CircuitCity.com was reborn on May 22, brought to you by the Systemax folks who bought remnants of the CompUSA chain and operate TigerDirect.com.
When CircuitCity.com first came back, its return policy came under fire from The Consumerist and other sites such as MaximumPC and CrunchGear.
The object of the ire: What looked like then and still looks now like an iron-clad policy against returning products from Compaq, IBM, Hewlett Packard, Toshiba, and Epson, among other manufacturers. Hard to believe that anyone that intends to sell computers or printers or electronics, in general, would try to make such a policy stick. It’d be smarter not to carry a brand at all, than not accept any returns at all from a particular make. Particularly brands with such weight.
But here’s what the policy was (and it was laid at the manufacturers’ feet):
Some manufacturers have implemented returns restrictions that prevent CircuitCity.com from being able to accept returns or offer exchanges, replacements or credits on their products for any reason. Products from manufacturers such as Compaq, IBM, Hewlett Packard, Toshiba, Epson, and others are not returnable to CircuitCity.com FOR ANY REASON.
But Between the Lines noticed yesterday that this statement nor anything naming any specific brand was in the CircuitCity.com return policy that now exists. The policy clearly has changed and includes, for instance, a potential 25% restocking fee, as The Consumerist’s Carey Greenberg-Berger notes.
Systemax declined to put any of its executives on the phone with Between The Lines. But did respond by email.
Here’s what Gilbert Fiorentino, Chief Executive of the Technology Products Group at Systemax, Inc., parent company of CircuitCity.com, said:
• The words were on our website but were taken out of context and erroneously compared to NewEgg’s policy which is actually more restrictive than ours. There are a very limited number of items from those manufacturers (usually high end and special order) that are only returnable to the manufacturer. The policy didn’t say all products from those manufacturers and always directed customers to review the item’s details page for exact return policy covering any individual item.
• Most products, include most from these manufacturers, are returnable for 30 days provided they are in complete, undamaged (unless damaged on arrival is the reason for the return) and returned original packaging.
• We did not receive any requests for comment nor clarification from anybody at consumerist.com.
• It’s not all of a manufacturer’s products or even a category. It’s individual products from some manufacturers. High-end HP plotter, for example.
Now, this may be so now and kudos to Systemax for (a) clarifying and (b) changing the wording in its policy. Because there’s little mistaking the simple declarative statement: “Products from manufacturers such as Compaq, IBM, Hewlett Packard, Toshiba, Epson, and others are not returnable to CircuitCity.com FOR ANY REASON.”
Here is a low-resolution reproduction of MaximumPC’s grab of the original policy:
And here is the context:
So it’s pretty hard to fault anyone, such as The Consumerist’s Greenberg-Berger, for taking the policy “out of context” — or not calling for clarification. You could say, there didn’t seem to be “any reason.”
Compare the first iteration with the new paragraph titled “Manufacturer and Supplier Restrictions” in the Return Procedure and the first sentence omits any manufacturers’ names.
That’s better. But if CircuitCity.com really wanted to make its policy jibe with Gilbert Fiorentino’s assertion that only a few products are affected then just say so. A simple fix:
“Some manufacturers have implemented returns restrictions that prevent CircuitCity.com from being able to accept returns or offer exchanges, replacements or credits on SOME OF their products for any reason.”
Return policies matter. So does clarity.
