Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Do "Lego Stores" care if you exchange a set you bought elsewhere for one of their sets?
With Lego sets on sale at stores like Walmart - Lego sets which tend to be not the kind that I like in my collection - I've wondered what's the Lego Store's posture concerning exchanges of sets bought elsewhere. Their receipts say that as long as the item is in brand new condition and as long as the set is in stock, they will exchange it for a set of the same price or give you a store credit. I imagine that these exchanges are performed with the assumption that the Lego set was bought at the Lego Store, or some Lego Store, but given that the times I have returned sets to the Lego Store without a receipt I have never been challenged or asked where I bought them, do they even care if you buy a set at a substantial discount at Walmart and exchange it for a more palatable, similarly priced set?
Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
Recent discussions •
I personally wouldn't even ask if it was possible let alone try it, but there are more unscrupulous people in the world. It is through their abuses of retailer's liberal policies or loopholes to the policies that make it harder for people who actually have issues with the retailer.
As a litmus test, tell the associate that you bought it elsewhere for a discount and see if there's any issue.
The intentions are honest - say a birthday gift that a kid already has - but there will always be people unethically taking advantage.
Target and Wal*Mart will accept returns without a receipt as well. But they require an ID (and have limits on number of times that any person can make a return without a receipt). When accepting a return without receipt, I believe it is their policy to offer store credit equivalent to the cheapest price at which the item has been sold. Those factors limit the damage potential.
So this unscrupulous practice can be deployed at other stores. Just not as effectively.
I'm sure you could wheel in a palette of poorly selling sets from Walmart and demand some double reward points as well...
I always love how some people think they can just screw over large companies and it's perfectly ethical and OK because Lego (or Walmart or whoever) wont notice a few dollars missing and as a fan I think they owe me a few.
Besides, if Lego wasn't quite so expensive I wouldn't have to steal it (and that is clearly what the OP is doing)
Ever wonder where some of that cost comes from? Those loses get passed to us honest consumers in raised prices.
Did the OP actually get on here thinking that we would all congratulate him for finding an awesome loophole that everyone should exploit?
I'm personally red-flagging him so that I'll never make the mistake of trying to make a deal with someone that I clearly can't trust to be honest
Some stores do have open return policies for presents, and that is really the intention.
I had a present that we received years back that was a duplicate. There was no gift receipt. I did ask at the Lego store about it, explained the situation, and they were more than fine with that and told me just to return it when I next came it. The toy may have come from there or from Target or somewhere else we just did not know, but the store handled it very admirably. Policies that are more open are for situations more like that. Now, if they told me we are sorry, we can only do a return with a receipt, I would have been equally fine with that. I do feel it is the stores/companies prerogative to choose how to handle situations like that.
The intention of return policies, though, is not to knowingly buy a product somewhere for cheap, and then get full price for it by returning it elsewhere.
That would constitute a form of fraud. In fact, American Girl recently brought a case against someone that knowingly did that. The individual bought a large number of dolls at a highly discounted rate (a sale) and then returned them for full price/credit. The charge was felony theft by swindle. http://kstp.com/article/stories/s3684614.shtml
ETA: American Girl probably has had an even more open return policy that many stores out there, and they still cared enough to bring charges in this case, so yes, I believe Lego would very much care if individuals did knowingly buy on sale and returned for full price....that does fall under theft.
I am not sure we can be more specific tha that. Sure it was with dolls instead of Lego, but the scenario described is the exact same... Knowingly returning an item bought on discount to receive the non-sale credit or return. It is theft.
The issue I presume comes in when one is knowingly trying to defraud a company of money. That is a very different practice than a company having a generous return policy and good customer service practices and telling a consumer they can return something.
I had one company that messed up my order and told me they would immediately send out the new product and then I could keep or donate the one they accidentally sent me.
That is good customer service. As a customer, good customer service is something that will keep me coming back.
Assume the exact same scenario, but let us say I lied and never had the wrong item, but I suspected there was a hig chance they would do the above. That would be stealing.
On the surface the same conversation happens, but only one is with the intent to commit theft.
In the nineties, my not so ethical friend would buy a Nintendo cartridge on sale, play it, return it without receipt, and pocket the cash. Of course over time the return without receipt policies evolved. But the fact that such service still exists today after all this time tells me a few things.
First, companies are not stupid. They are well aware of the possible abuse and yet they still offer such a policy (Hold it. That statement does not mean I am inviting people to abuse it). Without going too much into branding and marketing, just like the silly gimmick of 1% cash back on credit cards which you and I and those who pay in cash are paying for; such services are priced into the cost of operation. Lego decided that they can take a risk (or even a hit) on abuses and gain brand loyalty. (Again, hold your horses).
If I have to buy electronics and choose between Target or Best Buy, I go with Target because of 30-days instead of 14 days return policy of Best Buy. I know why BB changed their policy and Target probably did lose money in some cases (say stuck with TurboTax after tax day). But in the end Target get my business more than any other company.
Lego simply does not have to offer such service and maybe they can lower the prices for all the sets, too. But Lego is smarter than that. There are always going to be people who cares little about ethics and I am 100% sure quite a few out there are abusing this service. lego has factor in that cost, thus you and I are paying for such service.
Again, please don't interpret that I encourage folks to go ahead and scam Lego stores. i am just looking at this more from a business perspective. I had been scratching my head as to why stores still offer no-receipt polices. But you know what, it works.
Folk who are outraged should not feel too bad about Lego. Those who abuse this are really stealing from all of us.
That makes almost no sense at all
Yes, there always will be people out there that think their interests are more important then anyone else's. We should just shrug our shoulders and be cool with it?
That's like saying cancer exists and probably always will so why should we bother looking for a cure?
People stop shoplifting when they are kids
Don't think that because we are playing with toys that you get to devolve into child behavior
While I haven't done any exchanges myself, a friend's son received a set he didn't want for Xmas (no gift receipt) and had it exchanged at the LEGO store, and I thought that was most awesome customer service on their part.
People are all up in arms about the service and to be honest, Lego should just NOT offer such a service and we'd not have this conversation. I hope no one here thinks they DESERVE to get such service from any company.