maybe a class action lawsuit against qvc - Page 4

debic · ‎09-02-2010

@HiLo wrote:
@Alsee wrote:
The shipping and return charges are in print for everyone to see.
Buying items "sight unseen" is always a risk, and shoppers are aware of the pitfalls when buying online, from a shopping channel, infomercial, etc.
How ridiculous to suggest a lawsuit.
It seems as if you would be more comfortable shopping in person, and returning items direct.
Mail order isn't for everyone.
And if you do buy from QVC and like the item, you don't have anything to lose.

There are many posters who state they are unable to get out to shop locally or that there are few places to shop in their areas. I am now one of those who can seldom get out to shop.

There are so many other places to shop online. I certainly wouldn't shop anywhere I'm not happy.

~~
*Off The Deep End~A very short trip for some!*

Moonchilde · ‎05-23-2010

@jackiejenny wrote:
No...just no. Frivolous lawsuits are never the answer, so please don't encourage one.

Not to mention that reputable attorneys won't touch them.

Life without Mexican food is no life at all

ALRATIBA · ‎07-15-2016

@Sassyboo3 wrote:
will get the hosts to STOP LYING! Sick of hearing "Buy it....YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE"!!! Last night katie mcgee...this am mary beth....about perfume no less. IT COSTS US A MINIMUM OF $10.00 TO RETURN ITEMS WE DO NOT LIKE OR DON'T FIT!!!! ARE THE HOSTS REALLY this dense or do they LIE AND MISLEAD on purpose? A lawsuit might get to the bottom of it!

@Sassyboo3 Do you have any idea of the cost and time involved in such a lawsuit?

I recently received a settlement from a case that was initiated in 2008. The participants all had substantial losses ... and guess what? Earlier this year (8 years later) we got about 5% of what we lost. Lawyers and the court expenses ate up all the rest.

ETA: ... another suit (overcharges re computer software). I was a member of the class because I had purchased the software ...we each got $10.

Brooklynny · ‎07-08-2010

So much for that @Sassyboo3. The only people who benefit from many class action cases are the lawyers.

Lipstickdiva · ‎03-10-2010

@QVCkitty1 wrote:
We know what they say and why they say it, what I will never understand are the cheerleaders who rise up and defend outright misleading statements. My ability to understand their motives doesn't negate their disingenuous statements.

Exactly. That is the point. When did it become okay for a company to say anything they want regardless of how outrageous or false it is? When did it become the fault of the consumer if they actually believe what they are told?

Both QVC and HSN have been in trouble before with the FTC for making untrue statements about products so it's not like anything goes.

For a host to say that it costs nothing to try an item is flat out not true. Regardless of how you want to slice it, that's a lie. And they shouldn't be able to tell a lie.

If they mean a restocking fee, then they should say they don't charge a restocking fee. To make a blanket statement about it costing nothing isn't true. And for that matter, I've never paid a restocking fee on anything I've returned anywhere. The only time I know a restocking fee is charged is on electronic items.

Lipstickdiva · ‎03-10-2010

I want to add, I'm not encouraging a lawsuit. Not at all. I think if the OP really has a problem, she should contact the FTC and see what happens. Maybe something, maybe nothing.

I work for a law firm. I worked on a class action suit. It is the biggest pain you can ever deal with. Attorneys earn every penny from those things. I never want to do that again.

Brooklynny · ‎07-08-2010

@QVCkitty1, @Lipstickdiva. I should probably just keep my mouth shut, but it is not disingenuous. I have a hard time believing that a host would tell a deliberate bold-faced lie about having "nothing to lose" by trying a product. For goodness sake, the QVC legal department won't even let them say "M&Ms!" I heard a host a few days ago refer to them as those "brightly colored little round candies!" Did you hear that said? I did, and it might have been on Sunday's ITKWD because the product was food-related. If anything, the hosts should have a refresher training session to remind them of what they can say, how to say it accurately, and how to say it so they don't offend.

