Hey guys, I'm facing an ethical dilemma right now and I

>>17016270
ignore his calls lol

You should call the store--not identifying yourself--and ask for the name of the manager on duty today. Then go in and ask to speak to the manager. Sort it out with him, not the salesman.

It doesn't matter if he gets in trouble at this point. It matters whether or not the phone company catches the error down the line and either terminates your contract or threatens you with collections.

>>17016270
yeah ignore him. he tried to lie to you, why should you trust him again? block his number if you can, file a complaint if he tries to contact you on something else and harangues you about it. it's not deducted from his salary, he just doesn't make a commission on it. he is willing to lie tho to make it sound like a missed opportunity = you are stealing money from him

what a scumbag, this is why i never fucking trust salesmen.

>>17016279
I feel like kind of a dick though. Like if I were a salesman and I made an honest mistake like that, I'd want the customer to pay me back.

>>17016280
I don't think I'm legally obligated to pay it though. When he was on the phone he didn't say I had to pay for anything. He also didn't make any legal threats and he didn't say anything about terminating my contract.

>>17016282
But the phone actually costs $660 dollars though. I feel like it was an honest mistake on his part. And yeah he did try to lie to me, but that shitty tablet deal is something that most Verizon dealers do and I'm pretty sure that's standard protocol.

>>17016280
he has a valid receipt, phone company can't do shit, idk what country you're in, but in the us we have consumer protection laws for this so people need to stop bending over for rich ass fucktards every chance they get, let alone scumbag salesmen.

also you get to keep the phone, this guy has no idea what he's talking about. if they terminate the contract they lose money, they make little to no money on the hardware and you keep the phone, which they subsidized to attract customers in the first place to make money off their monthly rates. if they send him a collections when he has a valid receipt (if they even give enough of a shit to do that just to fix a single salesman's fuck up), if he's in the us at least, he can file a complaint with the necessary authorities and it will be resolved by specialists at the corp who deal with this shit regularly.

don't talk to them about it anymore, just explain what's on the receipt, and definitely never talk to that sleazy salesman.

>>17016290
>I don't think I'm legally obligated to pay it though.
You're probably not on the hook for pricing errors in general. But what if the terms of your contract specify that you must pay 50% of the down payment? The fact that you didn't on the day of receipt doesn't mean you're suddenly off the hook. If you agreed to pay then by extension you've agreed to be subject to be billed for it. However I started this with "probably" because I don't know your state's laws. The team of lawyers which the phone company has on retainer certainly does, however.

>When he was on the phone he didn't say I had to pay for anything.
He's not really the one to trust for that information. First off, you established that he's scummy. Also he's just a salesman. The aforementioned lawyers know what you do and don't have to pay. He's some dickhead who smokes pot every night. You can't go by what he says.

>He also didn't make any legal threats and he didn't say anything about terminating my contract.
Again, those things wouldn't be up to him. Look you have every freedom to wait and see what happens if you want. All I'm saying, just so you know, is that you signed a contract and the terms of that contract haven't been invalidated. Don't be surprised if somewhere down the line you get a call or letter about owing money. I figure you can get ahead of that by going to the manager and saying "Hey, I walked out of here yesterday and everything looked kosher. Now this dude is telling me I owe you guys hundreds of dollars. This sounds fishy."

>>17016295
>he has a valid receipt, phone company can't do shit,
He has a receipt for the transaction that day. However he also has a contract detailing his obligations across 1 or 2 years. If the contract says he agrees to pay 50%, it doesn't matter that he walked away from the transaction this week without paying it. He still owes the 50%.

>>17016290
>it's standard for them to fuck me over so shouldn't i let them?

Step back and think about what you're saying for a moment. If you want to be a big bitch and give him $330 do it, you obviously aren't broke or starving or you wouldn't even be questioning this let alone getting an iPhone. For fucks sake, imo, you should give him the full $660 since you're a fucking retard who will buy an iPhone in the first place, you've earned it buddy.

