Shopper's plays their dirty games again

[Tabby40]

I find this fascinating first the chocolate bar promo, then the huggies promo, both ended badly and now they did it again. Jamieson Flu Shield is on for 9.99 and you receive 9000 pts.

What is up with them?

[sharkie]

I find this fascinating first the chocolate bar promo, then the huggies promo, both ended badly and now they did it again. Jamieson Flu Shield is on for 9.99 and you receive 9000 pts.

What is up with them?

that is SDM ..willing to put anything on promo just to get us in... and then change it...

[screamy]

OMG, I got heart attack when I first read your post Sharkie, I am having more than 1 million points now ( I got 60 chocolate bars and 20 Huggies tubes) so I really spent lot of money at SDM. If they did this to me I definitely have to start a lawsuit then.

@Screamy : how much you're gonna charge me an hour lol?

Totally pro bono for you, my dear!

[screamy]

It is very easy for the data department to write a report from the optimum card/sales database that shows the total number of wipes bought that week, from all stores, for each optimum card number, ranked from most wipes bought to least. Dead simple.

If, compared to the rest of the optimum shoppers out there, you are an exceptional consumer (defined as someone that bought way more than anybody else, the top 1% or whatever) SDM would certainly have the data to back this up. They would then naturally freeze the card to make sure they are actually dealing with a consumer, and not a convenience store owner or other reseller, before your next purchase. And certainly they would watch your account for further exceptional (compared to your peers, other optimum members) behaviour.

Maybe 17 boxes of soap is the most anyone bought at once in all of Ontario. Then by definition it is an exceptional, not reasonable quantity, from SDM's point of view, backed up by their other data. So if you want to know where the line is drawn, maybe you're already standing on it.

Honestly SDM probably intends to run the promo as is until a certain number of units are sold, then sets limits, all by design. They can't predict when they will hit a certain number of units, which is why it's not advertised for a set number of days. They just hit the brakes when they get their target sales. Try and keep everyone happy.

I agree with you that it would be easy as pie for them to parse their data to determine that kind of stuff. But that's not what the "reasonable man" test is about.

In legal terms, it's more along the lines of "if a person, acting as they would normally act, could or would theoretically perform action X (e.g. buy a year's worth of a non-perishable item at one time, in this particular case) and might have reasonably been expected to have done so at any other given time (e.g. when they happened to have coupons for Nivea and it was a good deal even without the additional enticement of bonus points), does that constitute extremely unusual or egregious behaviour?".

Then you have to look at their circumstances to determine if it's reasonable. If I'm a billionaire with a thing for high-end cars, and there's a huge fire sale on at my local Ferrari dealer, is it "normal" or "unusual" for me to buy three Ferraris in one purchase when they're 20% off instead of one at a time over three or four years? For "Joe Average", obviously it's not reasonable to expect that they'd buy even a single Ferrari, never mind three. For Donald Trump, who knows? Maybe it would be perfectly normal. Having said that, even for a billionaire, a judge would likely take a look at their car collection and purchasing habits to make the determination.

If - theoretically - something like that ever did go to court, of course SDM could easily argue that they believed that person X was purchasing far in excess of what THEY considered to be reasonable. All person X would have to do is show that he or she supports a large extended family (and, to be safe, had done so for some time so there would be an obvious pattern, something their previous SDM purchases would, ironically, likely bear out) and/or has a stockpile against job loss, is on a fixed income, you name it - and they would have enough evidence to make a judge need to consider the reasonable man test. They might or might not come down on the side of the purchaser, but it would definitely not be an SDM slam dunk.

As for putting the brakes on their advertised promo when they hit a specific quantity sold - legally, they just can't do that without saying something like "while quantities last", "limit X", etc. There is tons of case law about bait-and-switch/false or misleading advertising and they would get crucified. That's why retailers are usually so careful to put things like "sorry, no raincheques", limits, etc., in their advertising.

So I see your point - but I have to disagree. They're messing with their customers and they're screwing it up themselves. Yes, there are certainly people who will try to take advantage just because there's the added benefit of points, no argument from me there - but some of them are being quite reasonable, from a legal POV. Others, granted, not so much. Either way, SDM shot themselves in the foot, again, by not limiting their own promos and they have no one to blame but themselves.

[Tabby40]

Nice explanation!

[sharkie]

I agree

[lecale]

.

