Target Has 79-Year-Old Taken In For Mental Evaluation After She Demanded Cash Refund

[tannybogus]

Christina Brown said she wanted her $30 back. The cops said she must be crazy.

That's how a 79-year-old New Hope woman ended up having her head examined when she asked the SuperTarget in Plymouth to refund the $30 she had paid for shirts that did not fit. When store workers offered her a gift certificate in return for the shirts, but would not give her cash, Christina Brown stood for her rights.

<snip>
When the manager said he was going to call the cops, Christina beat him to the punch: Taking a cellphone from her purse, she dialed 9-1-1 and called police, asking them to come and help her. Officers responded and later filled out a report, but no charges were filed.

The police report also says she asked to be arrested, but she denies that, saying, "I'd have to be crazy to ask for that."

"They can put you in jail for this," she says a cop told her. "Well, I've got nothing else to do today," she replied. "Besides, I may meet a better class of people in jail."

The store wouldn't budge. Christina wouldn't bend. A stretcher was brought in.

Christina was strapped to it, and taken by ambulance to North Memorial Medical Center. Her physical and mental health was supposed to be evaluated.
<snip>

http://www.startribune.com/local/26936624.html?page=2&c=y

I have read this story twice, and I am still at a loss as to why she was taken for a mental evaluation. Either there is something missing in the story
or someone at Target is batshit crazy. They should have been taken in. I worked retail for a loooooooooooong time, and there were plenty of customers
that I wanted hauled off for a checkup. I can't imagine what she would have done to deserve this. I really want to know what it was, if anything.

I do know that if I had a customer treated like this, my corporate office probably would have sent me to join her. The cops had to have made that call???
Or do they now let store managers determine levels of sanity. Unless she was a clear danger to herself, I would had to have had permission from the CEO
of my company and God to have her taken for a mental evaluation.

:shrug: :shrug: :shrug: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[Skink]

1. Seems plausible to me.

No refund for you. Next!!!

[fed_up_mother]

61. No receipt. No refund. Simple. Did she have a receipt?

Stores are well within their rights not to give cash for people who "return" stolen items. It's a great way to make a little cash. Or many stores will wait until a check clears to give a refund.

[tannybogus]

68. She had her receipt according to the newspaper column.nt

[fed_up_mother]

69. Interesting. As long the the tags are still on the items purchased

and it hasn't been a terribly long time, I have never had a problem with returns at Target, but then I always use a credit card because I know I tend to return things (that don't fit my kids, for instance), and I don't want to have to wait for a check to clear.

[bobbolink]

98. Nice assumption.

You do that often?

If so, no wonder you're "fed up"

[fed_up_mother]

106. I asked "Did she have a receipt?"

I didn't assume.

[bobbolink]

144. After the fact.

"

No receipt. No refund. Simple.

Did she have a receipt?"

[fed_up_mother]

146. IT was IN THE SUBJECT LINE!

geesh

[bobbolink]

147. Yes, geeesh.

It's the deal now to assume first, and ask later.

You might want to consider whether that is actually "progressive".

[romulusnr]

192. Yes

sad of you to assume the customer was wrong without evidence. yes, she had a receipt. AND the store was offering her credit so they WERE offering her a refund, just a refund she could only use there to buy more Target stuff. Return with receipt equals cash refund in my book.

[roguevalley]

142. if that had happened to my dad who was her age, they would still

be looking for body parts. Poor woman. I HUG YOU!

[Liberal Gramma]

2. There has to be more to this story.

Was she wearing the shirts at the time?

[tannybogus]

5. Got me!

I am trying to find anything else. What I know is in that

newspaper column. :hi:

[On the Road]

28. What's Probably Missing

is that she acted in a way that made employees suspect her stability. I don't doubt the customer had a valid point and should have been given a refund rather than store credit. She may have been completely sane and within her rights, but the employees may not have seen it that way. Not saying they were correct, but that's often what happens in a case like this.

[tannybogus]

33. Here is a reply from Target.

<snip>
"It's not anything she did," he said. "Team members were concerned about her well-being and her safety, and wanted to make sure she wasn't endangering herself."
<snip>

http://consumerist.com/5036954/target-has-79+year+old-taken-in-for-mental-evaluation-after-she-demanded-cash-refund

It's a contradictory statement. How can you be concerned if it's not anything she did?

I have no idea where the truth lies.

[bobbolink]

99. "We're so concerned, we want her rights taken from her."

That would be HILARIOUS if it wasn't so damned scary.

Wadda country....

:grr:

[Trillo]

126. It's not entirely contradictory, when POV is understood.

"It's not anything she did," it's what she didn't do that's at issue. She wasn't a sheep.

"Team members were concerned about her well-being and her safety, and wanted to make sure she wasn't endangering herself." because she didn't follow along with the crowd that accepts store credits or certificates, her well-being and safety were, in fact, threatened with the force the corporation could easily muster.

Hope she, at her age, gets enough out of this, quickly enough, that she never worries about paying any of her bills ever again.

[TrogL]

89. No, she may merely have been an inconvenience

A friend of mine (40 years old) went to the doctor and for some reason, even though the doctor was there, couldn't be seen. Possibly she was late for her appointment or had the wrong time. She was quite ill and became upset and was crying. The nurse threatened to call the police if she didn't leave.

I've told her to change doctors. If not, I'm going with her to the next appointment and they can call the cops on me.

[On the Road]

95. It's Always Difficult to Know What Went On

It does sound like an abuse of the part of Target. Although sometimes if they release a video clip, you can see why someone called the authorities.

[pipi_k]

96. Just wondering...

Did your friend ever make this incident public?

Like by writing to a newspaper or calling a TV station or even posting about it (all with the doctor's name) on a board with large readership?


Because I think that's probably the best way to deal with dickheads in the public sector who think they can push the "little people" around.

In fact, some years ago Mr Pipi was having some discussion with a local bank that was acting in a very sleazy and unprofessional manner...and when he threatened to make their actions public, they gave in and stopped being asshats.


Punish these jerks.

But remember to keep the complaints factual. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, it's not Libel (or Slander) if it's absolutely true.

[Truth4Justice]

162. Boycotting Target now too.

[LostinVA]

3. I worked retail management for a long time and agree with you

Either TARGET has lost it, or there's a part of the story we're not missing. I'd like more info before I decide either way.

Because both of us know how crazy and abusive some customers can be!)

[tannybogus]

10. Here is another link and more about the story.

In the emergency room, they looked her over and sent her home that day. She seemed to be an elderly lady who was upset. From Christina's account, she also seemed to have a good reason.

Target's Fransen says store employees were concerned for her health.

"It's not anything she did," he said. "Team members were concerned about her well-being and her safety, and wanted to make sure she wasn't endangering herself."

Perhaps, so. But this could be one case where three $10 bills would have done a lot more — and done it more cheaply — than an ambulance ride to a hospital.

http://consumerist.com/5036954/target-has-79+year+old-taken-in-for-mental-evaluation-after-she-demanded-cash-refund

[bobbolink]

100. And who gets to pay for that ride?

Why isn't there outrage on a "liberal" forum about MORE erosion of our rights????