>>17016307
Don't listen to this retard, a receipt is a fucking legal contract, he is making you feel guilty for no fucking reason lmao.

>>17016319
That's not exactly what I was saying, but whatever. I will admit that getting an iPhone was a shitty decision but I was tired as fuck and lately I've been really stressed and overwhelmed with college.

Anyway, there are two things I signed. One of them says I have to pay a $330 down payment, but I also still have the receipt. So I don't know which document would take precedence.

>>17016319
>a receipt is a fucking legal contract
So is the service agreement he signed. Unintentional errors do not typically void contracts. The receipt is valid as processed. The service agreement is valid as well (unless his local laws specify otherwise).

>>17016341
Okay so now the question is: which contract takes precedence?

>>17016270
Pay the money. This salesman isn't 'The Man', he's not the one setting up shitty tablet deals, he's not the bad guy. He's just a regular guy working a shitty job trying to do the best he can. Put yourself in his shoes and then make your decision.

>>17016346
The standard is generally that of what a reasonable person would expect. If a reasonable person agrees to pay $330, would they then expect the other party to the contract to accept $0? I'd say no. A reasonable person would understand that this is an error and that they're still on the hook for the $330 the promised since the other party also satisfied their promise (the phone and the service).

>>17016270
Dont be a nigger

File: 1382428707162.jpg (22KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 500x500px

>>17016270


>said that if I don't pay him $330 (the down payment), then the store would deduct it from his salary.

In most states, this is illegal. Even if an employee makes a mistake its against labor laws to charge an employee for damages unless the employer can prove gross negligence or malicious intent (which, for a phone company isn't worth the time and even then they'd technically have to sue their employee).

He basically wants you to pay the money so he doesn't have to take the hit for making a mistake. While that may be legitimate, he totally lied to you about having to have the down payment from your phone deducted from his salary.

Talk to his manager, not him.

Actually, I think I figured out what this guy did. I looked on Verizon's website, and I found out that the down payment is based on your credit. I have really good credit, so technically I shouldn't have to make a down payment. But I think he intentionally made it look like he made a mistake so he could trick me into thinking I was making an initial payment of around $200, even though I'd really have to pay $330 extra. Either way though, the contract says what the contract says, and I think >>17016357 is right. Also, either way I'd eventually have to pay $660 in total anyway.

>>17016339
Haha bruh, I'm fking with you about the iPhone, I had an iPhone 4 at one time, it just pisses me off that people are so willing to give their money away. Make these bastards work for it at the very least, not saying to battle it all the way to the courts, but let me ask you this: If you were overcharged for something, would they be rushing or feeling guilty about making sure to get you back your full amount? or would they likely just cancel the "automatic" charges for the proceeding months and prorate the preceding?

Give it a rest for now and see what happens. Don't spend the $330 obviously, it shouldn't be considered fuck you phone money till at least after your first monthly payment. I doubt they'll do anything, and anything you owe should be on your monthly balance anyways. So go online and if your account balance is fine, then you're fine for now.

>>17016341
>Unintentional

The phone corporate offices have to actually notice that, which means the salesman has to report it up the ladder and someone has to approve the manual billing of $330 to the client again (which they then factor in other risks if the client even owes that or there's just a computer glitch, etc), if that's the case he'll pay it anyways. It likely went into the system as being paid for, so unless THEY contact him, I see no reason to be so eager to send your money rather than wait it out to see what the phone company says. He should know by the end of the first month.

>>17016353
See this >>17016375

There are plenty of good salesmen, the ones that lie to you are not the ones I give a fuck about. Unless anon is implying in your shoes you would lie like crazy to someone else to make a commission off their loss.

>>17016270
Was this at the Verizon store?

>>17016394
No, why?

>>17016399
What store?

>>17016387
I'm just going to pay the down payment. I have the money, and even if I didn't make the down payment I'd still have to pay for it down the road.

