SLICK AND SHADY STORE POLICY

Badly needing to replace my pitifully worn out slippers, I decided to head over to SM San Lazaro one late morning about a month ago. I would usually go to Robinson’s Ermita—for their oftentimes discount offering—but on this particular occasion, SM San Lazaro was a much closer drive from where I just played a game of badminton.

I was excited. I was finally buying a pair of Merrell slippers which I had been longing for some time. Although they cost more than those offered by Adidas, Nike, and Outland, these Merrell slippers come with Vibram soles and apparently better made. They’re very comfortable and the snug fit would also make them ideal for short distance driving. And with the local wet season upon us, I could wear these out in the rain, which I wouldn’t with the leather slippers.

Most importantly, my experience of having previously owned a pair of Merrell sandals assures me that the dye used by this shoe company wouldn’t bleed and darken the soles of my feet. The few pairs of Adidas slippers I had owned in the past did this, which was rather embarrassing. I had to actually go for extra foot spa sessions just to have the stain effectively rubbed off my feet.

Anyway, I immediately slipped on my newly-purchased Merrells right after paying with my credit card. However, after about a few minutes of walking around the mall, I noticed that with the right pair, the strip that goes between my toes was situated a bit too forward and was beginning to hurt the inner sides of my big toe and the one next to it. Afraid that it would rub my skin raw, I turned back to have them replaced. I was disappointed when told they had no other pair available with my size. The perky saleslady was even more disappointed when I opted to just return them instead of settling for a different less-favorite style.

At the customer service counter, I was dumbfounded when told that in lieu of a refund, SM gives a gift certificate bearing the same amount, but expires within 30 days if left unused. Any intelligent consumer will immediately find such policy ludicrous and totally unacceptable.

When I asked to speak to a manager, she replied that she was, in fact, the manager. She then pointed to a framed poster-sized print of their return/refund policy, which was hanging for all those in line to see. I commended the alluded legalese of its content, as well as for their choice of frame for the print itself. But then again, questioned why a copy of which was not placed just as distinctly at every cashier counter for every customer to see and read before making a purchase; not afterward at the customer service counter (located in some obscure corner of the selling floor) should a problem arise with any purchased merchandise.

I even suggested, since the sale was made with my credit card, that it would be simpler to void the sale rather than go through the hassle of issuing a gift certificate, which quite possibly, I might just throw inside my desk drawer and forget altogether. I also mentioned my failure to find merit in handing over P2300.00 to SM without getting anything back for it. The manager merely smirked and remained adamant.

Exasperated, I pulled out my cellphone and advised her rather calmly that if she insisted to refuse in purging this purchase from my credit card, I will call my bank and report that SM has charged my credit card for a non-existent merchandise. Instantaneously, she called her superiors and within ten minutes, I was walking out of SM Department Store a non-victim; holding a slip to prove that the earlier sale that was charged on my credit card had been voided. I then headed downstairs to Toby's sport shop that also carries Merrell footwear and got what I wanted.

This incident left me wondering how many unsuspecting Filipino consumers had been had by SM’s devious policy. Would anyone really succumb to it? In the States, other than established laws, the Better Business Bureau and various consumer advocacy groups regularly monitor consumer complaints. The country is also abundant with enterprising attorneys who are always ready to jump into the fray with class action suits.

Now, some might say, “Sorry, Eric, but this is the Philippines.” To which I will reply, “Too bad, my credit card is issued by a multinational company and therefore, assured by its universal policy of protecting its card holders.”

In essence, the credit card company can hold its remittance to the retailer until the complaint by the card holder regarding that particular purchase has been fully resolved. And should some time had already elapsed and the retailer had already been paid by the credit card company, the credit card company, at its option, may suspend its further affliliation with the retailer until the dispute has been completely resolved. Such suspension may raise a red flag among potential customers and become a source of embarrassment for the retailer.

During the few years since having moved back to live in Metro Manila, there were other consumer issues, although less significant, I’ve encountered. But just the same, the merchants’ policies were seemingly disadvantageous to the customers. So far, in all, I’ve managed to persuade the store managers to listen and accept my points of view.

Incidentally, remember my problems with my laptop? Had Hewlett-Packard and Silicon Valley Store been indifferent to my complaints, my other option was to seek assistance from MasterCard to resolve the dispute. I had after all used it to facilitate the purchase. It is for the same reason that I plan to use my credit card as soon as I am ready to buy the Canon digital camera which I have in mind.

My point here is, for the most part, Metro Manila merchants protect their integrity by providing great products and services; however, there are those, as in any part of the world, unscrupulous proprietors who lurk behind their glitzy facade. Therefore, the use of a credit card can provide extra protection.