[TwilightGardener]

4. The cops were the ones who had her taken in--Target obviously

does not have the authority to do that. The police thought maybe she wasn't in her right mind, after dealing with her. They played it safe. Just giving her her money and sending her on her merry way might have done her a disservice if she had something else going on, health-wise. An almost-80 year old who's behaving in an unusual and unreasonable manner might be suffering from dementia, medication side effects, who knows what.

[Dogtown]

11. In many jurisdictions

a police officer can remand a subject into custody for a 24 hour "observation" period.

It's an unusual call, and requires quite a bit of paperwork to justify it, plus the agreement of the admitting doctor.

Realistically, your ordinary beat-cop isn't going to jump through such hoops unless there's some cause. This sounds like a bit of yellow journalism to me.

[TwilightGardener]

20. Right. People are focused on "why didn't they just give her a refund", and they're

missing the point--there was something about this woman that made the cops think she wasn't rational. She was creating a disturbance, wouldn't agree to store policy, etc. From personal experience in nursing and from having relatives with Alzheimer's and strokes, it's not some "cute little stubborn old-lady" thing, it's potentially cause for concern when the elderly behave this way--just placating them isn't the point, there may be some health or safety issues at stake for this woman. Besides, if this were a young man refusing to leave, nobody here would bat an eyelash about the cops being called, because he would be seen as trespassing. You don't have a RIGHT to be in a store. They can and will throw you out on your ass if the police agree you're creating a disturbance.

[tannybogus]

25. Oooooooooooooookaaaaaaaaay?

When I get old and cranky, I'm going to be taken for evaluation because I'm old and cranky.

See post #20. I know people can be disruptive, abusive, etc. Unless she was truly out of

control, I don't see taking her to the hospital. In the second link the Target people say, "It's not anything

she did." Arrest her. she called the cops. I still haven't read enough to see where she should have been

taken to the hospital.

[TwilightGardener]

29. Your bizarre condescension to me aside, you weren't there, you don't

know the full story--just reading an article written by some columnist hack with an angle to push isn't enough to declare wrongdoing here. Sounds like the police played it safe with this lady, in case she had some underlying health problem. That's my opinion.

[tannybogus]

35. I agree with you.

About 2 things. It was bizarre condescension and I apologize. I have

also said that I don't know who is right or wrong. I don't see enough in the story to jump

either way. In the second link, the Target employee said it wasn't anything she did.

that just seems contradictory.

[TwilightGardener]

36. S'okay.

:pals:

[Growler]

54. she got lucky!

She should be thankful the cops didn't punch her in the head, then taz her when she was down.

[JeanGrey]

41. She wasn't behaving in a "unusual manner". SHE WANTED

her money. There is nothing "mental" about it.

[TwilightGardener]

44. I've been refused a refund before, due to store policy. I didn't

make a scene, I didn't refuse to leave, I didn't call the police. I accepted store credit. That's what most rational people do.

[BuelahWitch]

151. Fuck store policy

If they want to maintain good public relations AND get more of the shrinking consumer dollar they'll learn to treat their customers better. Maybe she wanted to spend that $30 somewhere else. At any rate, she'll never spend another dime at Target and I don't know if I will either.

[Hekate]

161. The time I accepted store credit it turned out to have an expiration date...

This was for a store I may not enter for months at a time. It meant I had to come back and make sure I found some random item(s) so as not to lose my money entirely.

By the way, I did have my receipt. I simply wanted to return a book past the one-week deadline for returns at my local independent bookseller. That experience and one other where I wanted to return a couple of books that turned out not to be suitable gifts -- making sure I hustled in there before the week was up -- where the owner basically treated me like I was trying to put something over on her, have made me very cautious about shopping there at all.

This bookstore is out of my way to begin with, and Costco is way cheaper for bestsellers. No doubt because of their sheer volume, Costco has no difficulty at all accepting my returns. It means I can make a snap decision when I am in a hurry and then examine the item at home before making my final decision. With my LIBS, on the other hand, I try not to go in there at all if I don't have the time to thoroughly consider my purchase. I will patronize her for special books that I already know the title of, have read the reviews of, and so on -- things Costco is unlikely to carry. I will do special orders with that store, and they are still very accommodating about that service.

But my past unpleasant experiences mean I spend less money in that store. Store credit for someone who has a receipt and an unused item? That's just wrong.

Hekate

[JeanGrey]

184. Why? I made a scene at Target and glad I did.

[Codeine]

56. Actually, you have no idea

how she was acting. If the police hospitalized her rather than simply arresting her or escorting her off the property something was clearly up.

[JeanGrey]

193. Oh really? And we know how much judgment the police

always have, don't we?

[avaistheone1]

139. When you are not doing what corporate earth wants you should be arrested

and sent for a mental evaluation. Especially if you are an older person. My, my how has this person not learned to conform after all these years? :sarcasm:

[Growler]

53. She's lucky the police didn't taz her.

She should be thankful the cops didn't punch her in the head, then taz her when she was down.

[file83]

156. "Don't taz me, sonny!"

[madeline_con]

154. Except there was nothing unusual in her manner.

Wanting one's money back is not unusual. She's probably on a fixed income, and needed the money she spent back to use to shop elsewhere. She didn't want store credit or a lot of bullshit.

[Sanctified]

6. Ok after reading the article I see where the problem is, she wrote a check.

A lot of businesses will not refund a check in cash and in Targets case they most likely have a policy in place not to refund checks since they would have to check their bank statements on their end to verify a check cleared before refunding, although they could do it at the corporate level and mail a check to the lady.

When I worked for a hotel as a kid we never refunded checks for cash, if someone wanted their money back from a check we would have our accounting department verify a check cleared and then mail the person a check. It was just a method of keeping people from writing bad checks and then getting cash for drugs.

[sunnystarr]

13. Don't assume it was a check...

Many retailers in some areas will not give refunds even when you pay cash. They only give a store credit. If they do give refunds and you wrote a check for the merchandise the store will tell you that the check must clear first and have you come back after it's cleared. That's why a store's return policy should be checked first.

[Sanctified]

18. I am not assuming, the article states it was a check.

"Target had the proceeds from her check, Christina had her receipt and bank records showing her money had been withdrawn. She wanted her $30 back."

I have received cash refunds from Target in the past so I believe they do have a cash refund policy for cash.

[Th1onein]

27. They tried to do this to my son one time, when he paid in cash.

He brought me with him back to the store and I raised holy hell. They gave me CASH back. I wasn't taken in for "mental evaluation," but of course, I was only in my thirties at the time.

When you pay CASH, you should get CASH back.

[JeanGrey]

42. Nonsense - if she had a receipt they needed to give her

her money. Target sucks. The pull this shit all the time. I had a horrible time with them a few christmas past. Rude as hell.

[Sanctified]

50. It's not nonsense, the store has no idea if the check cleared.

They can't give someone cash just because the person wrote a check, the store can verify the check cleared then refund the money but to do that they most likely have to go through their corporate accounting department and they would not have been able to give the money right there.

Writing a check and asking for a cash refund is a common scam and one most stores have policies in place to protect themselves from.

