Ask Lemmy

It’s bullshit because they aren’t going to sell it for $35 less to the next chump.

Returns are not a right, no retailer is required to accept them. Most do it for a better shopping experience, people are more likely to spend if they know they can return.

You are protected from defective or dangerous products, but that's through the manufacturer's warranty. You are also protected from products that do not work as advertised. I think that's a law in most countries.

But returns for other reasons like bad clothing fits or you just don't like it are not legally protected for the most part. There are some exceptions but they're specific.

So to say restocking fees are greedy is silly.

Small shop: Depends how much they are asking.
It can be a hassle to get it back into inventory.

Big shop/retailer: They are setup for that process. They can stomach the burden.

I believe a fair and reasonable restocking fee is absolutely justified when customers try to game the system. Having worked in several retail establishments over the years, I can tell you that this sort of behavior is rampant and I've seen lots of really shady shit from people, including:

• Buying clothes for a special event and then trying to return them the next day.
• Buying a tool to fix something in your home, and then trying to return it the next day.
• Breaking an item that you purchased, and then wanting to return it, claiming that it is defective.

People are opportunists. If there are no controls in place to keep some people from doing shitty things, some people will do shitty things.

I can see several reasons why this may be done, and most depend on the retailer and product. The short version is that restocking fees make sense for large or valuable items, and for small businesses.

High-value items like electronics, jewelry, etc. are prone to theft and return fraud. For example: someone could buy a computer or jewelry, swap some parts, and return it with different parts that are worth much less. It takes time and resources to test the product to verify it's the same as what was sold.

Large items like furniture are very expensive to ship and when one is puchased, the retailer would often restock the item which costs them money.

Small businesses are often charged higher fees by manufacturers and distributors for ordering or shipping products, as they generally don't order in high amounts. This means that they will make less money if they sell an item for the same price as a large corporation. Small businesses also don't have the same resources for testing returned products, so processing returns has a much larger impact on them vs large corporations. Because of this, it often makes sense to implement a restocking fee to make up for these costs.

Large corporations generally have a streamlined process for processing, testing, and shipping returned products. While some things are still expensive to process, it's significantly less impactful for a large business to process a return. It still costs money to process a return, but in my opinion restocking fees can be greedy for larger corporations that can eat those costs.

I'm sure there are some people who take advantage of returns and the restocking fee is there to dissuade them. But also I'm sure the retailers are trying to make some extra money on returns.

Depends on the reason for the return and the amount of the fee. It does cost a business money to take product back to stock. Businesses need to keep stock moving out. Just holding stock costs them money. Taking stock back costs even more. They likely can’t sell it as new on top of the normal overhead costs of stocking it.

If it’s returned because you didn’t like it, it’s reasonable for you to bear some of the cost.

If it’s defective or doesn’t work as advertised, that’s different. The retailer should eat the cost of that.

Greedy retailer.

Any retailer worth their salt would include them in their profit margins.

When you run a retail store (or online store) selling physical goods, you are bound by the rules of matter (as oppoes to digital stuff). Stuff breaks. Food spoils. Old car models lose value. PC parts even quicker. Stuff gets lost. Stuff gets broken. An error occurs during manufacturing. These are all sources of loss which you have to take into account, predict and mitigate.

Adding returns to that already large (and by no means exhaustive) list isn't an unreasonable ask.

You just estimate the number and projected cost of returns and adjust your prices and profit margins accordingly.

A "restock fee" is definitely uncalled for. The store made the decision to order X amount of the product, with a Y margin of loss (lost, broken in transport, stolen,...). These present a loss of item. An item they could've sold. However, a return isn't a loss of item. They get the item back. And charging customers for the priviledge of buying something, getting dissappointed and making a big deal out of it with "restock fees" is a stupid business move - you risk losing the customer. Especially when you consider the fact that a return is the smallest cost out of all the issues mentioned here.

And if your competition doesn't treat their customers as bad as you do - the risk isn't small. And even if not, a boycott out of spite, even just one customer, is a much larger loss than the net gain of one "restock" fee.

So, it's just greedy. And a bad business move if you care about customer retention. Not doing it while others do is a smart move, since these things are bound to happen. And when they do at a competitor, who knows? Maybe the customer tries you next and just... Remains loyal. Although when you say "customer loyalty" today, people think of gimmicks like loyalty cards.

Depends what it is, I'd say a restocking fee on dildos is reasonable.

This seems relevant: https://youtu.be/WG8idKaX9KI