[renegado]

Then you have to look at their circumstances to determine if it's reasonable. If I'm a billionaire with a thing for high-end cars, and there's a huge fire sale on at my local Ferrari dealer, is it "normal" or "unusual" for me to buy three Ferraris in one purchase when they're 20% off instead of one at a time over three or four years? For "Joe Average", obviously it's not reasonable to expect that they'd buy even a single Ferrari, never mind three. For Donald Trump, who knows? Maybe it would be perfectly normal. Having said that, even for a billionaire, a judge would likely take a look at their car collection and purchasing habits to make the determination.

If - theoretically - something like that ever did go to court, of course SDM could easily argue that they believed that person X was purchasing far in excess of what THEY considered to be reasonable. All person X would have to do is show that he or she supports a large extended family (and, to be safe, had done so for some time so there would be an obvious pattern, something their previous SDM purchases would, ironically, likely bear out) and/or has a stockpile against job loss, is on a fixed income, you name it - and they would have enough evidence to make a judge need to consider the reasonable man test. They might or might not come down on the side of the purchaser, but it would definitely not be an SDM slam dunk.

The reasonable purchaser can also be expected to understand what is considered "reasonable" purchasing behaviour in a particular store. For example, most people can tell the difference between Costco and Shoppers Drug Mart. The amount of stock available, product packaging, and pricing structures give a good indication of what constitutes a "reasonable" purchase in each store. In a store where bars of soap are sold in cases of twenty bars for $15, and there are four hundred cases on a shelf, buying forty bars would seem reasonable. Buying forty bars of the same soap in a store where they are sold in packs of 2 bars for $3, and there are twenty packs on the shelf .... maybe not so reasonable.

[screamy]

Sorry, buying a year's worth at one time is not reasonable behavior. If you looked at the accounts of SDM's millions of Optimum users, you would find that very few, and exceptional few, actually do this. If you are statistically exceptional you had better have a hell of a story. If your purchases are not for your own personal/household use, I expect that this would count against you.

Face it, you're not ever going to be in a position where a lawyer is arguing this for you. It costs too much money. I mean be realistic, I once hired a lawyer to write a letter and it cost me $400. How much more would I have paid if I proceeded to legal action? SDM has declared both the right to change the program at any time and the right to limit quantities anyway. The ball is in their court and if they don't want to play with you anymore they are free to take their ball and go home.

Shoppers is free to change the terms of any promo at any time, all they have to do is give notice. That is their right.

It is fine and dandy to come up with legal ploys to avoid being charged with fraud but come on, that is the key issue, you are arguing for your right to commit fraud. If things ever hit a courtroom that's what it would be about...but truthfully I doubt things would ever get that far, you would just be expelled from the program.

Easy there, them's fightin' words...I would suggest that you re-read what I've written. I'm not arguing/advocating that people SHOULD buy excessive amounts - just that what's excessive is relative. There's absolutely nothing wrong with buying a year's supply of something at a time, or even unusual - depending on the circumstances. You don't get to determine what's reasonable. And I don't see how the legal definition of fraud under the Criminal Code (http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/a...180.html#h-105) would even enter into the argument. But I digress.

As for their right to change the promo, if you'll re-read what I've posted, you'll see that I've said notice is required - and that they are free to change things IF they provide it. If they do not (as with the Huggies promo, in which they clawed back points and froze accounts BEFORE they gave notice), they're hoist by their own petard.

Once they've provided notice, of course, they can easily claw back points awarded in error, and I'd have no problem with that at all, they would be well within their rights and I would tell anyone upset with having lost their points (under those circumstances) that they were SOL.

Incidentally, I wouldn't need a lawyer to argue it for me, it's so cut and dried that I'd be fine on my own. There's plenty of case law that would back my argument/reasoning, and, as it happens, I've successfully represented myself and others many times in a number of courts at different levels. But if I did, I happen to work for one.

[lecale]

.

[tccl21]

Fraud? They'd have a hard time proving that one. Anyone can sign up for a card at any time, no ID required. There's also no ID required when you redeem points. For all they know, I could have lost my card and someone else could have done all those Huggies purchases on my card, redeeming and redeeming and paying cash for the tax. PROVE it was me. Their system is lousy.

[anastasia1009]

Well I guess one example of fraud would be pooling the purchases of an extended family, i.e., acting as an organization made up of several households, not an individual, for financial gain. Optimum accounts are for individuals. If you create a group that pools its purchases, you are acting as an organization and misrepresenting yourself as an individual. Add in financial gain and you have fraud.

Keep in mind that not every customer is experiencing a clawback of points without notice. It is only select customers. Certainly SDM has some grounds to do so based on the declarations in their Optimum program rules, and the exceptional nature of those customers' purchases. If you are really pushing it, SDM has the right to strike back.