[tammywammy]

59. Exactly.

When one of my customers returns something they paid for with a check, I hold the refund for 10 days after the original check was sent to the bank. Then they can get their refund.

This is standard policy and with a large company like Target, it's easy to see why they won't refund cash for a purchase with a check. Too many people will write bad checks, return the goods the next day and get cash back. :shrug:

Plus, Target's return policy is clearly visible in the store and on your receipt.

[JeanGrey]

182. They can find out if they want. This is bs.

[Codeine]

194. There is a transition period

after you deposit the check but before it gets processed by the bank. This can be a few days.

[Codeine]

57. Stores aren't obligated to do that.

Some won't make refunds or exchanges at all.

[JeanGrey]

183. And they won't last long.

[theboss]

87. If she paid in a check, Target has to know that the check cleared

Otherwise, they would be inviting the easiest check scam in the world.

I steal a checkbook. Write a check for merchandise. Return the merchandise. Get back cash. By the time the check clears or is rejected, I am in another state.

[Enrique]

7. story seems to display a backwards attitude toward mental health

"crazy", "have her head examined".

[book_worm]

8. Actually Target didn't have her taken in for mental eval, the police did

but it does seem stupid. Just give her $30 in cash.

[mikelgb]

9. they probably wanted to arrest her ass

but opted for the stretcher to avoid too much negative publicity...

but to their chagrin....

[WhollyHeretic]

21. Uh...yeah. Target doesn't decide that. The police did. Where does it say Target had anything

to do with that?

[tannybogus]

30. Here's another version in this link.

I pointed out that I was questioning that Target could do that. If the cops did take her on their Target's,

they would be in trouble I think.

[JeanGrey]

43. It SAID the store employees "were worried for her health".

ROTFLMAO Yep ask for YOUR money and get locked up.

[Odin2005]

102. Like how the USSR locked up dissidents by claiming they were schizophrenic.

The Soviets made up a totally fake type of Schizophrenia to label dissidents with.

It's a sure best that the Coporatists would invent similar fake mental illnesses to apply to us if they could

[Codeine]

195. We're comparing Target to Stalinists now?

:crazy:

[undeterred]

12. She stood up to a corporation. Of course she's crazy.

[ellie]

14. That reminds me of a Simpsons

episode where Mr. Burns was institutionalized after visiting the grocery store and becoming confused over the difference in pronunciation between "catsup" and "ketchup."

[HereSince1628]

15. Yet another case where standing up for yourself=creating a disturbance

And the police always care about disturbances.

Getting the disturbing individual stuck with an involuntary hospital and ambulance bill strikes me a new way to apply non-judicial punishment. I never read of that before.

[DustyJoe]

58. Bill

The city will have to pay the bill, it was involuntary.

[Kire]

16. oh good

they're building a target about two miles from me, now

I can't wait until it opens in October.

I'm also pleased to see that it is going up in a very high traffic area, and nothing is being done to improve the road.

:sarcasm:

[NYC Liberal]

17. How did they detain her with tasering her?

:sarcasm:

[unblock]

19. to forcibly take someone for an evaluation, they must be a physical threat to themselves or others

as long as whatever she did was disruptive, argumentative, bad for business, trespassing, etc., the worst they can do is arrest her.

granted that every state has their own laws on the matter, but by and large, you have to be a clear physical threat to yourself or others to be taken for an evaluation against your will.

i know because my brother is mentally ill and we tried for ages to get an official diagnosis for him. eventually we were able to do it with his consent, but that was a mission that took an awful lot of careful planning and execution. even with a diagnosis in hand, the state would do nothing to help him until he finally did something that was recognized as a threat to others.

[Mabus]

37. You're right

The times (yes, that was plural) that my mentally ill stepdaughter has had encounters with the police and far outweigh the number of times that she's been admitted for a psych evaluation. Off the top of my head, I'd say that she's had the cops called on her or was stopped by them because of erratic behavior about seven times. The only time she was taken in for a psych eval was when she swung at a cop. Even then, the cops that were called on her, one of whom she took a swing at, waited for some sort of confirmation by another police offical (this was in OKC) who came out to the scene and made the call for her to be hospitalized.

In most places it is not an easy thing to get the police to commit someone. There had to have been something else. They do not take people in for psych evals unless a determination has been made that the person is an imminent danger to themselves and/or others.

I'd assume that Target has advised its employees to make a standardized "we were concerned for her health and well-being" statement to limit any liability they have in this matter. They sure don't want employees going on the public record as saying anything inflammatory until they can get their lawyers and others to check the store tapes.

[nykym]

22. When I saw this post it reminded me of of a search I did once

about getting refunds. This is an excerpt from the NY State BBB

"There is no law that requires any retail merchant to have a specific refund, credit or exchange policy. In New York State, refund policies can range from "100% money back guarantees" to "no refunds or exchanges" whatsoever".

It does go on stating different scenarios but essentially once an item is bought it is yours unless defective. Stores are not required to give refunds but do so to keep customers satisfied. It's obvious that this Target store was not interested in this. I would also venture to say that the manager in question is either gone or getting retrained for a job more fitting something janitorial maybe.

[crikkett]

23. Huh. Be grateful they didn't taze her.

As it is she's going to be assessed for the arrest, ambulance and medical evaluation.

[SheilaT]

24. It does feel as if something is missing from the article.

It would be interesting to know if any customers who witnessed what happened are available for comment.

Also, once the stretcher was brought it, it's a little hard to imagine she climbed up on it willingly.

[progressoid]

26. Misleading title.

It wasn't Target, the corporation, but an idiotic employee of Target (and a cop or two) that had her taken away. It's not like the manager called corporate hdqrtrs and they told him to do it.

[BrklynLiberal]

31. I hope she gts a good lawyer.

[nichomachus]

32. It's fairly obvious what the problem was

She inconvenienced a corporation -- one of the entities that rule the country. If you do that, you are -- ipso facto -- mentally ill.

People will learn. You do what the corporations tell you, or else.

This worked for the Soviet Union (which we have become) for years. Anyone who objects is mentally ill.

[Dreamer Tatum]

39. Did you read the article, or just the misleading title?

Target can't do shit other than to ask someone to leave.

It's possible that just mayyyyyyyyybe this woman's entire life story WASN'T distilled into this one
little article, and that there is some context missing somewhere.

Or, perhaps not. It's entirely possible that someone in the Target-Law Enforcement complex saw a threat
to, oh, fifteen cents of profitability, so they spent $100 in some cop's time to hassle her. Yeah, that's
probably it. :eyes:

[MilesColtrane]

45. Refund policies are posted at the point of sale at almost all retail stores.

Just because she didn't bother to read the return policy doesn't mean she had the right to demand cash back, much less the right to remain on the property IF she was asked to leave.

If she has a beef, she should sue the police, because they are the only ones that could have forced her to be carted away in an ambulance.

[nichomachus]

74. Target return policy

Target Stores Return Policy

We will issue a full refund for most items returned within 90 days in new condition, with the original receipt, packaging and accessories.

[tammywammy]

81. And there's this part

"Any purchase made by check may be refunded as a merchandise voucher."


