A question of morality?

Post Reply New Topic

There's an interesting situation at the shop I work at.

For background, the place I work at is a camera shop. It's an expensive place, and sells very little you can't get cheaper elsewhere. However, it offers a lot in the way of convenience, information and service with the goods.

Recently, an elderly couple purchased a Fuji Finepix F40FD from myself. They spent around 40 minutes of my time looking through all the cameras they might consider, and working through what price range they wanted, what functions they were after etc etc etc. At the end of it, I threw in a free case & 100 free prints for it, and they paid £169.99 for the camera and left perfectly content with their purchase.

A short while later (an hour, maybe?) they phone the store- it turns out the same camera is available from some no-name internet site for £109.99. Needless to say, they are annoyed. They don't specifically say they want anything, and instead try to feel out my response. Of course, my response is very limited - I didn't know it was available that cheap (and certainly don't trust the site, considering that RRP for this particular camera is over £200) and irrespective the only person who can decide or do anything once a sale has been completed is the manager.

These people agreed to the price they paid, and were perfectly happy with it. They weren't lied to, and it was made clear during discussion that it was not the cheapest place they could get cameras from (For example, www.play.com is £10 cheaper). Legally, since they were'nt coerced or misinformed in any way, they have absolutely nothing in the way of entitlements. On the other hand, I do feel somewhat guilty.

I don't know what the managers response will be, and the situation is somewhat out of my hands. So, the question is, from an ethical vs practical perspective, what would be the right thing to do?

(edited to expand poll options)

You are paying the extra for service.Emplyees,shops and electricity cost money.

I agree...

It was not as if you were swindling them....lots of stuff can be found cheaper on the internet than at stores..you could always point out that it is generally safer to deal with actual people than some no-name site that could bait and switch products or...um...send irregular products..or their camera could be damaged in the mail and it would be harder for them to do anything about it...

I got baited and switched on a ukulele once..and ended up just having to live with this bad instument with faulty intonation.

What it really all boils down to is whether or not your store has a return policy and what that policy specifies...

And yes people are paying extra for the customer service...

It costs alot more money to mantain a shop and pay employees and whatnot than it does to run an internet business..and so often those factors are figured into the prices of things at a shop..and that is why products can often be cheaper on the internet...

Anyway..i voted "do nothing" but really my gut instinct would be to throw something in for the trouble if possible..be as nice about it as possible and i guess it would be more likely that you would keep them as customers...

I work for an internet business and I am constantly throwing in little extras here and there....

Ive bought "new" cheap stuff from internet sites, e-Bay the like, though new, often the box is a mess, or maybe they are "new" items that have been returned or old stock that somebody has bought cheap.

Tell them they could probably get it even cheaper if they find somebody who can get it off the back of a lorry.

dont do anything. the deal is ended, you did your job and they just made a unwise desicion. their loss anyway

I agree, you didn't con them, you even told them they could get it cheaper elsewhere. in stores (as opposed to the internet) you're paying extra for the customer service (they discussed what they wanted with you, and you gave them suggestions), for seeing and handling the actual thing close up and for the convenience of walking out with it instead of waiting for delivery. charging for these things is reasonable since they cost money (salaries, upkeep, electricity, rent). if it's not worth it to you, you can buy online or look for another less upscale store, the shop you work in is not a monopoly. it's widely known that in a fancy shop you can end up paying far more for the same item as in a cheap place or online. they may have made a bad decision, but it wasn't your fault, and they weren't grossly overcharged so that it really was unethical (they did not pay ten times the price, or something that was grossly ripping them off). giving them a freebie might be good PR, but i don't think you have any moral obligations.

Do nothing.

Wait for the manager's decision. Many stores have a policy that if customers can find the equivalent item elsewhere cheaper, they are entitled to a refund of the difference. But this may or may not exclude websites. The corporate policy will spell out what should and shouldn't happen, and in the absence of this, it's the manager's discretion. All you are obliged (and all you probably should do) is sympathise with the customer and tell them that the manager will help them as soon as he is able. Anything further you do might make the manager's job harder if you come to a different decision from what he would have done.

Thanks for all the responses, everyone.

I probably wasn't clear enough in my original post, but I couldn't do anything in this situation even if I wanted to. Literally the moment money is in the till the only person who has authorisation to do anything is the manager, so the question was more hypothetical than practical - I.e. "what would have been the right response if it had been my choice to make?", instead of "what should I do?".

Interestingly though, the store doesnt have anything in the way of policies, at all. It's run very much to the style of what the manager says goes, and about the only dependable factor is that he'll avoid breaking the law. (though I have a few suspicions on that count).

I'll update this when I find out what the manager decided.

If it had been my decision to make, then I would have judged the liklihood of the elderly couple returning to buy anything else from my shop in the future. If they are likely to return, then I would offer a refund of the difference between my price and the web price, provided they were able to give me documented proof of the web price. If the web price was so low as to be below my own cost price, I would refund them to the cost price, so that they received some money back, but I didn't actually make a loss on the camera. The gain in emotional currency from having made two future customers happy is worth more than the value of the refund they're seeking. Happy customers means future sales, which means future income which even in pure monetary terms will be worth more than the cash value of the refund they want.

If they were unlikely to ever return to my shop, then I'd politely refuse to help them and wish them good day.

..I didnt mean there was anything wrong with that.

Logical is good.

Disturbing is also good, in controlled amounts.

In the USA, a standard practice among stores that sell cameras is to match the prices offered by other stores, if the customer brings in an ad. This is because the customer also has the option of returning the camera for a full refund, and then going to the other store to buy the camera at the lower price, which wouldn't be good. Also, you are hoping that the customer will come back to the store to make more purchases in the future.

However, stores do not match deals found on the internet.