Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

accidental breakage in shop

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Arthur Beesley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,537 ✭✭✭Arthur Beesley


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    If you have two sales, one in excess of 300 euro, and the other 25 euro with a 50% reduction, then the shop is not out of pocket.

    You don't really know that. They could be making a small margin % on the more expensive item, might be loss leader or similar etc.
    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    Also the shop in question is a large multinational, I would wager they have percentage factored in for breakages.

    Just like they factor in shop lifting. Doesn't make shoplifting right or mean they do nothing about it or stop them trying to recover the goods etc.


  • Options
    #33
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,098 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    To be honest, she will probably return:D

    But I wont.

    Thanks to all

    You wouldn't go to the majority of shops with that attitude, actually they were pretty good to give it only at 50%. Or is it only when you see it happen that it counts?


  • Options
    #34
    sabat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭sabat


    chef wrote: »
    Nice to look at,
    Nice to hold,
    If you break it,
    Consider it sold.
    ABajaninCork wrote: »

    I've often seen this rhyme at home in the UK which says it all:

    Lovely to look at. Lovely to hold.
    But if you break me? Consider me sold.

    This sign always makes me want to smash stuff...


  • Options
    #35
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    You wouldn't go to the majority of shops with that attitude, actually they were pretty good to give it only at 50%. Or is it only when you see it happen that it counts?

    What attitude exactly ?:confused:


  • Options
    #36
    JimsAlterEgo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭JimsAlterEgo


    :confused:isnt that what insurance is for?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    discombobulate
    Registered Users Posts: 2,846 ✭✭✭discombobulate


    Put it this way if they had dropped the €300 item instead would you still think they shouldn't have to pay? Exact same principle.


  • Options
    #38
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    discombobulate wrote: »
    Put it this way if they had dropped the €300 item instead would you still think they shouldn't have to pay? Exact same principle.

    Well, it was an armchair, so they would have had to throw it at a wall. Most shops place high value or fragile goods, in a case, or shelve them is such a way that's it is difficult to get to them.


  • Options
    #39
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users Posts: 4,977 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    If I walked into a shop/someones home/onto someones premises and broke something, irrelevant of whether it be €1000 or €1 I would expect to have to pay for the damage I caused.


  • Options
    #40
    discombobulate
    Registered Users Posts: 2,846 ✭✭✭discombobulate


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    Well, it was an armchair, so they would have had to throw it at a wall. Most shops place high value or fragile goods, in a case, or shelve them is such a way that's it is difficult to get to them.
    She dropped it!

    Even if it had been in a case or out of the way, after she had taken it from the safe place it was dropped, not knocked because of the position it was in!


  • Options
    #41
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    TheDoctor wrote: »
    If I walked into a shop/someones home/onto someones premises and broke something, irrelevant of whether it be €1000 or €1 I would expect to have to pay for the damage I caused.

    I don't think it is quite the same thing. If I broke/damaged a neighbours/friends property, there would be no question, I would replace or pay for the item without hesitation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    discombobulate
    Registered Users Posts: 2,846 ✭✭✭discombobulate


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    I don't think it is quite the same thing. If I broke/damaged a neighbours/friends property, there would be no question, I would replace or pay for the item without hesitation.
    But not a strangers item which they have in their shop and depend on selling to make a living?


  • Options
    #43
    zarquon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,734 ✭✭✭zarquon


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    What attitude exactly ?:confused:

    The atitude of no personal responsibility. Someone breaks something and somehow the owner of the broken item is painted as the bad guy rather than the culprit. TBH i think the shop is very generous in taking a 50% hit. I would be embarassed at the thought of not paying for an item i broke and would be even more embarassed to criticise a shop for expecting partial remuneration.


  • Options
    #44
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    discombobulate wrote: »
    But not a strangers item which they have in their shop and depend on selling to make a living?

    Did I say that?