Her purchase was with a check. :shrug:

[nichomachus]

108. I will check myself into a mental hospital immediately

Apparently, anyone who can't read the fine print is arguably crazy.

There will be a quiz later on the fine points of your credit card "contracts." Anyone who gets lower than 75 will be evaluated for mental illness.

[Swamp Rat]

113. I'll need an extra large straight jacket, and 100% cotton, please.

[tammywammy]

117. Ahh, yes it's so difficult to look at the receipt

She still had her receipt, is what the story says. I completely understand why a company won't give cash back on a check purchase.

And when I've returned things at Target, there's a huge sign that says the policy.

I don't have credit cards, so I have no idea what those contract say.

[LostinVA]

119. People lie and people steal ALL THE TIME

Working retail management really disillusioned. I saw people take stuff off the shelves, stuff it into one of our bags,, and head for the register, people use "counter checks" to want to pay for things, etc. And, MOST of these scammers weren't scuzzy: they were often well-dressed, well-mannered, sometimes elderly, sometimes saying they were a minister, etc.

Target DOES have a sucky return policy, but I understand why.

[tammywammy]

135. Yep

I learned when I worked customer service at an amusement park. People that were in the park all day until an hour before closing demanding a refund. :eyes:

[madeline_con]

155. I think that's bullshit because Target gets the cash.

Just not the day the check's written, so it represents cash.

[hedgehog]

34. Something is wrong with this story. Sometimes it's not what you say, it's how you say it.

She could very well have appeared confused to the cops. I ran into a lady one time asking directions at a local gas station. She was refined, well dressed. perfectly coiffed. I paid for my gas and went back to my car, and it was only then that things started to click for me. She came out to her car and I asked her a few questions to make sure she knew where she was going. It didn't take long to realize that while she knew the original road, she was totally unfamiliar with roads that had been put in 30 and 20 years ago. Was she having a mini-stroke? Was she in early stage Alzheimer's? Fortunately, we were able to flag some cops who were nearby so they could get her to safety. Every year or so around here it seems we have a sad case in which an elderly person sets off to drive to the store, gets lost and is found dead or dying parked carefully under a tree or next to a farm field 300 miles away after running out of gas.

One aspect left out in the newspaper story - where was this woman's daughter in all this? Supposedly she was in the car waiting for her mother to get the refund.

[SoCalDem]

38. When generations clash..

Someone her age, no doubt remembers when a store gave you your money back when you returned something.

When a person paid cash for something, and then returned it, their money was refunded.

If you wrote a check, people understood that, once it was deposited, you could not get your money back until the store knew the check had cleared, but after a phone call to the bank , stores would refund it if the check had cleared.

Stores used to be locally owned/operated, and individual managers/owners valued the patronage, so they did not want a pissed off ex-customer running around.

Fast-forward to now..

Stores are corporate "children", and must follow the policies set from above.. Managers are often not very likely to "adjust" or deviate from policy.. They do not want to have to explain things with their reports they must send to corporate.. Probably, most just want to hit their projections, keep their costs down, and remain as invisible as possible..

An angry customer demanding that they change their policy, is the last thing they want.. Bending to her demands, only opens the door for others to ask, as well..

Perhaps she needed that $30 cash, but if she spent her last $30 on shirts, that's another issue entirely.

Chances are, she could easily have found something she needed, and could have used that "store credit", but she insisted on cash..and that's just not the policy..

I have known many older folks who are used to getting their way, and when they do not....well..let's just say it's not a pretty sight..

Store employees are probably told to follow policy faithfully, and if a customer gets belligerent, to "call the manager".. It sounds like the 911 call stepped things up too many notches, to back away from.. Once the police get involved, it's gone too far for anyone to be satisfied with any outcome..

[Bobbie Jo]

55. Exactly...good explanation. nt

[BlooInBloo]

159. That's what it sounds like to me.

[PVnRT]

165. That seems very logical

[JeanGrey]

40. Target is batshit crazy. I cannot stand them and wouldn't

spend a dime in their store if I had to. They are mean and nasty, especially with returns, I've experienced it.

Jerks.

[CoffeeCat]

48. Target has an awful return policy...

...and many people are dissatisfied with it.

You can't return anything and get your money back, unless you show them
identification, give them your name, addy and phone, etc.

They're known for their Stalinesque return policies. The fact that they
would rather have this woman hauled off for a mental evaluation, rather than peacefully
resolve this and give the woman her money back--clearly demonstrates a flaw
in Target's system.

There is no report of this woman being combative or doing anything bad. She just
wanted her money back! Target should have given it to her.

Idiots.

[JeanGrey]

196. Try returning a gift even with a receipt. If someone bought you

a toaster, I was told you have to have "another small appliance".

These people are shit. I wouldn't shop there if it were the last store left.

[tannybogus]

46. I have called the police twice when working retail.

That's in 25 years. Both times were because the customers were drunk and abusive. They would not leave the store.

One time I was working alone at the front register when this big, nasty man came up and started screaming at me at

the top of his lungs. I was the only one there so I put a confused expression on my face and began looking frantically

everywhere behind the counter. I pulled open drawers, opened magazines, and looked in every nook and cranny. He shut up because

now I think he thought I was crazy and was wary of me. He asked what I was doing. I told him I was looking to see who he was

talking to because he wasn't talking to me. I said if he could continue in a decent manner I might be able to hear him and fix the problem.

It worked. I don't remember what he wanted, but it wasn't worth the durm and strang. In addition, in the places I worked, if

a customer was that worked up, they were usually given the money. I know what a policy may say, but once the a certain point was

reached, it wasn't worth it. :popcorn:

[tammywammy]

49. I've held the phone up and turned it on in front of a customer

Telling the a**hole to get out of the store or I'm calling the cops. Thankfully he just left and though he was a regular customer, stopped coming in (I think he was really embarrassed by how he was acting in retrospect, he started coming back after 6 months or so and was always extra nice).

[tannybogus]

52. I was working in a sporting goods store one time.

I happened to be at the hunting counter. This man came in and wanted to look at a rifle. After I gave it to him,

he began aiming it around the store. I asked him please not to do that, and to aim it at the back wall if he needed to.

He got very angry and said he was going to call the president of the company. I told him that was a good idea because

we all could have a refresher course in gun safety. I didn't think it was loaded, but who knows what an employee may

have done "as a joke." :hide:

[ButterflyBlood]

47. I'm a bit sympathetic to Target here

I work tech support and frequently get calls by people whining about things on their iPhones and demand things I can't set up. Of course I've never called the police due it being over the phone, but it's not fun, nor is it fun to have to discuss this thing with a guy who threatens to sue Apple unless he gets a full refund on his iPhone (OK it sounds funny now, but not at the time.)

So maybe this woman had issues with Target's policies. Fine. But she's not going to change that by harassing some very underpaid employees who can't change it anymore than she can. People all too often use bottom rung employees as the scapegoat for their frustration with a company, which is hardly fair.

