Woman Battles Neiman Marcus To Return Damaged Dress
You can understand Amy's disappointment when she ordered a belted dress from Neiman Marcus, but the dress arrived beltless. Starting in July, she tangled with customer service to get her money back.
After months of back-and-forth, Neiman Marcus caved once she finally cc'd Consumerist on a message. She describes her ordeal:
Here's the timeline:
July 27: Receive item dress which was described as "belted dress" without said belt. Request a discount for the damaged merchandise, which was proffered (10%) and refunded to my debit card.
Contact Executive Offices to request an additional discount, since 10% would have bought a pretty chintzy belt. This request was granted for an additional 10%.
Decide that I would prefer to return the merchandise, as I noticed a snagged seam in addition to the missing belt. Send it in.
On August 10, I called to inquire about the status of the return, because I had lost my debit card and needed to cancel it. I wanted to insure the credit had been applied to my bank account before I did so, as I feared that canceling the card before receiving my return credit would be problematic. The phone representative said it had been "credited to my account" (exact words) on August 7. I cancelled my debit card.
On August 13, I went to the bank to close out my account, as I had moved for a job and thus switched banks. I found that my account was short a serious amount of money. I called Neiman Marcus and asked them what was going on. They said that they had sent out a "check" (exact words), so reassured, I closed my account.
I returned to the school that I work at on August 27 to find a gift card in my mailbox. At that point I got in touch with them to see what could be done to get my money back as per the return policy. I must have spoken to at least 3 different people, because I could never get any follow-up on the promises that were made to me. There was acknowledgement that it was a mistake to send a gift card, that I was owed money, and pledges to get this take care of via their refunds department, but now it's almost a month later. I'm still waiting and still spending hours on the phone trying to explain this to people who don't have the authority to do anything about the situation.
If you need any more information, below I have appended the whole history of e-mail correspondence with customer service filling my inbox.
Apparently it was sent as a merch credit because I shipped it to an address other than my billing address using my nickname — which is fine, it's an automatic system, whatever, as long as the issue is addressed in a timely manner. However, they have admitted they owe me the money and I'm still waiting. I'm a teacher, but I'm also a loyal customer who appreciates beautiful clothes that are made to last (or, I was), and I buy this stuff on sale. I've been polite on every phone call despite my rising level of frustration. I really could use the money for my car insurance bill!
On Sept. 19, a Neiman Marcus responded to Amy's inquiry about the status of her refund, telling her they were unable to access her tracking information. She wrote us Saturday saying that Neiman Marcus has refunded her money, suspecting the company did so because she cc'd Consumerist on an e-mail.
So feel free to cut us in on any complaint messages. Doing so may save you the hassle of having to go the Executive Email Carpet Bomb route.
Post a comment
Comments:
@tbax929 is back from the beach: I have to agree, and too wonder how much the final refund was for .... the total original amount or less the two previous credits. Frankly as confusing as it all is, I don't blame Neiman Marcus for the mishap.
She complained and received a 10% discount. She wanted another 10%, so she complained some more and they gave it. Despite getting exactly what she asked for, she kept complaining.
The reason it took Neiman Marcus so long to "fix" this problem is because the customer made it so difficult. It's not easy hitting a moving target.
True.....you asked for some discounts which is fine, but is it really necessary to be that fussy?
@GMFish: Agreed. If you don't want to return the item but would be happy with a discount, ask for the discount that would make you whole. In this case, OP should have asked for a 20% discount from the frontline CSR, and if refused, should then have escalated to ECSR.
Oh... and add me to the list of commenters wondering if she got the 20% refund + the 100% return, or if the return was prorated.
@GMFish: I can't believe I'm anywhere close to blaming the OP, but I agree that the three different requests can be hard for a company to fulfill.
However, CS requests shouldn't take a month or hours on the phone.
I'm with everyone else. It seems like NM went above and beyond for providing two discounts when only one was really necessary. If Amy wasn't happy with the dress in the first place, she should've returned or exchanged it. I don't see the need to ask for two discounts AND a full refund.
I don't see why she added in that last part about needing the money for her insurance bill. If the dress wasn't damaged, the money would still be gone. Maybe she shouldn't be spending so much money on a dress if she needs it for more important things. Priorities!
