Indeed TigerDirect and OnRebate.com has a very close relationship with the intent just to rip-you-off your rebates.
I am a pharmacist and an owner of a pharmacy. I did refer a few of my relatives and close business friends to TigerDirect. After the invention of this OnRebate.com, TigerDirect has lost its integrity as an honest business, to me and my friends.
We came across a FujiPlus 19¡¨ LCD Monitor promotion with two separate rebates ($30 and $90). One of my relative with a law firm also decided to get one of this monitor after I sent off for mine.
After received the items we sat down and review the OnRebate requirements to claim rebates. The requirements are plain irritants so that they can void / lose your claim documentation if you did not follow the EXACT manner that they prescribed or if you did not send via certified mail.
They also provided you with a non-functional button that you would not be able to print your Rebate Form that would contain your much needed Tracking Numbers in the Bar Code Format (their process is machine read), a place that you have to sign (they claim that is for illegality reason! That is if you believe it.)
Furthermore, there is a label of their address that you have to cut to paste it to the envelope ¡K as ¡§Important: envelopes without a proper label may not be delivered and processed.¡¨ We had our laughs, and the documents were reviewed by 3 lawyers and we painfully fulfilled the requirements to the teeth.
Knowing the intent of these ridiculous requirements that are demanded for the rebates, and to test our suspicion, we sent off the two claims in one labeled envelope to OnRebate.com via certified mail. We bundled the two sets of documents and identified them separated to avoid OnRebate¡¦s claim of their mis-handling thinking that was only one claim (for one household).
On our tracking we found that only my documents were recorded as received. On questioning a lady called Martine at their 1-888 numbers, we learned of a new requirement that each household claim has to be in a separate certified post-marked envelope. This absurdity of course she could not find in print, as it serves no practical or legal purposes. She failed to provide a functional explanation to make this invented irritant stands.
On learning our exercise to the claims and the action that we are planning to take, she suddenly found a solution that there is an avenue that we can fax them the support documents if we do keep records. She will accept and re-enter the documents in their records. Naturally, we have records ¡K we painfully document everything from the beginning, notarized and verified each step by a partner of the law firm.
There is also a $90 rebate from the FujiPlus Company; we are still waiting to hear from them. TigerDirect also claims that they will honor the rebates if all else failed. This does not indicate that TigerDirect is free from complicity ¡K in fact the reverse ¡K for obvious reasons in their position.
I suggest that anyone should seek relief would be the small claim courts and also make a filing with the Consumers Protection and Practice Standard.
We must note that a company can set requirements relating to this procedure, BUT:
*The requirements need to be reasonable and functional.
*Unreasonable requirements and irritants to void rebates are all indications of a scam ¡K complicity to fraud. This is the view of the court. The courts view misrepresentation and defrauding the public very serious matters.
Harvey XXX B.Sc.Pharm., R.Ph.
Toronto, Ontario
Canada
Harvey
Toronto, Ontario