  • Options
    #45
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,098 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    zarquon wrote: »
    The atitude of no personal responsibility. Someone breaks something and somehow the owner of the broken item is painted as the bad guy rather than the culprit. TBH i think the shop is very generous in taking a 50% hit. I would be embarassed at the thought of not paying for an item i broke and would be even more embarassed to criticise a shop for expecting partial remuneration.

    Yes and the fact that they said they wouldn't visit the shop again, qhy? because they made somebody pay for breaking something? Basically if they take that stance they should go into the majority of shops ever.


  • Options
    #46
    zarquon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,734 ✭✭✭zarquon


    Its a question of morals really rather than law. If you break something, any one with a decent sense of moral responsibility should offer to pay in full for a broken item if within their means. If one is happy to let someone else suffer a loss for one's own mistake then it speaks volumes of one's character.


  • Options
    #47
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    Yes and the fact that they said they wouldn't visit the shop again, qhy? because they made somebody pay for breaking something? Basically if they take that stance they should go into the majority of shops ever.

    Yes, you are right, they should.:confused:

    I said my relative probably would visit the shop again, but I wouldn't.


  • Options
    #48
    zarquon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,734 ✭✭✭zarquon


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    Yes and the fact that they said they wouldn't visit the shop again, qhy? because they made somebody pay for breaking something? Basically if they take that stance they should go into the majority of shops ever.

    I propose an alternative, person doesn't pay 100% for their own breakage then they should be barred from said shop. B&M stores have enough revenue issues these days without having to deal with $rsehole customers with a lack of morals. Such customers that refuse to pay for breakages or criticise shops may as well try dipping their hand in the till as that is basically what they are doing anyway!!


  • Options
    #49
    zarquon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,734 ✭✭✭zarquon


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    Yes, you are right, they should.:confused:

    I said my relative probably would visit the shop again, but I wouldn't.

    You wouldn't visit the shop because your relative made a mistake and cost the shop some profit? (they would eventually have sold the broken item to someone else!) :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #50
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,098 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    Yes, you are right, they should.:confused:

    I said my relative probably would visit the shop again, but I wouldn't.

    What, can you not read? I already said that. That is what we are talking about.


  • Options
    #51
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    zarquon wrote: »
    I propose an alternative, person doesn't pay 100% for their own breakage then they should be barred from said shop. B&M stores have enough revenue issues these days without having to deal with $rsehole customers with a lack of morals. Such customers that refuse to pay for breakages or criticise shops may as well try dipping their hand in the till as that is basically what they are doing anyway!!

    Oh, we are reduced to name calling now are we? Who refused to pay???

    I merely asked was paying 50% of the price of an item that broken, the norm?

    Now you are accusing people of theft...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    Yes and the fact that they said they wouldn't visit the shop again, qhy? because they made somebody pay for breaking something? Basically if they take that stance they should go into the majority of shops ever.
    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    What, can you not read? I already said that. That is what we are talking about.

    I can read alright, can you? I said my relative WOULD return. Above you say WOULDN'T


  • Options
    #53
    zarquon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,734 ✭✭✭zarquon


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    Oh, we are reduced to name calling now are we? Who refused to pay???

    I merely asked was paying 50% of the price of an item that broken, the norm?

    Now you are accusing people of theft...

    I'm not accusing your "relative". I'm accusing people who feel they don't need to pay anything which is theft in my opinion.

    If your relative was happy to pay 50% then she obviously does not fall into my categorisation so i'm not sure why you are so offended unless you are in the category that would refuse to pay if you broke something

    If someone hit my car in a collision and drove off (avoiding paying) then i would call them scum. That so called scum might decide that because i have a nice car i may have a lot more money than them so they would have no issue driving away. Same principal with a customer who would break an item and try to avoid paying for it with a "Sure the business has more money than me, they'll be grand" atitude.


  • Options
    #54
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    zarquon wrote: »
    I'm not accusing your "relative". I'm accusing people who feel they don't need to pay anything which is theft in my opinion.

