It sounds like both she and the store are a little at fault. She didn’t seem too interested in what she got because of her lack of interest in getting the dress in the first place. The store should have called her with results of the conversation with the dress company about the size. If she didn’t care at the fitting and she would have never looked at the tag, she probably would have never known. It sounds to me like Tia wouldn’t be happy with any dress. If there is a price difference in the two brands, she should get or pay the difference. She seems to have made it through the wedding by now. I would have taken the $75.00 and moved on.

Well, she didn’t seem to have a problem with the dress when she tried it on back in August… BUT, she ordered the dress she ordered. The store gave her something else, without discussing with her, and she didn’t notice until it was too late to take her business elsewhere. I’d say her request for half the cost refunded was quite fair.

As far as the store’s response “You can’t say you’re not into dresses, and then complain that it’s not quite the same dress” — I say you can’t enter into a contractual agreement with a customer to sell them something, and give them something else, either.

One comment on the actual article was exactly what I was thinking. I can’t believe the store manager is dumb enough to let it get so far that it’s getting printed in the paper. That is not good publicity.

Is this news?

I know the store and they have been cheating women for years at that store.

I’m glad we are discussing this issue. I was afraid something bland like the bailout was going to come up. Whew!

Kurt, There is no way to enter politics into this subject. I think that we have all forgot what life is like without elections going on. Come on guy’s, just give your opinion about the dress deal. It’s important to someone. I’m not sure who, but someone.

After reading Mr. Bill’s column I have come to the conclusion that Tia is probably an Obama supporter because of her occupation (social something). I can also figure out that the dress shop owner is a McCain supporter. I only assume this because he is a business owner and to most, that makes him a rich Republican. Thats the whole problem. She should have gone to some little old lady making dresses in her basement (another Obama supporter). Everything would have come out fine. Another example of a wealthy Republican taking advantage of a poor Democrat. Whats the world coming to?????????

It appears that Mr McClellan has jumped the proverbial shark here. As it appears, a large woman wanted a dress which a store ordered for her. The dress came in and it needed to be altered (I assume let out) which took 2 or more fittings. In front of a mirror. With salespeople/seamstresses. She then takes the dress to a wedding and wears it. THEN decides she does not like it. Then comes back and wants her money back?! I say not. Off the rack, no alterations, and unworn, perhaps. Does Mr Mclellan not have bigger fish to fry?! Sorry, bad analogy.

I think the retail store was negligent to switch brands for the reasons cited without consulting first with the customer. What would happen if I purchased a Toyota Camry and the dealer ordered a Corolla instead, and then if I asked my brother who doesn’t know the difference between a Camry and Corolla to take delivery? I think the dealer would ultimately be obligated to deliver the product I purchased. The customer in this case is clearly “not into dresses”, and probably feels uncomfortable even being in the environment of a dress store with all the petite sizes running around the store, etc. So she makes an effort to get fitted as quickly and invisibly as possible—in and out of the dress store as soon as possible, not paying much attention to the dress! Clearly not a place where a big girl wants to be!

I think in this case, the jury will find in favor of the plaintiff. But I wonder if it’s worth the hassle? I’d take the $75.00 and go on with life.

Yeah, can you believe this is news. I guess McClellan couldn’t find something to bash Sarah Palin about.
My first thought was that this chick is a Democrat. She screws up, doesn’t realize she is getting fit for the wrong dress, wears it, realizes the mistake, and now wants the company to bail her out. I do think the company should have notified her of the switch, but perhaps this is the motivation she may need to lose weight so that she can wear normal sizes so that things like this don’t have to happen in the future. I am being serious here.
I know someone who saw the wedding pictures she was in and was so embarrassed at how fat she was that she has now lost a lot of weight. So stop making excuses and blaming others for your own mistakes.