I believe in short, concise explanations, however, due to the complexity of this situation, I apologize for a rather long missive.

December 20, 2007: As a Christmas gift for my wife, I purchased, on my VISA. a sewing machine and other accessories for it from Gall Sewing & Vac Centers, Inc. This is a small store specializing in sewing machines and vacuums. I told them I knew nothing about sewing machines except that my wife had a very old one that she complains about every time she uses it and I asked the clerk to explain them to me. She told me about the quality of the machines and the services they provide and the disadvantages of buying one from a major vendor and quite successfully convinced me to buy a rather expensive machine that she was sure my wife would like. I did purchase it along with other items to go with it. She processed the sale with my credit card and wrote out the receipt, finishing with a stamp on it, which said, “90 Day Exchange Guarantee, No Cash Refund”. A small alarm did go off, so I reiterated that this was a surprise Christmas present and asked for assurance that it could be returned if by wife did not like it. I was advised that it could be. I accepted this as a satisfactory answer, telling myself that “Cash” is definition of cash is:

1. money in the form of coins or banknotes, esp. that issued by a government.
2. money or an equivalent, as a check, paid at the time of making a purchase.

The definition does not include credit purchases. This seemed understandable. No store is prepared to hand over $2400.00 in cash for a return. I expected that, if returned they would require debiting my credit card.

On Christmas day, while my wife was opening her present, we noticed that the box had been taped closed and the staples detached, indicating the box had been previously opened and perhaps returned by someone else. We removed the machine from the box and my we looked it over. It appeared in good order. The next day, my wife informed me that she wanted to return it. While she thought it was a wonderful machine, she did not think she would do enough sewing and embroidery to justify the expense.

December 27, 2007: We returned the machine to Gall Sewing & Vac Centers, Inc for a credit to our VISA account. The manager in charge advised us that we could return the machine for an in-store credit only. I told him that I was assured the machine could be returned. He pointed out the stamp on the receipt and a poster behind the counter indicating “No Cash Refunds”. I acknowledged I was aware of this but had used my credit card for the purchase and only required a card debit. He advised me that this was the same as cash and they would not do it, but would provide an “in store credit”. However, this is a small store that sells only sewing machines and vacuums. We neither wanted another sewing machine nor needed a new vacuum. We were unable to resolve the dispute with the manager so I left the machine and other items in their possession and they signed the receipt stating they received the items. We left our telephone number with the manager in charge and asked the owner to call us to resolve the matter.

Margaret, a manager, promptly called us and my wife spoke to her explaining that while my husband was very kind to consider a new sewing machine as a gift, he unfortunately knew nothing about sewing. He had purchased a sewing machine that was far beyond her need. She suggested we apply the amount to a vacuum cleaner. My wife told her we had a new vacuum and we were not in the market for another one. She said while the machine was in their possession it could not be sold and that is why only an in-store credit could be given. My wife mentioned the box the machine came in had been opened and likely had been returned once already. Margaret explained that it probably had been opened to check the machine over and adjust the settings. She also stated a new machine had been ordered to replenish their stock. In addition, she stated the owners might consider a re-stocking fee. The next day she called again and told me that she had talked to the owner and he was willing to accept the return of the machine but needed a $220.00 “restocking fee”. I told her that this was unreasonable and I could not accept that as a solution. I asked that the owner call me.

December 28, 2007: I called Gall Sewing and spoke to Margaret, indicating the owner had not called. She advised me that he was adamant about the restocking fee and that the fee would need to be increased if we continued with the dispute through VISA. I asked again that the owner call me.

January 3, 2008: We stopped at Smith’s Sewing Center, a competitor of Gall Sewing, which also sells only sewing machines. I asked the owner about their return policy. He advised that they accept returns unconditionally and ventured that I must have a problem with Gall. He mentioned he has heard several similar stories. We then stopped at Gall’s, asking to see the owner. He was not there and we left another request for him to call.

January 4, 2008: I again called for the owner. I was advised he was there but busy. I asked to have him call. We have not received a call.

That is the course of events. We are asking you, VISA, to deny payment of the entire charge of $2, 415.67, based upon the following considerations.

1. The store’s return policy is unreasonable compared to general retailing policy in the Grand Rapids area.
2. When I expressed concern about my wife being able to return the machine if she didn’t want it, the clerk (Margaret) did not make sufficient effort to assure herself that I understood their policy.
3. That the wordage of the stores notice of “No Cash Returns” is vague, and does not indicate that returns of any kind are not accepted.
4. That the machine’s packaging had been previously opened indicating that it had possibly been previously sold and returned. The store’s explanation that they opened it to adjust it is not reasonable or believable.
5. That we returned the machine in the same condition in which we received it – unused.
6. That a restocking fee of $220.00 is unreasonable. The machine was back in their store two days after Christmas available for sale.