>>17016387
>so unless THEY contact him, I see no reason to be so eager to send your money rather than wait it out to see what the phone company says
That's fair. I just don't trust phone companies, especially with billing. I had a friend who canceled with a provider, got on with his life for a full year and then suddenly received a letter from a collection agency for the amount his canceled plan accrued over that year. No bills, no calls, nothing for a year except "sorry to see you go sir, hope you'll consider coming back in the future." Over stuff like that I'm more inclined to get ahead of shenanigans like that. But sure, waiting for a month sounds reasonable enough.

>>17016399
Well because the guy might be trying to scam you.

>>17016270

First of all, you should have been contacted by a MANAGER, not the salesperson who made a mistake.

Secondly, whoever calls you should be apologizing to you for the inconvenience of the mistake and should be offering you alternative solutions. They should not be guilting you into paying.

Which leads to the last point that it's illegal for the store to deduct the cost of his mistake from his salary. It's more likely that they just wouldn't give him commission from the sale.

I'm not sure what's going on in this situation, but it's damn fishy. Call up the manager of the store and ask about the situation. Alternatively, you can wait and see what they try to bill you. But, whatever you do, don't go to the store and just cough up the money.

>>17016411
As long as you remain their customer, they're going to bill you rather than send something to collections, unless you stop paying on the account of course. Phone companies are notorious for being dicks about sending things to collection agencies without notice, but they shouldn't do that unless you cancel with them.

Don't waltz on down and throw the cash into his lap. This sounds a bit odd. I'd get into contact with the management at that store and see what is going on.

Either way, the salesman sounds iffy. Don't speak to him and get someone higher up if you're that concerned. The fact that he contacted you and is guilt tripping for them SUPPOSEDLY taking it out of his salary (can they do that??) is bonkers. This is shady as fuck.

Okay guys, update:

I didn't go to the store and I'm not gonna shell out $330 to that guy. I'm just going to talk to the manager or just call Verizon customer service and tell them about it. Because it's mad shady that he called me and tried to guilt trip me into paying him $330. Also, you guys are right about the labor protection laws: it would be illegal for his boss to deduct money from his salary for making a mistake.

Also, if I call the manager, then there's no ethical dillema. If it truly was an honest mistake, he's not gonna get screwed over for it.

>>17016973
I think you're doing the right thing.

>>17017015
Yup. And if I really did have to make a down payment, why wouldn't he just tell me? Why would he make up some story about how his employer is going to deduct it from his salary?

>>17016973
>>17017019
Ok guy, this is iPhone bashing asshole anon from earlier, make sure you call Verizon customer service if you plan on doing that, fuck the manager (not literally) since you said it wasn't a Verizon store anyways. They're gonna do their best to get as much money out of you as possible, whatever 3rd party shitfest it was, you're better off dealing with Verizon directly than opening yourself up to the guy who hired and trained the shitbag you're now avoiding.

>>17016270

Can't speak for America, but here in Britbong once a transaction is done it's done, it's the cashiers error.

Morally, if you can live with it I say crack on. If you can't, agree to make the payment.

Personally I say enjoy your free phone

>>17017046
No actually it is a Verizon store. It's listed on their website as an authorized dealer too, so it's definitely legit.

>>17017054
>authorized dealer
=/= Verizon owned and operated.

That's like calling Best Buy a verizon store or an apple store because they're an authorized retailer.

Either way it's not a trustworthy outfit, even if it was owned and operated by Verizon, whoever the manager is there.

>>17017046
>>17017063
True. Yeah the place was really sketchy. I was considering calling the manager before, but now I'm defintely just gonna call customer service

And it's also really sketchy because that store just recently opened. And you're right, since it's not owned or operated by Verizon, there's no reason to trust them. I mean for all I know, the manager could've goaded the guy into trying to rip me off

>>17017052
It's the same thing here, there are just a bunch of try-hard psuedo-lawyers here who like to seem righteous whenever possible, when it's obvious they don't know jack shit.

>>17017052
I didn't do anything morally wrong because either that guy is lying, or his employer is violating labor protection laws.

And either way, I'm going to have to pay that $330, the only difference is that I don't have to make a down payment.