PropertyValue
?:author
?:datePublished
  • 2017-12-14 (xsd:date)
?:headline
  • Are Retailers Using 'Disappearing Ink' on Receipts to Discourage Returns? (en)
?:inLanguage
?:itemReviewed
?:mentions
?:reviewBody
  • The holiday shopping season often spurs rumors that retailers use disappearing ink on receipts, making it difficult for consumers to use paid-for warranties or return unserviceable merchandise. Some rumors were more broad, involving anecdotal concerns about disappearing ink receipts, addressing retailers: Others were more specific, claiming very clear timeframes—30 to 45 days—and practices governed the legibility of receipt ink. Iterations of that sort asserted companies deliberately sought out to ensure that no receipts past a certain point could be used, presumably rendered void when the ink disappeared by design: Although the rumor was rife on Facebook, instances of it far antedated the social network. Forum posts as far back as 2003 referenced the phenomenon. However, many retailers's return policies stipulate that receipts are not the sole manner in which consumers can prove a purchase. Walmart maintains: At Lowe's the policy reads, in part: Similarly, CVS notes returns or exchanges are subject to a third-party verification process, suggesting physical paper receipts were not the sole manner in which proof of purchase was retained by the consumer or retailer. The web site CreditCards.com surveyed major retailers and reported that in addition to protections offered by issuers such as American Express and Mastercard, receipts were rarely the only recourse: Retailers' policies stipulating for other verification measures undermined the implication receipt degradation was a deliberate action to discourage store returns. As for why receipts tended to fade (at least under certain conditions), papermaker Panda Paper Roll explained that the effect was a cost-saving measure for different reasons: That claim was echoed in a since-deleted 2014 WFLA story about disappearing ink receipts: Although it was clearly true that many receipts faded over time, the claim involving disappearing ink was a misnomer. Retailers' well-known reliance on thermal paper due to its cost efficient nature led to the generation of fragile receipts, particularly those exposed to heat or light. The phenomenon was real, but the cause was often misinterpreted by concerned consumers. Early iterations of the rumor also antedated the rise of online retail giants, e-receipts, smartphones with storage capabilities, and other technological advances that served effectively as a receipt for consumers. (en)
?:reviewRating
rdf:type
?:url