Unsolicited school pictures that you have to pay for or return

[Kimberlyann11]

Apples and oranges again. You asked for the item and the person accidentally went a little over. Totally different from someone sending you something you didn't ask for and demanding payment or return. Would you feel the same if the store made it a common practice to throw an extra item in your bag with a note that said when you got home, you had to send payment for it or bring it back to the store? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE explain how someone keeping the gift of their kids pictures instead of returning them makes it much more expensive for you. The truth is that Life Touch makes it much more expensive by printing up all of these pictures that will just get returned and shredded.

I would be okay with the extra item if

1. I knew it was coming in advance and I didn't tell them not to send it.
2. My kid took a bag back and forth to the grocery store every ... single ... day.

If it was something I wanted or needed I'd keep it and pay for it. If not, Snowy can keep it in her bag. If I got sick of them doing it I'd tell them to knock it off. Anyone that's manipulated into keeping items they don't want has bigger problems.

Kind of like school pictures.

I think everybody's got a price for their Integrity. We had a councilwoman locally who went to prison for taking a bribe. It was five thousand dollars. The thing that amazed a lot of people was the petty amount she sold out for. Some people's price is a pack of school pictures. Honestly, what's so hard about saying "Listen Snowy, don't even take that crap out of your backpack". You can say that while doing other things so no time or effort expanded on your part.

Oh, but then you don't get one over on "the man" and get free stuff.

 

[Bluestars]

Apples and oranges again. You asked for the item and the person accidentally went a little over. Totally different from someone sending you something you didn't ask for and demanding payment or return.
Would you feel the same if the store made it a common practice to throw an extra item in your bag with a note that said when you got home, you had to send payment for it or bring it back to the store?

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE explain how someone keeping the gift of their kids pictures instead of returning them makes it much more expensive for you.

The truth is that Life Touch makes it much more expensive by printing up all of these pictures that will just get returned and shredded.

Keeping something that you didn't pay for is morally wrong. Just because you can legally take advantage of a situation doesn't mean that's what you should do. I feel sorry for children who are raised by people who have no moral compass.

 

[msjprincess]

Apples and oranges again. You asked for the item and the person accidentally went a little over. Totally different from someone sending you something you didn't ask for and demanding payment or return.
Would you feel the same if the store made it a common practice to throw an extra item in your bag with a note that said when you got home, you had to send payment for it or bring it back to the store?

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE explain how someone keeping the gift of their kids pictures instead of returning them makes it much more expensive for you.

The truth is that Life Touch makes it much more expensive by printing up all of these pictures that will just get returned and shredded.

It's not the same thing. No one has to make a special trip to the school to return them. The child is going there anyway, you just stick it in their backpack.

 

[MSLRAC]

1. Nobody is being screwed over and if the people in the groups you mentioned lack the intelligence to understand the law and choose to do business with unethical companies, that's very sad for their kids. 2. The school is lying by saying you have to return the pictures or pay for them, when the law very clearly states that you don't. 3. Try reading a little more carefully next time. I certainly didn't say Life Touch did anything illegal and I don't think anyone else did either. I also didn't link to any blogs.

There is no lack of intelligence. Very few parents want to deal with other parents that have acted in unethical and manipulative ways. You keep claiming the schools and companies are the ones acting that way but I doubt most, if any, other parents would feel the same way even when you explain the law. This thread is pretty evident of that. Just because this law covers you stealing pictures, does not make it right.

I find it very sad for kids that there are parents out there teaching kids to do whatever they want and to justify their actions by any means possible. Those pictures cost money to take and print and when you keep them without paying, you are screwing over the school and company because they don't get paid and you're screwing over other parents because you're driving up the cost of the pictures.

Sorry but I don't feel as if the school is lying and I find it even more sad that you can't take 2 seconds to return them but can spend countless hours scouring the laws to find a way to justify keeping them. It is seriously NOT that hard to return them.

And the company that takes most of these pictures is Life Touch and they have been called unethical and their business practice illegal in this thread numerous times. My apologies if you didn't use those exact words and for confusing you with the other person trying to justify this by posting that ridiculous blog.

 

[mom2rtk]

There is no lack of intelligence. Very few parents want to deal with other parents that have acted in unethical and manipulative ways. You keep claiming the schools and companies are the ones acting that way but I doubt most, if any, other parents would feel the same way even when you explain the law. This thread is pretty evident of that. Just because this law covers you stealing pictures, does not make it right.

I find it very sad for kids that there are parents out there teaching kids to do whatever they want and to justify their actions by any means possible. Those pictures cost money to take and print and when you keep them without paying, you are screwing over the school and company because they don't get paid and you're screwing over other parents because you're driving up the cost of the pictures.

Sorry but I don't feel as if the school is lying and I find it even more sad that you can't take 2 seconds to return them but can spend countless hours scouring the laws to find a way to justify keeping them. It is seriously NOT that hard to return them.

And the company that takes most of these pictures is Life Touch and they have been called unethical and their business practice illegal in this thread numerous times. My apologies if you didn't use those exact words and for confusing you with the other person trying to justify this by posting that ridiculous blog.

