Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

SeSawaya · Oct 1, 2004, 11:02 PM

Just got a letter back today telling me my purchase of a new powerbook and iPod dont qualify for the Cram and Jam deal cause they were not on the same receipt. WHAT?! Funny cause no where that I ever saw said they had to be purchased at the exact same time. Just between the dates given as I understood it, Ok fine, my fault.

BUT when I called Apple and ordered my Powerbook last month, the Apple person said I should use the Carm and Jam coupon since I ordered a new iPod a couple weeks before. Great, so now I'm out $200 and that was the point that made this PB affordable to me. Fine print is fine if its availible and easy to understand. Apple can kiss my arse. 4 billion in the bank and they make something like this, how typical of a big buisness.

At least I have a PB & Pod that I love, & wasnt counting on that check like I normally am.

<end venting>

James L · Oct 2, 2004, 02:07 AM

You can get it fixed.. just do not stop bitching. Start with customer service, then when they say no get that persons boss on the phone. When they say no get THAT persons boss on the phone, etc.

Do NOT yell, nor be rude. Simply state your case, and keep going until you get someone who is reasonable.

Short of this, email Steve jobs directly. People there DO read his email.

Cheers!

James

p.s. When you look at the PDF certificate (in the terms and conditions section) you fill out for your re-embursment it actually does say both must be purchased at the same time.

chessplayer · Oct 2, 2004, 04:53 AM

You should have read the rules of the promotion. It was clearly stated that it has to be on the same receipt.

StevenWRX · Oct 2, 2004, 08:59 AM

fight for your money.

having two items on the same receipt is rediculous.

goodluck.

cambro · Oct 2, 2004, 09:45 AM

It isn't rediculous for Apple to require that both items be on the same receipt.

What is to prevent people from combining orders? Or snatching receipts from people who didn't opt for the iPod or powerbook, stapling them together and sending them in? I could put some flyers up on campus and buy people's iPod and Powerbook UPCs and their receipts for $50 and turn around and make $150 if Apple allowed this.

That said, you may be able to plead your case if you can prove that it was actually you that bought both items and that you bought them under the assumption the rebate applied.

wtmcgee · Oct 2, 2004, 10:51 AM

The rules may or may not be silly to you, but they are plainly stated.

tooki · Oct 2, 2004, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by SeSawaya:
Just got a letter back today telling me my purchase of a new powerbook and iPod dont qualify for the Cram and Jam deal cause they were not on the same receipt. WHAT?! Funny cause no where that I ever saw said they had to be purchased at the exact same time. Just between the dates given as I understood it, Ok fine, my fault. ...

Sorry that you're inconvenienced, but you didn't read the fine print. One of the reasons companies do rebates instead of just lowering the price is that they can then save money by not paying out to those who don't follow the instructions to the letter. (Another reason is that only 10% of rebates are sent in, on average. Another is that the rebates can come from the advertising budget, thus providing tax advantage by calling it an expense, rather than lost revenue.)

tooki

Person Man · Oct 2, 2004, 11:17 AM

Originally posted by tooki:
Sorry that you're inconvenienced, but you didn't read the fine print

Yes, but the original poster was told by the Apple salesperson that he should apply for the rebate because he bought the iPod a few weeks before. I would hope that an Apple salesperson would know what the fine print said.

Of course, it's his word against the salesperson's word in the end, so he still may not have any chance.

cSurfr · Oct 2, 2004, 11:18 AM

It blows my mind when someone blames Apple when they don't read the fine print. Actually, it isn't all that fine. Here is a snippet from the Cram and Jam Coupon...read between the bullets. Don't blame Apple for your oversight.

Person Man · Oct 2, 2004, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by cSurfr:
It blows my mind when someone blames Apple when they don't read the fine print. Actually, it isn't all that fine. Here is a snippet from the Cram and Jam Coupon...read between the bullets. Don't blame Apple for your oversight.

Did you read the original post? He was told by the Apple salesman to apply for it. That still doesn't excuse him from reading the fine print himself, but I would STILL expect the APPLE EMPLOYEE to KNOW WHAT THE FINE PRINT SAYS TOO.

cSurfr · Oct 2, 2004, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by Person Man:
Did you read the original post? He was told by the Apple salesman to apply for it. That still doesn't excuse him from reading the fine print himself, but I would STILL expect the APPLE EMPLOYEE to KNOW WHAT THE FINE PRINT SAYS TOO.

If I told you wolves would make good pets, would you listen to me? It's always best to find out for yourself.

madmacgames · Oct 2, 2004, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by cSurfr:
If I told you wolves would make good pets, would you listen to me? It's always best to find out for yourself.

No but you are not selling pets on behalf of someone else. If you were and made that statement to me, and I reasonably relied upon it, and the wolf bit me, your employer would be liable for it.

This is a pretty clear principle/agent problem here. The sales rep has the express authority of Apple to sell Apple's products. Any 3rd party is going to reasonably rely upon what a sales rep tells them when buying something. What Apple's true policy is of the Cram & Jam is of little concern here, as when an agent has authority (either express, apparent, or implied), the principle is liable for that agent's actions and statements the agent makes to 3rd parties, i.e., they are bound by the acts of their agents.

The sales rep made a statement on which SeSawaya reasonably relied, the sales rep has Apple's express authority to sell on Apple's behalf, and moreover, SeSawaya would have reasonably believed that they were acting with the authority of Apple. Apple is responsible, liable for, and bound to the actions and statements of their sales representatives.

These laws are in place, for among other reasons, to protect innocent 3rd parties.

SeSawaya, if the sales rep told you that you would get the discount; Apple is obligated to give it to you then.

Person Man · Oct 2, 2004, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by cSurfr:
If I told you wolves would make good pets, would you listen to me? It's always best to find out for yourself.

If you CAREFULLY read my post that you quoted, you would see that I said that it doesn't excuse him from reading the fine print for himself.

Person Man · Oct 2, 2004, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by madmacgames:
Apple is responsible, liable for, and bound to the actions and statements of their sales representatives.

These laws are in place, for among other reasons, to protect innocent 3rd parties.

SeSawaya, if the sales rep told you that you would get the discount; Apple is obligated to give it to you then.

He still would have to prove it... Short of recording the sales call and playing it back, it's his word against the sales representative's, and the sales representative would most likely deny that he ever made that suggestion (unless Apple happened to record that particular sales call).

Lancer409 · Oct 2, 2004, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by chessplayer:
You should have read the rules of the promotion. It was clearly stated that it has to be on the same receipt.

dude .. it stated it in the rules of the promo .. what's with all these fight for your money posts? i got screwed out of 100 bux rebate from some company .. I FOLLOWED ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND RULES. ... you didnt bother reading .. and the error is on your end .. that and the stupid moron on the phone..

that said ... you still got edu discount .. (thank god) ...

the laptop is well worth retail .. you'll see ... but .. hey ... if you can get ur 200 bucks (that you DONT qualify for) good luck and more power to you ... i'm just saying that at this point, you arent owed anything .. sorry if it sounded mean i REALLY DONT INTEND IT TO BE VIEWED as a mean post ... i just wanted to point out how important it is to read carefully...

Lancer409 · Oct 2, 2004, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Person Man:
Yes, but the original poster was told by the Apple salesperson that he should apply for the rebate because he bought the iPod a few weeks before. I would hope that an Apple salesperson would know what the fine print said.

Of course, it's his word against the salesperson's word in the end, so he still may not have any chance.

We dont have proof of said conversation. If it's true, we should tack a kickme sign on his back ... with a pneumatic nailgun ... but .. then again ... we have no proof the conversation took place