    If your relative was happy to pay 50% then she obviously does not fall into my categorisation so i'm not sure why you are so offended unless you are in the category that would refuse to pay if you broke something

    If someone hit my car in a collision and drove off (avoiding paying) then i would call them scum. That so called scum might decide that because i have a nice car i may have a lot more money than them so they would have no issue driving away. Same principal with a customer who would break an item and try to avoid paying for it with a "Sure the business has more money than me, they'll be grand" atitude.

    But who mentioned someone who did not want to pay anything???


  • Options
    #55
    zarquon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,734 ✭✭✭zarquon


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    But who mentioned someone who did not want to pay anything???

    No one is mentioned specifically, i thought this was just a general discussion on the topic hence i generalised my comments. You said yourself you are just posting for discussion as the issue is already resolved and it does not involve you directly.

    Not to sound rude or intrusive but may i ask would you be happy to pay either 50% or 100% if you were in the same position - a question for discussion purposes only ;)


  • Options
    #56
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    zarquon wrote: »
    No one is mentioned specifically, i thought this was just a general discussion on the topic hence i generalised my comments. You said yourself you are just posting for discussion as the issue is already resolved and it does not involve you directly.

    Not to sound rude or intrusive but may i ask would you be happy to pay either 50% or 100% if you were in the same position - a question for discussion purposes only ;)

    Well you did mention it specifically.

    To be perfectly honest, I really believed shops in general would not charge if you broke an item accidently, maybe I am naïve. But in this instance, due to the fact a more expensive item was also purchased, I thought (only my opinion) the 50% charge on the breakage should have been waived. And to answer further re paying 100% of broken item, well no, I would not be happy to pay that. I hope that answers that for you, but either way, lets try to keep it civil. Nothing to gained from name calling.


  • Options
    #57
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,098 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    You wouldn't go to the majority of shops with that attitude, actually they were pretty good to give it only at 50%. Or is it only when you see it happen that it counts?

    You

    I even put your quote in bold where you said I
    I haven't mentioned your relative once, we are talking about you, you wouldn't return. As I already said.


  • Options
    #58
    zarquon
    Registered Users Posts: 3,734 ✭✭✭zarquon


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    You

    I even put your quote in bold where you said I
    I haven't mentioned your relative once, we are talking about you, you wouldn't return. As I already said.

    You are right, but for sanity, i'd leave it ;). OP is taking this too sensitively and is overly offendable on this top therefore IMO i'm not convinced there is a "relative" as there is such sensitivity to the topic and a highly defensive stance. Based on the thread, the OP has an opinion which he is entitled to of course but the responses clearly show he is very much in a minority opinion.

    As there is nothing further to be gained from trying to have a discussion with someone who asked for discussion but doesn't really want discussion, just people to agree with him instead, then there is no further value in this thread for myself (and anyone else with an opposing opinion to the OP) so /exit for me. :)


  • Options
    #59
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    Its not often I open a thread, and I am beginning to regret doing so in this instance. I don't think I am being over sensitive, or over defensive. I threw something out there for to see what other peoples views on it were. Some seemed to agree with me, and some disagree, which is fine. I don't think there was a majority/minority either way. When some people start to insert words in inverted comma's to imply l may not be telling the truth, and making personal comments, I dunno, you just wonder about some people. I mean what is to be gained by making something up and posting it here...


  • Options
    #60
    pleasant Co.
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 7,405 Mod ✭✭✭✭pleasant Co.


    eisenberg1 wrote: »
    Its not often I open a thread, and I am beginning to regret doing so in this instance. I don't think I am being over sensitive, or over defensive.

    I don't think you are either, but I'd be lying if i said the hostility you've received was outside the norm, there can be a really nasty core inside this otherwise superb community.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    eisenberg1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,387 ✭✭✭eisenberg1


    pleasant Co. wrote: »
    I don't think you are either, but I'd be lying if i said the hostility you've received was outside the norm, there can be a really nasty core inside this otherwise superb community.

    :Dmany thanks, you do get a bit of that from time to time. I will revisit.

    cheers


Advertisement