After being on air for three hours straight (and in some cases even longer), I can only imagine what kind of tossed word salad is going on in their heads. I am positive that they are either misinformed (which is possible) or they're on autopilot and something comes out wrong. But to accuse hosts of deliberately lying is a stretch when it's a misstatement. There is no malice there.

Filng a complaint is a ridiculous notion, but OP or anyone else so inclined should go head if it makes them feel better. My last comment on this. Bash me if you wish, but this is too silly to waste any more time on it. P.S. I don't work for QVC or any other company affiliated with it.

QVCkitty1 · ‎05-23-2015

@Brooklynny wrote:
@QVCkitty1, @Lipstickdiva. I should probably just keep my mouth shut, but it is not disingenuous. I have a hard time believing that a host would tell a deliberate bold-faced lie about having "nothing to lose" by trying a product. For goodness sake, the QVC legal department won't even let them say "M&Ms!" I heard a host a few days ago refer to them as those "brightly colored little round candies!" Did you hear that said? I did, and it might have been on Sunday's ITKWD because the product was food-related. If anything, the hosts should have a refresher training session to remind them of what they can say, how to say it accurately, and how to say it so they don't offend.

After being on air for three hours straight (and in some cases even longer), I can only imagine what kind of tossed word salad is going on in their heads. I am positive that they are either misinformed (which is possible) or they're on autopilot and something comes out wrong. But to accuse hosts of deliberately lying is a stretch when it's a misstatement. There is no malice there.

Filng a complaint is a ridiculous notion, but OP or anyone else so inclined should go head if it makes them feel better. My last comment on this. Bash me if you wish, but this is too silly to waste any more time on it. P.S. I don't work for QVC or any other company affiliated with it.

First I have no interest in suing QVC. I do believe that we as consumers have accepted so much bad treatment in general, that we make excuses for "weasely " behavior. After awhile, as we see here on these boards, the customer becomes the bad guy. As Judge Judy says, " don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining ." QVC is no better or worse than anyone else, but that does no make them deserving of a medal.

" You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Lipstickdiva · ‎03-10-2010

@QVCkitty1 wrote:
@Brooklynny wrote:
@QVCkitty1, @Lipstickdiva. I should probably just keep my mouth shut, but it is not disingenuous. I have a hard time believing that a host would tell a deliberate bold-faced lie about having "nothing to lose" by trying a product. For goodness sake, the QVC legal department won't even let them say "M&Ms!" I heard a host a few days ago refer to them as those "brightly colored little round candies!" Did you hear that said? I did, and it might have been on Sunday's ITKWD because the product was food-related. If anything, the hosts should have a refresher training session to remind them of what they can say, how to say it accurately, and how to say it so they don't offend.

After being on air for three hours straight (and in some cases even longer), I can only imagine what kind of tossed word salad is going on in their heads. I am positive that they are either misinformed (which is possible) or they're on autopilot and something comes out wrong. But to accuse hosts of deliberately lying is a stretch when it's a misstatement. There is no malice there.

Filng a complaint is a ridiculous notion, but OP or anyone else so inclined should go head if it makes them feel better. My last comment on this. Bash me if you wish, but this is too silly to waste any more time on it. P.S. I don't work for QVC or any other company affiliated with it.
First I have no interest in suing QVC. I do believe that we as consumers have accepted so much bad treatment in general, that we make excuses for "weasely " behavior. After awhile, as we see here on these boards, the customer becomes the bad guy. As Judge Judy says, " don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining ." QVC is no better or worse than anyone else, but that does no make them deserving of a medal.

Exactly how I feel. I don't really care one way or the other. I brush off the statement about it costing nothing because I know it's not true. However, if it bothers someone else that much, they should do what they want. I don't think filing a lawsuit is the answer but whatever.

And I agree that I think consumers have started to accept a lot of bad treatment and misinformation for some reason and it becomes the consumer's fault.