dradlin said:


> I must have missed that episode of Sesame Street.


As long as your grades didn't reflect that then it's fine.

...but don't let it happen again.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

dradlin said:


> You are legally entitled to a working replacement and nothing more.



Wrong. Under Ontario's consumer protection laws he is entitled to a full refund with no restocking charge.


----------



## Adcandour (Apr 21, 2013)

smorgdonkey said:


> "c is for cookie" may have been an artsy way of saying "that's good enough for me".


was his name-o


----------



## dradlin (Feb 27, 2010)

colchar said:


> Wrong. Under Ontario's consumer protection laws he is entitled to a full refund with no restocking charge.


Me, and the Ministry of Government and Consumer Affairs.


----------