And then there's the law, and then there's ethics...

I agree with you..I have worked for a points card before as supervisor as well as fraud department and even ging cards for suspicion of fraud or misuse. They can find out who the person is easily by past records (debit, credit systems) and matching may take a bit but can be done. They don't have to prove it is you they just have to suspect fraud, misused for individuals purposes. I have ged and suspended so many points card for that reason as most point systems is for individual use only with reasonable limits. And each company determines that and its their card & their point system and they can do what they want and or suspend it or terminate it. If we suspected numerous points card opened up for individuals or commercial who were going against the policy. Grab the debit card or credit card, search the system and close them. Remember there are so many programs out there to search point cards for fraud or misuse.

[sharkie]

I agree with you..I have worked for a points card before as supervisor as well as fraud department and even ging cards for suspicion of fraud or misuse. They can find out who the person is easily by past records (debit, credit systems) and matching may take a bit but can be done. They don't have to prove it is you they just have to suspect fraud, misused for individuals purposes. I have ged and suspended so many points card for that reason as most point systems is for individual use only with reasonable limits. And each company determines that and its
their card & their point system and they can do what they want and or suspend it or terminate it. If we suspected numerous points card opened up for individuals or commercial who were going against the policy. Grab the debit card or credit card, search the system and close them. Remember there are so many programs out there to search point cards for fraud or misuse.

I agree about some people who do commit fraud but I think SDM has gone to far.....they straight out told me I could buy more Nivea if I did not use the coupons...So obviously they did not think I had bought to much when I bought the 17 packages...they just did not want me getting it free and getting bonus points...that is what makes me so mad....it is only excessive and abuse if I use the coupons?

[coley3]

Just to jump in here I buy a years worth of certain stuff all the time.My biggest is laundry soap and cereal. If the deal is right I buy enough for a year. I have the space for it and cereal usually has a 1 year shelf life. You wouldn't believe the fiasco I endured with the mini-wheats recall. But after giving all the #'s they needed I was compensated for all my boxes with coupons for free products which I have already received. They too were skeptical that I had so many boxes. But we eat at least 5 boxes a week and cereal is expensive. So if the price is right I have coupons and there is some bonus attached to it I'm buying. Would it be normal for some people to have 100 boxes of cereal in the basement maybe not. But for me it is. Plus I don't usually buy cereal at Shopper's. So if they were to look at my account transactions it would seem unreasonable. But if looked at for a different store it would be normal etc. So I am not sure how looking at your past purchases at SDM would really tell them how much you need of a certain item anyway. Plus for the Huggies wipes they are great to give with a shower gift etc. So past purchase wise I might not have bought any. But with the good price, coupons and BP's it made it the right time to stock up for gifts. This would count as personal use. So not sure how they could decide that I bought too many. When do they get to decide how much is too many.
This whole SDM is just horrible. I am so upset with poorly run promotions. I think I will stop shopping there. Unless there is some outrageous deal. Then I will get in there on the first day before they change the points and take advantage and transfer the points. Maybe if we all started doing that they would get their head out of their .......... and fix things already.

[sharkie]

Just to jump in here I buy a years worth of certain stuff all the time.My biggest is laundry soap and cereal. If the deal is right I buy enough for a year. I have the space for it and cereal usually has a 1 year shelf life. You wouldn't believe the fiasco I endured with the mini-wheats recall. But after giving all the #'s they needed I was compensated for all my boxes with coupons for free products which I have already received. They too were skeptical that I had so many boxes. But we eat at least 5 boxes a week and cereal is expensive. So if the price is right I have coupons and there is some bonus attached to it I'm buying. Would it be normal for some people to have 100 boxes of cereal in the basement maybe not. But for me it is. Plus I don't usually buy cereal at Shopper's. So if they were to look at my account transactions it would seem unreasonable. But if looked at for a different store it would be normal etc. So I am not sure how looking at your past purchases at SDM would really tell them how much you need of a certain item anyway. Plus for the Huggies wipes they are great to give with a shower gift etc. So past purchase wise I might not have bought any. But with the good price, coupons and BP's it made it the right time to stock up for gifts. This would count as personal use. So not sure how they could decide that I bought too many. When do they get to decide how much is too many.
This whole SDM is just horrible. I am so upset with poorly run promotions. I think I will stop shopping there. Unless there is some outrageous deal. Then I will get in there on the first day before they change the points and take advantage and transfer the points. Maybe if we all started doing that they would get their head out of their .......... and fix things already.

very, very well said coley3...