Originally Posted by rrich
My complaint with Wal Mart is them fighting to NOT honor the warranty that THEY promised at the time of purchase. That's intentional FRAUD! Technical term is BAIT AND SWITCH.
Actually BAIT AND SWITCH doesn't apply in this situation as you friend actually bought the battery he wanted over two years ago and WAL-MART did not lure him into the store with the promise of a warrenty.
a bait-and-switch is a form of fraud in which the party putting forth the fraud lures in customers by advertising a product or service at a low price or with many features, then reveals to potential customers that the advertised good is not available at the original price or the list of assumed features is different. The use of this term has extended to similar situations outside of the marketing sense.
I also think it is ludicrous to accuse a clerk that makes $9 of intending to defraud your friend. I'm sure Wal-Mart store managers have Raj like powers but again I suspect he was more concerned about keeping a customer happy and bending a corporate policy than any litigation Wal-Mart might have to endure over a $50 product. What do you think Wal-Mart spends a year for Lawyers? I'm not sure but the cost of a $50 small claim case could probably come out of the corporate-council's board room coffee fund.
Your friend got a new battery and the clerk and the manager have already forgotten the transaction. Sounds like everyone came away a winner.