It is a really incompetent fraud attempt, they could have just removed the RMA sticker before sending it back. Steve of GamersNexus would still have been able to get the history from the serial number with the motherboard manufacturer but it would have taken longer to work it out but it would also have removed the plausible deniability of an error I guess.
My guess is that prior to this episode blowing up on YouTube, Steve was dealing with a single customer support/RMA person who was either extremely lazy or negligent (perhaps due to Newegg incentives) and there is no escalation path for regular people whom Newegg isn’t aware are YouTube stars. I doubt Newegg set out to defraud Steve or anyone else, but they put the structure and incentives in place that let it happen. And they probably know this happens to some extent due to the wealth of other complaints they’ve racked up. They choose to operate this way, though, so the bottom line is that their execs are ok with scamming a small percentage of their customers because it saves/makes money. That small percentage just happened to hit the wrong guy this time.
> Steve was dealing with a single customer support/RMA person
Doesn't that mean, that Newegg has no procedure in place to escalate contested cases to a higher-up or second person?
No way of dealing with customers who contest your findings?
Nobody looking at why a ticket still isn't closed after weeks, and has way more emails going back and forth than it ever should have?
Basically, if you send something back in, and have the bad luck to get some "single lazy or negligent" person answering your ticket - then you are screwed. Won't get your money back, won't get your board back, and absolutely nothing you can do to change that (other than making a YouTube video on a famous channel)?
There absolutely should be a way for a customer to contest those claims - and if all else fails - be able to demand speaking to a superior - and if that fails as well - at least get their board back.
Fraud and incompetence are indistinguishable. The outcomes appear the same. So should be regarded as different types of error. Without the messy bother of divining intent.