Speaking of which, no one here was present at the situation. Some things don't get summarized into words very well. I know exactly how abusive angry customers can be over the phone, and acting that way in real life would never be considered acceptable. Over the phone of course we have a way out, if a customer is particularly abusive we may hang up. But that's not an option here, so I don't see whatever course can be taken. And I've talked to people who are probably in need of a mental evaulation too.

[avaistheone1]

51. B.S. If this old lady did someting wrong

Target would only be too happy to tell us.

The only one who was abusive in this case was Target and their employees. Frequently low rung employees have poor pay, poor attitudes and poor training. In this Target drama it all shows.

[MilesColtrane]

60. There's no evidence that the employees were abusive towards her,

unless you consider asking her to leave the store (which it is not clear that they did) abuse.

She's the one who called the cops.

[avaistheone1]

103. She called the cops because the manager threatened he would call the cops.

Therefore, I call Target not a pleasant place to shop, with a shit return policy.

[MilesColtrane]

105. I suspect you've never worked retail.

[avaistheone1]

138. Your assumption is wrong.

This is not how customers should be treated especially the elderly.

I know plenty about retail. I worked retail during high school and college. I found most customers to be respectful and good people.


btw This thread sounds like it is under control of the freepers. How sad.

[tammywammy]

141. How long ago was that?

Because it sure as hell isn't all peaches and cream to work retail anymore.

[LostinVA]

167. I also think it must have been in Stepford, too

Because I know alot of people who have/are worked retail and/or waited tables, and "respectful" and "courteous" are not words they'd use to describe at least 50% of the customers. And, of the other 50%, most are just there instead of being courteous (I'm including talking on their cell when you're waiting on them -- unless it's an emergency, it is RUDE AND DISRESPECTFUL!).

[LostinVA]

109. I can see YOU'VE never worked retail

The American consumer population is full of rude, crazy, abusive, scary liars. I never knew how many violent people and liars there were until I worked retail management. It's astonishing. And, I managed a higher-end bookstore. My employees were, for the most part, extremely good, smart workers.

Your post is ignorant and condescending. I bet you're a real treat to wait on.

[Withywindle]

62. Wait a minute - she called 911 because of an argument with a store manager?

Don't a lot of places have laws against making frivolous 911 calls? Sure, you can be taken in for that. As you should -- 911 operators need to be clear to receive REAL emergency calls.

Wasn't there a case just a few weeks back where some guy called 911 because a Subway got his sandwich order wrong and then gave him attitude about it? He was arrested, and nobody defended him, as I recall.

[Patiod]

177. That was my first thought when I read the story

What the hell was she doing calling 9-1-1?

If you don't like how you're treated in a store, you don't cause a scene, you ask for the manager, and if you don't get satisfaction from her or him, you go home and contact the company, contact your local newspaper, whatever.

[dysfunctional press]

185. the problem is- he had/has testicles

which generally seems to put him in the wrong in the minds of many people here.

[Fox Mulder]

63. Why didn't they just give her back her fucking money?

There was no need for Target to act this way. :grr:

[JVS]

82. The sweet sweet profits. That's why.

[Fox Mulder]

93. Exactly.

[tammywammy]

64. This whole headline is bogus

Target didn't call 911, she did. Target didn't have her taken in for psych evaluation, the cops did.

The only thing that Target did was offer her store credit and not cash back.

[tannybogus]

70. The manager threatened to call the cops.

That was like pouring gasoline on a fire apparently.

He upped the ante a little, and she called him on it.

Then she called the cops and upped it a lot! He probably

thought he would scare her.

[tammywammy]

73. I've threatened to call the cops on unruly customers before

Personally myself, I've held up the phone and told someone to leave or I'd call the cops. And at the place I work now, I've seen us call the cops on super irate customers.

Not once has calling the cops on someone come first, the customer puts you at that point.

[tannybogus]

77. I know.

I'm not saying he shouldn't have because I'm not sure what was going on.

The Target person did say however, "It wasn't anything she did." I'm just pointing

out that he should have been prepared to call the cops if he was just using it as a threat.

That was when things got waaaaaaaay out of control. Nobody ended up looking good in this - the woman,

Target or the cops.

[JVS]

84. I've called the cops on people before too. The cops came and removed them.

They prefer that people doing business call them rather than resorting to force.

[avaistheone1]

92. True. The Target manager threatened her by first saying he would call the cops.

So good on the old lady for calling him on it.

Target handled this situation in a very tacky manner. They are definitely not models of professional retail.

[LostinVA]

168. I've called the cops on peopel who refused to leave, too

Or who wouldn't calm down. But, SHE'S the one who called 911 over a REFUND.

[Cleita]

65. Probably because of her age they could get away with getting her mentally

evaluated, but I certainly think they were in violation of her rights. I never have had a problem returning stuff to Target or any other of the big box stores. It seems the manager there is full of baloney.

[tammywammy]

66. But Target didn't send her in for a psych evaluation

The police officer did. Target didn't even call 911 the woman did herself.

[Cleita]

71. Yes, but the police were making an assumption because of her age. n/t

[tammywammy]

72. Did you read the article?

"After her auto accident, she received therapy for her injuries and for traumatic stress, too. When she mentioned these things at Target, she was interpreted to be saying she could blow at any moment. What she was trying to say, she explains, is that she knows how to handle herself in a stressful situation."

[Cleita]

75. Well, I don't know why you want to argue about this.

It apparently has to do with her age and misinterpretations by people who aren't qualified to jump to conclusions. They should have given her the refund and there would have been no problem. I return clothes all the time that don't fit. I don't want to use their fitting rooms to try stuff on so I do it at home and return what I can't wear. No one gives me any grief over it as long as I have the receipt.

[tammywammy]

78. I'm not arguing

You're assuming it was because of her age. I do not assume that. I've been in the situtation where you threaten to or do call the cops on a customer.


Target's return policy is that purchases made with a check will be given store credit. :shrug:

[Cleita]

86. It is? I've written a check and got a refund.

:shrug: Well, you get the last word if that's what you want.

[baldguy]

67. Did the store manager suffer the same fate?

[ButterflyBlood]

76. Why should he?

He had nothing to do with the calling of the cops and probably wasn't even aware of her presence until after they came.

[tannybogus]

79. No

The manager said he was going to call the cops. Then it was really FUBAR.

[baldguy]

88. I dunno. A Customer Service professional not being able to handle a Customer Service issue?

And why did the cops treat the two partys in a civil dispute in a grossly unequal fashion? Unless there's an obvious crime being committed, they should be neutral.

Is it now a crime to ask a store for a refund?

[ButterflyBlood]

152. It's not a crime in itself

However behavior associated with it such as threats or antisocial screaming can be considered disorderly conduct.

This case is not simply the woman walks up, asks for a refund, and then the manager calls up some jackbooted thugs to tackle and taze her. People are greatly oversimplifying and misrepresenting it.

[baldguy]

164. "One mild oath" is not the same as "antisocial screaming".

Being assertive is not the same as being threatening. Standing up to the corporatocracy does not mean you're crazy.