@calquist: As well, it seems odd that in the middle of all this she first had to cancel her debit card because of losing it, then had to close the account because she moved, and then when she went to close it, the "account was short a serious amount of money". She only noticed this when she went to close it??
And how much money could it be short if the dress was already on sale?
I'm the last one to blame an OP here, but this one is on her. Yes, it should have had a belt with it and I'd agree that they needed to throw the extra 10% in there if the original 10% wouldn't buy the belt that would go with the dress.
But after that, this is on the OP. You don't request two discounts, get them and then decide to return the dress. And you lost your debit card and then you decided to close the account without verifying with your bank that the appropriate credit had been deposited?
Finally, if you need cash to pay your insurance bill, stop buying expensive clothes and learn to save a little for unexpected emergencies.
Summary:
1. Agreed to A.
2. Changed mind, Asked for A+A.
3. Changed mind, asked for B.
4. Did stuff that made getting B much more complicated.
5. Despite complication, received financial equivalent of B that solved the problem of B being made an overly complex affair by the OP.
6. Complained about that.
7. Equated inability to pay car insurance bill with problems returning overpriced dress.
This is the sort of customer that gives the rest of us a bad name.
I think if I were NM, my patience would have run out long ago. She asked for two discounts when she should have asked for a replacement dress, or for the missing belt. Most likely it fell out in the fulfillment plant, and is floating around. She probably could have just gotten the belt sent to her for no charge. NM is awesome like that. But she had to make it convoluted.
"You can understand Amy's disappointment"
You have got to be joking.
I donno, I'd almost label this one as above and beyond. The situation described is a pretty convoluted one, and though it took time, the company gave in to each of her demands, apparently without ever trying to shift the blame to her. Sending a gift card instead of check was a mistake, but they admitted it was a mistake and corrected it, fair enough.
@twophrasebark: I can understand her disappointment at not getting a belted dress with a belt, but her sense of entitlement is baffling.
I agree with everyone above. Made a mountain out of an ant hill. Sure it came without a belt but NM took steps to correct it. The OP made those steps into an obstacle course.
@squinko: Not only that. Discounts on damaged merchandise is heavily frowned upon. I'm surprised they even offered it.
The dress was purchased at the tail end of July and the "since July" includes her two requests for additional discounts. The refund request doesn't seem to have occured until around Aug 10. One month with all of those requests and changes she caused doesn't seem too unreasonable.
It probably would've been faster had she gone into the store and spoke directly with an associate or customer service rep, even if it had to be escalated to a manager. It probably would've been refunded on the spot. I guess though that's assuming that there is a store nearby.
@formergr: Erm, it's Neiman Marcus...
@tbax929 is back from the beach: She mentions that she discovered additional damage, other than the missing belt, and that's why she wanted to return the item entirely. Confusing for Neiman Marcus, I'm sure, but understandable IMO.
@thompson: @thesadtomato: @GMFish: So let me get this straight. You guys apparently all believe that if I find a problem with an item and request a remedy, it is wrong of me to later ask for another remedy if I find a different problem with the item (all within the appropriate time period of course)?
@TinkishDelight: Wow. I wasn't expecting those prices. If I bought a dress for that much money, I would return it in a heartbeat if it wasn't exactly as I ordered.
I don't get everyone's posts here. Did nobody see the part where she found an _additional_ problem with the dress that made her want to return it? Are you guys saying that if I find a problem immediately with an item, I should hold off on trying to get that fixed so I can make sure there are no other hidden problems? The same commenters would probably be blaming her for waiting too long to report the initial problem if she did that.
@psm321: The problem was that she asked for a partial refund/discount and received it, then decided that it wasn't enough to satisfy her needs and decided to ask again. I and other users agree that this is just feeling entitled. NM wasn't required to give an additional 10% back - it did so because it showed good customer service.
@psm321: I think the problem here was when she lost her debit card. She talked to Neiman Marcus to make sure they had credited her account - if they had not, she should have closed her bank account anyway and upon starting a new one, given that account to Neiman Marcus instead. If you lose your debit card, it's much more problematic to lose all of the money in your account than to not have a relatively small amount of money remain uncredited. I think her priorities were out of line here. To me, if I lost my debit card, I'd be closing that account before whoever picked it up went on a shopping spree. Whatever amount of money I spent at NM is small potatoes in comparison to the risk of leaving a compromised account open.
