If Sears Canada were a person I think that person would be a pedophile, because it sure seems to enjoy screwing little people.
First it was the frontline workers who couldn’t have the pensions they spent years earning because the best and the brightest had to be properly compensated for pulling the handle and directing the swirl, and now customers who spent hundreds of dollars on extended warranties to protect expensive appliances are being bullied by Scotiabank and collection agencies into continuing to pay for them even though they’re now worthless.
Mike Albani of Richmond Hill, Ont., bought four high-end kitchen appliances from Sears in September 2015 and took delivery in March 2016.
He said he was encouraged to buy a 48-month extended warranty, at a cost of $724.28 including HST, and that the salesperson told him if he didn’t use the warranty, the amount would be refunded in Sears gift cards when it expired.At zero per cent interest, Albani decided he had nothing to lose and financed the total amount on his Sears credit card.
But then Sears announced it was closing its doors and informed customers they had to keep paying for extended warranties — even though they would not be honoured.At the time, Sears assured CBC News that customers would be refunded for the cost of the extended warranties at the end of their financing term.
“Monthly payments will remain the same, but the amount equivalent to future payments for protection agreements will be reduced at the end of the obligation,” a Sears spokesperson told CBC News by email on Oct. 9, 2017.
But Scotiabank, which now owns the Sears credit card accounts, is threatening to send Albani’s account to collections.Albani said he’s willing to pay for the warranty for the seven months he owned the appliances while Sears was in business, and he wrote to Scotiabank on Oct. 31, 2017, enclosing a cheque for that amount. But he doesn’t believe he should have to pay the remaining $618.48 for extended warranty coverage in the months after Sears went out of business.
“[Scotiabank] suggested I could just pay this and the issue would go away,” he said. “The same with their collections company. They said, ‘Just pay the bill and it will be no more of a headache.'”
Scotiabank also suggested he and other impacted customers take it up with Sears, a suggestion that, while likely technically correct, would be much more reasonable if Sears A: wasn’t out of business and B: hadn’t lost at least one of its customer service numbers to somebody shilling Walmart gift certificates.
I’m sure I’m doing little more than whistling into the god damn wind here, but wouldn’t it be much more sensible and even honourable for Scotiabank to settle all of these accounts and then go after Sears itself to recover the hit? I imagine they’re in a better position to do something like that than are Holly in Dundee or Mike from Richmond Hill. That Sears is financially bankrupt doesn’t wash as a good excuse for Scotiabank to be morally so.