I'm sure she was being a pain in the ass for the manager - with some justification. I'm sure she made a scene in the store. THAT IS NOT A CRIME. The solution would have been to give her the damn $30 and tell her never to come back. But, no. The dickless wonder manager Mr Nasty lacked either the authority or imagination do to the right thing. Instead he had to threaten a sick, harmless 79-yr old lady arrest.

"Team members were concerned about her well-being and her safety, and wanted to make sure she wasn't endangering herself." How very Big Brother-ish of them. Spare me from the kindness & compassion of corporations.

[LostinVA]

174. Making a scene in a store IS a crime, especially when you refuse to leave

[baldguy]

175. If you came to my house & I stole your money *I'D* be arrested for theft.

But if you come into my big box corporate store and I steal your money, I can have you hauled away in chains for trespassing.

Depends on your definition of "crime" I guess.

[ButterflyBlood]

179. You don't waive story policy for someone throwing a fit

Whether you disagree with that store policy is beside the point. Don't like it, don't shop there. I deal with this all the time in my job. Every single person who calls wants me to make them the exception even at the risk of losing my job.

Once the store asks you to leave, if you remain, you are trespassing and committing a crime.

[baldguy]

186. "Store policy" isn't the Word Of God.

And good companies give their managers discretion on how & when it's applied.

Bad companies don't. They say that every person that comes in contact with the company at any level should bow to the companies' will, give up all their rights, take on all the responsibilities, and not be allowed to act in their own interest in any way. People - both employees and customers - should just accept being treated like shit and act like the low-class drones they obviously are - OR ELSE. Unfortunately for these companies there are too many people - like Ms Brown - who refuse to be treated like drones.

If you have "every single person" who calls you ask you to ignore the policy your corporate masters have handed down from on high & make an exception for them, then maybe it's the policy that's unfair & in need of change. It's not a sign of insanity, or mental & emotional deficiency when people question such a policy. And they should not be institutionalized or arrested for "disorderly conduct" or "trespassing" when they do.

[JVS]

80. STORE CREDIT ONLY! DO NOT MAKE ME TAZE YOU!!!

[theboss]

83. So...she was trespassing

Who calls the police over a refund?

[tammywammy]

85. She does apparently

[theboss]

90. This is that woman who called 911 over Burger King refusing to give her the correct sandwich

That's kookoo bananas.

[Wizard777]

104. What about the cop that arrested a Burger King cook for "poisoning" his burger with salt?

I'm not talking salts of potasium cyanide. I'm talking table salt. I never did hear anything about the disposition of the case. The name of the girl arrested was Kendra Bull. I'll have to check it out.

[tannybogus]

91. Delete

[FunkyLeprechaun]

94. That's weird

I used to buy things at Target then try things on at home. If I didn't like them or they ended up not fitting me, I'd bring them back without a problem.

[otherlander]

97. First of all

the cops were way out of line to have her taken away for an examination like that when she wasn't being violent towards anyone.

Second of all, this is crappy journalism.

[TwixVoy]

101. Are you kidding?

She called 911 over a refund at Target. She called an emergency number over a refund. That in and of its self says "unstable" to me. "911 what is your emergency" "Yes I am at target and they won't give me a refund" You are telling me that doesn't sound a little unstable to you?

Secondly, she is lucky she wasn't arrested. In some parts of the country calling an emergency number for something that isn't an emergency is a crime.

Thirdly, she sounds exactly like a person who believes the world revolves around her. Did she care she was taking a 911 operators time who potentially could have been dealing with a REAL emergency? Did she care she could have been taking away precious seconds that could have saved someones life who was calling in a serious issue? No. She called an emergency number like a spoiled 5 year old who didn't get his way because the world revolves around her.

I have had to call 911 before and be put on hold when I had a serious emergency. I really wish the cops filed charges against her.

[Matariki]

111. She *pre-empted* the store calling the police

which they threatened to do.

[TwixVoy]

112. Which is unstable

it is not logical. How does that even matter?

"911 what is your emergency" "Yes I am at a target store and they just threatened to call the police on me, so I am calling you first" WTF???

Again 911 isn't to play ten year old level games. You call 911, it had better be a damn good reason.

And just to clarify the policy at target is NOT to do a cash refund on a check payment UNTIL the check CLEARS. Once the check clears they will return cash if you want. That is a completely reasonable policy.

[Matariki]

115. And the article says the woman had proof the check cleared.

So what's your point?

[TwixVoy]

118. Right a bank statement

and how exactly is the service desk employee supposed to know the $30 deduction on the statement is ACTUALLY the $30 check she wrote? Could it not easily have been a $30 check she wrote to pay her phone bill or anything else?

I have never ever seen a bank statement that shows you WHO a check was written to, or WHEN it was written. Can you please tell me of a bank that prints statements that include this information? All it will show is that a $30 check caused a $30 deduction from your account. It doesn't tell you WHO or WHEN that check was made out to.

The computer system at target lets the service desk employee do a cash refund once the target system confirms it has in fact cleared. Until the computer says it has actually cleared there is no way to know for sure... especially from a bank statement.

[Matariki]

123. And if indeed it was the check to Target

it was certainly more than a few days since she wrote it, for it to show up on her bank statement. They could have looked it up. The check number was certainly on the statement. That would have taken less time (and caused less negative publicity for the store) than calling the police.

What *probably* happened was the clerk was too lazy or cranky or stubborn to actually look it up. Some people like to exert the tiny bit of petty power they think they have. The threat of calling the police on a 79 year old woman makes me think this was probably the case here.

[TwixVoy]

125. HOW would the clerk look it up

Tell me HOW? The registers target uses have no such ability to search through targets bank accounts.

Are you telling me that low level employee has access to targets bank account?

[Matariki]

128. Tell me how they would EVER know a check cleared then?

Since you're the one saying all she had to do was wait a couple days.

[TwixVoy]

130. I have worked at target before

It's really very simple.

The registers use a VERY user friendly and simple, basic software. When you try to run a return for something bought on a check the register connects to targets central servers (Automatically and behind the scenes) to see if the check cleared. At which point the employee attempting to do the return gets a message saying they can do a cash return or not. That is ALL the information the employee gets. It automatically checks to see if it has cleared, and they are told if they can do it or not.

There is no function to start searching through bank records manually to see if something has cleared. If the register says cash can NOT be returned that is all the information the employee gets, and the explanation the register gives him. The is no other way for the employee to "check" to see if it cleared.

Once it actually clears the register will tell him it's OK to refund cash and give him the option to do so - automatically.

[Matariki]

134. Okay, fair enough

I haven't worked in retail since the computer age began, LOL

[tannybogus]

166. Target has a system that withdraws funds quickly - her $30 was gone the next day

Target spokesman Dave Fransen says Target's return policy doesn't allow cash refunds for items purchased by personal check until seven days go by, allowing checks to clear the bank. But Target is introducing new technology that allows electronic transfer of check funds, which appears to be what happened to Christina: Her money was withdrawn from her bank account the day after her purchase.

http://www.startribune.com/local/26936624.html?page=1&c=y

[Fumesucker]

120. As has been mentioned multiple times on the thread..

The STORE MANAGER was the first to threaten calling the cops.

Would you have criticized the manager for calling 911 in a "non emergency" situation?