@formergr: I was a little confused about that. Does "short a serious amount of money" mean she had assumed the refund was there and it wasn't, or that something else sinister had happened?
I'll deviate slightly from some of the responses by saying I think she still did have the right to return the dress so long as it was, as it seems to be, policy. But 20% for a missing belt? Which was probably a self-belt and thus not the one you'd want to use anyway? That's a mighty sweet deal, and if I'd gotten that, I'd be apologetic and appreciative about the fact that I now I wanted to return the dress, and that I'd change cards moved banks in the meantime to boot.
@floraposte: What I want to know is why she didn't ask Neiman Marcus to ship her the belt in the first place. It has to be there somewhere! She has the item number, and they have it in their databases. Why didn't she ask them to find her a belt and send it, considering she did actually want a belt because she asked for a discount in order to buy one. And a lot of belted dresses have real belts, too. If I'm buying a dress from Neiman Marcus, I'd sure as heck make sure it was a real belt, and not treated as an after thought.
@pecan 3.14159265: I just had to get a new credit card on a compromised account, and I'm still afraid that there was something back-ordered somewhere that's going to fall afoul of the change.
If they promised her the money, she's definitely entitled to it, but I can see why this might not have been the smoothest credit process in the world.
@pecan 3.14159265: Just guessing, but if it was a sale dress, as her final statement suggests, it's quite possible they didn't have another one in the right size, which is why they went down Partial Refund Road in the first place. If so, the chances of finding the belt were pretty slim--it's probably in the closet of the last person who tried it on.
@psm321: I don't understand why it took her so long to find an additional problem with the dress. If the problem were that bad, she would have noticed it about the same time as the belt problem and definitely before the time it took to acquire two separate discounts.
@saralegal21: I'm pretty sure it's cheap to fix a snagged seam, right? It might be a matter of undoing the entire seam and redoing it, but I had to redo the seam for an entire huge blanket and it was only $10. One side of a dress surely can't cost that much.
@floraposte: But she ordered it online, which means it came packaged from a fulfillment center. It's more likely that the belt just fell out of the bag. I once got shoes that were in the wrong color, but were labeled as correct on the outside. It was just a mix up at the fulfillment center. No one bothered to check inside to make sure the description matched the product.
Honestly, she could have avoided a lot of the e-mail and phone tag by taking it to a Neiman Marcus store, presuming she actually had one near her.
@psm321: She requested and accepted a remedy to the problem, requested an additional remedy for the previously existing (and supposedly as per her acceptance, remedied) problem and THEN she found yet another problem to which she requested yet another remedy all the while creating assorted obstacles along the way.
Personally I didn't find anything unreasonable about asking for a discount, or later asking for a refund, it's her sense of entitlement that I found to be unreasonable. Plus she adds on the bit about not being able to pay her insurance? How on earth is her lack of budgeting comprehension NM's fault?
Ive got to admit Im finding the whole belt missing story a little hard to swallow, this OP seems to know the ropes of discount shopping and valued shoppers pay retail hence your lower end retailers no return policies on sale items. I assure you your fellow coworkers are appalled you are waiting by the mailbox for a check from NM. Your working at a school not Wall Street. I can see your not exactly hurting in this economy and your in the mess because NM is aware your difficult and demanding and might keep both the GC and check. Valued shoppers pay retail, your a haggler, penny pincher, bargain shopper and uninsured driver.
@psm321: I'd wager there wasn't a snagged seam. After getting two discounts and realizing she didn't have enough money for her car insurance, she wants to get rid of the dress altogether. A snagged seam is as good a reason as any, so she went with it.
Unless she's lying about the insurance, and really would have kept the dress had there not been a snag. Either way she's lying about something.
@brandmuffin: I don't see anything wrong with only buying sale items on Neiman Marcus. I do see a problem with wanting to take advantage of a store that has not only done nothing wrong, but gives great customer service without fuss. I only shop at Neiman Marcus and Nordstrom when there's a sale, because that's the only time I can really afford anything at the stores. I really appreciate both stores for great customer service, and relatively good sales. I wouldn't hesitate to return something that I thought was damaged, but I wouldn't essentially ask them to pay me, which is kind of what she did.