Keep in mind the Target employees have stated the woman did nothing wrong.

[tammywammy]

136. The manager had the right

The manager had an irate customer that was asked to leave the store refusing to leave, at that point the customer is trespassing. The woman called to complain because she couldn't get a cash refund as opposed to a store credit. There's a difference.

[Fumesucker]

143. As has been mentioned multiple times now..

The Target employees said the woman did nothing wrong.

[tammywammy]

Nothing wrong to get a psych evaluation

She was asked to leave and when she said she wasn't was told by the manager that she was trespassing.

[Sanctified]

137. Calling the cops and calling 911 or two different things.

If my neighbor is drunk pissing in my front lawn I call my local police department, if he starts beating his wife I call 911.

[Matariki]

107. Sent them an email

http://www.startribune.com/local/26936624.html?page=2&c=y

Oh, really? Think I won't shop at Target anymore. At least until this woman is issued an apology and her shirts exchanged.

What's next - tasering your customers like Best Buy? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22361567/)

Don't know who reads their emails, so it's probably spitting in the wind - but I invite you all to do the same. This kind of crap had GOT to stop. We're walking down a dangerous road, as a society.

[TwixVoy]

110. Oh for the love of god

she brought it on her self calling an emergency number over a return. 911 is NOT your personal tantrum line. If I was the 911 operator taking a call from someone upset over not getting a $30 return I would likely radio and warn the officers being sent over they are potentially dealing with someone who is unstable.

If you are calling an emergency number for anything OTHER than an emergency you should expect problems.

[Matariki]

114. And the police aren't the private army of corporations.

The store was calling the police anyway. The woman simply refused to be threatened by them and called first.

[TwixVoy]

116. Again

that doesn't justify her calling an emergency number for something that wasn't an emergency.

Just because someone else is going to do something wrong doesn't mean that makes it ok for YOU to do it.

The policy on check returns at target is they will give you cash AFTER your check clears. More than likely all she had to do was wait until that happened, (probably 2-3 days), and she could have walked out with cash. Likely she flipped out on hearing that. Anyone who has ever done a return on a check knows you are NOT going to get cash back until the check clears. That is common sense.

Also the policy on check refunds is posted. If she didn't want to have to wait 2 or 3 more days for a cash refund no one forced her to pay by check.

[Matariki]

121. My actual point is that the trend of stores calling police because a customer is upset

is NOT a good trend. The police showing up and tasering people or hauling them off to a mental hospital (at the person's expense no less) is NOT a good trend.

You can make all the rationalizations you want, but I refuse to shop in stores that do things like this. Just like I refuse to shop in stores that 'proudly' post notices of drug testing their employees at the entrance to the store. I don't like the erosions of privacy and liberty that are happening in our society. Those are my principles and I'm sticking to them.

It very well may be that the woman was wrong to expect cash back, even though she apparently brought proof the check cleared. That doesn't justify handling the situation by calling the police and hauling her off to a mental hospital.

[TwixVoy]

122. With people shooting other people

over stupid crap YES it DOES justify it.

I am retail manager, and if someone comes in and I believe them to be a threat to ANYONE in the building because they are acting emotionally upset and abusive I don't wait around to see if they actually end up doing anything.

If you can NOT act like a civilized human being in public don't expect people to wait around to see if you are going to do anything to hurt anyone. If you are going to yell and scream at people and act emotionally unhindged then don't expect people to feel comfortable around you. If you can not act like a civilized adult over a $30 return, then yes that might be a sign something isn't quite right in your mind.

Now were the people in this scenario likely to REALLY call the police? PROBABLY NOT. A mature rational adult (which this lady should be at her age) should have the common sense to realize this, and NOT choose to escalate the situation more by doing the exact thing you should know they aren't really going to do.

Likely they would have let her throw her tantrum and leave. She is the one who chose to escalate the situation by actually calling 911 over a return.

[Fumesucker]

124. But you didn't answer my question...

Would you have criticized the store manager for calling 911 in this situation?

Keep in mind once again that according to the employees at Target, the lady did nothing wrong to justify the store manager threatening to call the cops.

[TwixVoy]

127. I have not seen proof

that such a threat was actually even made. Until I see proof I don't believe it even happened.

The only proof we DO have is that a 911 call was made, but from the person who the police felt needed to be mentally evaluated.

And how do we know she did nothing wrong? If she was asked to leave and she didn't that is something wrong. (don't know if that's what happened, but likely) At the point she was asked to leave and she did not she was tresspassing.

[Matariki]

129. You haven't seen 'proof' of a lot of other things you're jumping to conclusions about

[TwixVoy]

131. Yes I have

I worked at target before and know how the return system works. This persons check likely had not actually cleared yet, or it had JUST cleared that day and the system didn't quite update with that information yet. In which case if she had waited another day (at most) the service desk employee would have been able to give cash with no problem.

[Matariki]

132. I meant you jumped to the conclusion that the store manager wasn't *really* going to call the police

In order to support your argument. You assume also that they even bothered to check their system and didn't just refuse to refund her anything but a store merchandise card from the get go.

I suspect that's the case, if her bank statement was actually showing the cleared check. BUT there's no way for me to know either. So I'm going to discontinue this back and forth with you about it.

[tannybogus]

133. Check this link!

"Target's Fransen says store employees were concerned for her health.

"It's not anything she did," he said. "Team members were concerned about her well-being and her safety, and wanted to make sure she wasn't endangering herself.""

http://consumerist.com/5036954/target-has-79+year+old-taken-in-for-mental-evaluation-after-she-demanded-cash-refund

Now unless "Fransen" is a person made up out of whole cloth, somebody said something. I have a healthy

skepticism about the press, but this is some tale to make up and embellish. I can't get a notarized statement.

[DearAbby]

140. I guess you would have to be mentally unstable to demand

a full refund in cash instead of in-store credit? Good lord.

[Miss Chybil]

145. She was probably asked to leave the store. She refused and

was told she could be arrested for trespassing. Instead of taking her to jail, they took her to the hospital.

Calling 911 for a refund is a little rash. I'm sure she was just very frustrated, but the store had the right to ask her to leave. If she still wants her money back, she has the right to go to small claims.

[DaveJ]

150. Not rash, if her intention was to make a point.

She's given me and I hope others another reason not to shop there, like I would willingly shop at any of these big box stores in the first place.

[Miss Chybil]

153. 911 is for emergencies. I was being polite by saying it was "rash."

It was illegal.

[ButterflyBlood]

178. 911 doesn't not exist so you can "make a point"

It's not a personal complaint line.

[DaveJ]

148. Target has a horrible return policy

I returned something there once and was told I could only have credit for the department of the original item. A small piece of furniture I got for Christmas that I didn't need. I never heard of having the make an exchange in the exact same department. Totally ridiculous.

I complained about it and eventually they gave in and let me use the credit in a different department. I guess I was luck I didn't get strapped down for phrasing any sentences incorrectly.

It sucks how the word police will make a determination of one's sanity by one's tone of voice and choice of words.

It's Totalitarianism.

[PVnRT]

169. Christ, that's what passes as totalitarianism now?

Standards have gone completely to shit, I tell ya.

[Xithras]

149. As others said, she probably refused to leave.

Once an employee of a company asks you to leave their property, you are committing a crime if you refuse. The right to enter any business can be revoked by the proprietor at any time. She was asked to leave, she didn't so she was detained. Instead of sending her to jail, they sent her for a psych eval. That's the cops call, not Target's.

As for the gift receipt thing, there are only two circumstances in which they do that. First, if you have no receipt, they'll give you a certificate good for the lowest price they've offered it for in the last year. If your receipt is over 90 days old, they'll give you a certificate for the amount charged. Reading the article, I'd assume this was the latter situation. They don't waive those rules for anybody, including stubborn old ladies.

[Egnever]

157. Great headline to cause shit

But apparently very few read the story.

Way more fun to dump on target I guess.

[entanglement]

158. Isn't that the kind of treatment reserved for breastfeeding at Olive Gardens?

:evilgrin:

[BlooInBloo]

160. Only if you get the fried chicken.

[LostinVA]

171. uh oh

hehehehhehe

[bread_and_roses]

163. Arrest! Institutionalize! Stubborn children, cranky old people? Call the POLICE!

And the police are always right! The "rights" of the "store" trump good sense and fairness. The store can do any goddamn thing it wants - it's PRIVATE PROPERTY, OUR GOD. I despair of my fellow citizens when so many are ready to defend the "rights" of the store to threaten to/call the police on someone simply "not following the rules" and being a good little consumer and doing what she's told. Or that there was a time when stores actually gave you a CHOICE on getting a gift certificate or your $$ back? That used to be the NORM, 'cause it was YOUR $$, for our young 'uns here who have never encountered what once was a standard courtesy. Have we forgotten that there are ways to handle conflict besides calling the police? Like some said above, she's lucky they didn't tazer her, and I'm sure if they had some here would defend that too.

[LostinVA]

170. Just a general statement: being old doesn't mean you can act how you want

MY father-in0law's father is a racist, anti-semitic, MEAN bastard, whose kids and grandkids live in fear of his tongue. I literally hate him, and I know Haruka's mother does, too. He's ALWAYS acted like this, but people know excuse him with,"Well, he's 78-years-old." Sorry, if you say mean personal things to make people in your family AND waiters/cashiers/et al cry, you should be called on it. If you talk about "Jew words," you should be called on it. If you talk about how dangerous educated black men are, you should be called on it. But no one will. I've seen him treat waiters like shit, and because he's old and uses oxygen, he gets away with it. He shou;ldn't -- the cops should be called and his ass should be thrown out of the store or restaurant.

I'm not saying this is who this lady acted, but some of the comments in this thread are excusing her because of her age, and some are saying that the "younger generation" waiting on her are at fault for being mean to elderly people. I've worked with high school and college-aged kids for years, and the huge majority are very respectful of the elderly. The kids that age in Haruka's family are, too. Even to the SOB mentioned above.

Having worked retail management for a big box store, I can tell you that managers don't threaten to call the cops lightly. I's still like to know the ENTIRE story of everyone's actions that day. I'd also like to hear the 911 call.

[Fumesucker]

172. Why did Target employees say that the lady did nothing wrong?

That's what so many seem to be missing on this thread.

[LostinVA]

173. They DIDN'T say that, as has been pointed out to you already

They said she didn't do anything to be given a psych. From what I read inthe very pro-Ms. Brown op/ed, she refused to leave after causing a scene and being asked to leave. There's been a trespassing order signed against her, which stores do NOT do lightly because of lawsuits. The Target employees had NOTHING to do with what the police did, which is what was commented on.

I would like to see an actual news story on this, instead of a feature cum op/ed.

[tannybogus]

176. This is what a Target spokesperson said:

Target's Fransen says store employees were concerned for her health.

"It's not anything she did," he said. "Team members were concerned about her well-being and her safety, and wanted to make sure she wasn't endangering herself."

Perhaps, so. But this could be one case where three $10 bills would have done a lot more — and done it more cheaply — than an ambulance ride to a hospital.

http://consumerist.com/5036954/target-has-79+year+old-taken-in-for-mental-evaluation-after-she-demanded-cash-refund

[LostinVA]

180. Yup, I saw that, but she was doing enough to get trespassed

[tannybogus]

181. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

"Get trespassed"

I'm considering what that crime constitutes.The grammar police have been called. I have emailed the

columnist because I really want to know why she was taken for a mental evaluation. I want to avoid that behavior at all costs.
:yoiks:

[LostinVA]

187. That's when you get a cite barring you from a property

[tannybogus]

188. My bad!

Learned 2 things. A new phrase, and another way to get my foot out of my mouth.

[NashVegas]

189. It's a Shame The Columnist Chose to Leave Out Target's Return Policy

What they did with that old lady is shameful - unless she was demanding something that her receipt or a sign on the wall said doesn't happen.

But we'll never know if those details aren't included with the story, if this woman was horribly mistreated, or if semi-mindless corporate employees did the only thing they could to get out of a situation they didn't have any proper training for.

But hey - this way, it makes for a better story.

[northernlights]

190. the return policy is in the 1st page of the article

the link picks up the article on page 2 of 3 pages.

According to the article, their return policy is a 7 day waiting period for cash refunds in order to allow checks to clear.

However, they now do auto-transfers, so the check cleared and they had her cash the next day, and they knew it.

In essence, by requiring a 7-day waiting period they are giving themselves 6 days of interest at their customer's expense.

This is no accident, nor are many of the requirements around returns. My lifetime experience in corporate amerika is that they do anything they can to make it difficult for you to get your money back, with the expectation that most people will give up, go away, and eat the loss. They don't script decency and common sense into their training programs...just how to goad and bait customers into losing their tempers so they can blame it on the customer. I'm quite serious about this, too. It's how the rethugs and the neocons pull off their shit.

Apparently she asked them to follow the *intent* of their policy, which is to ensure they don't give cash refunds for bad checks, instead of the "letter of the law" which says 7 day waiting period.

Stupid on the Target manager's part. They created the scene and they got bad press as a result. They *knew* her check had cleared and her cash was in their bank, and they *knew* in some number of days the official policy was give the cash refund. Shouldn't have been a deal to bend the rules and give the refund a couple days early. But that's common sense, common decency, good PR...and its not in the script or training.

Stupid on her part, though, to call 911 as she got stuck with the medical bills. She should have tone it down a bit, let them call the cops...and then sue their effing asses off. They admit that "it wasn't anything she did." Their suggestion that they were just concerned about her suggests that they did have something do to with the police strapping her to a stretcher and carting her off. She says she wasn't unruly, just determined to get her money back for shirts that didn't fit. There was a crowd that witnessed the scene.

A heads up for women everywhere. From the time I hit 50, in better health and condition than most 30-somethings, i.q. 155, 4.0 gpa at university in tough program, I've already been experiencing blatant "ageism" in minor and annoying, plus major, life-threatening ways.

It's not fun and I guess it's only going to get worse with time. Great. Just effing great.

[NashVegas]

191. Ah

thanks for pointing out the link.