I also take issue with the fact that her mail is going to her office. She shouldn't mingle personal with professional. The workplace is not her personal mailbox.
@Schmeeky: I agree that there's an air of suspicion around this story, which I don't quite understand, because NM has very, very good return policies. You can return it to any store, you can send it back prepaid by NM and get your money back. If it's on sale, it can still be returned for the full purchase price. I feel suspicious of the story, but I'm not entirely sure why, because there are a variety of perfectly reasonable and legitimate methods of getting a return without lying or trying to cover it up.
@psm321: If you would actually read the posts, most people are saying a combination of: they don't understand why she didn't return it in the first place, why she didn't just ask for the belt itself, why she asked for two discounts AND then returned it, etc. There's nothing wrong with asking for your money back, but if there's something wrong with the dress, why keep it and ask for a discount when you can exchange it or get a refund?
@pecan 3.14159265: It's the "lost" debit card, followed by having to change banks because she moved, only discovering then that it was missing money, all in the same month that this dress had no belt, revealed a snagged seam, etc. that was a huge red flag to me.
@formergr: Maybe she damaged the dress, and it wasn't NM's fault? I don't know how she would've gotten around that if that were the case. If her goal was to just get the original amount back, she could have done that without much hassle. I just have no clue what she was trying to accomplish. NM was never going to issue store credit for returned merchandise, especially since it was damaged (no belt). Per their return policy, she would have received the exact amount she paid back on her debit card. She would have gotten her money back.
@pecan 3.14159265: I have packages and mail shipped to me at work because I know I can:
a. sign for them and not have to pick them up at the depot in Manhattan
b. ensure that it is not stolen (had issues with mail never making it to my house)
c. it is alot faster to have something mailed to my work address than my Brooklyn address
Do you let all your co-workers in on your stance about personal mail at the office when they are signing for their packages from Amazon, Land's End or whereever?
When you run your own business you are more than welcome to dictate to your employees the rules of receiving personal mail. In the meantime I will be sure to let my managing directors, that receive personal mail at my office, know how you feel about it.
@itiswhatitis: Why the attitude? My opinion is simply that - and opinion. You don't agree with it, but why the need to feel so offended?
@pecan 3.14159265: To me that line just seemed snotty and somewhat judgmental, why even add it? Who cares if she has her mail re-directed to her job? There are many reasons why people do that but its one of those things that unless it directly affects you (which it doesn't) its none of your business and irrelevant to the story.
This entire story is fishy, full of red flags and gaping holes, and reeks of an astounding sense of entitlement.
Since when are customers the ones calculating proper refund/discount amounts? This is clearly someone who knows how to haggle/work the system.
Because I clearly have too much time on my hands, I did a quick search of the sales items on NM.com for a "belted dress", the average price of these clearance belted dresses is about $270 bucks. Without knowing what she bought, let's just assume it's that average price. Could be more, could be less - just interesting info to have.
And furthermore I love the last line about how she could really use that money for your car insurance. If that is the case, she should've thought about that before spending money on a dress from Neiman Marcus.
All in all, I don't fault NM for the errors made/delays incurred. This woman's being a difficult fussbudget.
"I really could use the money for my car insurance bill!"
Then maybe you shouldn't have bought the damn dress in the first place.
@formergr: Those were my thoughts as well. There's just so much happening in that story. Perhaps it's a result of condensing a complicated story, but it is odd.
My chronology comprehension might be a bit rusty, but I'm a wee confused about something. According to the last paragraph, the dress was apparently shipped to a work address (right?). At some point in the first two weeks of August, she changed jobs. But at the end of August, the merchandise gift card was in her work mailbox - because that was the address used to ship the dress. Wouldn't this suggest that no change of jobs took place..?
I've read it a few times and it's still not clear. hrmph.
I'm glad she got her money back, but I don't really understand why she asked for two additional discounts up front instead of just returning the original item. Maybe that' where the confusion started. I wouldn't make a transaction that convoluted. Just return the item for the refund and then get whatever you want.
Also, now I'm wondering if she got 20% returned to her debit card for the discounts she requested and then also received back the full amount of the dress. I'm confused.