And imagine how uncomfortable it is for the poor kid to be asked every day why they haven't brought the photos back yet.

 

[MSLRAC]

And imagine how uncomfortable it is for the poor kid to be asked every day why they haven't brought the photos back yet.

Exactly! I often wonder if parents ever stop to think about their own kids and what crazy stuff like this does to them.

 

[nugov2]

Exactly! I often wonder if parents ever stop to think about their own kids and what crazy stuff like this does to them.

Exactly and why my example of the dropped money is the same. It that example I technically followed the law just like the picture theif. I made what can be considered by some a reasonable attempt to contact the owner...just like the theif is within the law to keep the pictures. Both situations IMO are unethical because you had every opportunity to do the right thing but decided not too. You can justify it any way you want, but they are both stealing in my book and the poor child has to be called out at school for the picture. Sad that you don't see what a poor example you are setting for your child.

 

[mill4023]

so OP since this was your thread from what 3 1/2 years ago and I'm not that interested to read all the pages what ended up happening ? or kindly point me to the page for the recap

Nothing happened. I sent the pictures back and I came on the DIS to express my irritation.

I didn't take a stand about it because it wasn't worth putting my child in the middle of it, even though it was really the school and the photography company that chose to do that.

 

[mill4023]

You sort of DID ask for them, though. You let your child participate in picture day, right? So it makes sense that they would offer to let you see the photos. Otherwise, what is the point of having your child participate? Sorry, but this starts with the parents, IMHO. If you have no interest in the pictures, you should let the company know in advance by not allowing your child to participate. There are no "surprise picture days". People need to take responsibility for their own actions. You can't willingly say "take pictures of my child" and then complain when they do it. That's ridiculous.

Actually, I didn't. We didn't know receive any notification about the picture day. Maybe they told our daughter, but she was 7 at the time, so it wouldn't surprise me if the message didn't get passed along.

Besides, this was the first time we had received unsolicited prints with a demand to pay or return them. In the past, we had always been sent a proof sheet or advance notice asking if we wanted to order pictures.

 

[mill4023]

Keeping something that you didn't pay for is morally wrong. Just because you can legally take advantage of a situation doesn't mean that's what you should do. I feel sorry for children who are raised by people who have no moral compass.

So you don't accept gifts?

 

[MSLRAC]

So you don't accept gifts?

Those pictures are not a gift and you know it. If they came home wrapped with a bow and a card saying please accept these pictures of your child as our gift, then ok but they don't.

Like many people have said, justify it however you want but most of us think keeping the pictures without paying is wrong.

 

[mill4023]

There is no lack of intelligence. Very few parents want to deal with other parents that have acted in unethical and manipulative ways. You keep claiming the schools and companies are the ones acting that way but I doubt most, if any, other parents would feel the same way even when you explain the law. This thread is pretty evident of that. Just because this law covers you stealing pictures, does not make it right.

I find it very sad for kids that there are parents out there teaching kids to do whatever they want and to justify their actions by any means possible. Those pictures cost money to take and print and when you keep them without paying, you are screwing over the school and company because they don't get paid and you're screwing over other parents because you're driving up the cost of the pictures.

Sorry but I don't feel as if the school is lying and I find it even more sad that you can't take 2 seconds to return them but can spend countless hours scouring the laws to find a way to justify keeping them. It is seriously NOT that hard to return them.

And the company that takes most of these pictures is Life Touch and they have been called unethical and their business practice illegal in this thread numerous times. My apologies if you didn't use those exact words and for confusing you with the other person trying to justify this by posting that ridiculous blog.

To be clear, I didn't keep the pictures. But if I had, it would in no way be unethical or manipulative.

You're right, those pictures cost money to take and print. Is it wrong if I send them back? Because that costs exactly the same amount as if I kept them. If anyone is driving up the cost, it is Life Touch, who chooses to spend the money to print all those pictures before asking parents if they want to buy them. Don't you think that's financially wasteful? Not to mention, bad for the environment.

And FYI, I didn't have to spend time scouring the law and I wasn't trying to justify anything because I didn't keep the pictures anyway. I thought it was fairly common knowledge that unsolicited merchandise is legally considered a gift.

I find it really astonishing that on the DIS, a place well known for bashing anyone who breaks rules, there are so many people who don't care about the law.

 

[mill4023]

Those pictures are not a gift and you know it. If they came home wrapped with a bow and a card saying please accept these pictures of your child as our gift, then ok but they don't.

Like many people have said, justify it however you want but most of us think keeping the pictures without paying is wrong.

Of course they are a gift. The law states very clearly that they are a gift.

You may think it's a dumb law, but it is the law and it's there for a very good reason. To protect consumers from being manipulated and taken advantage of by unethical business practices.

I'm not particularly concerned about what "most" people think because I've found that "most" people are extremely gullible and lack the capacity to use logic and reason.

 

[smitch425]

Actually, I didn't. We didn't know receive any notification about the picture day. Maybe they told our daughter, but she was 7 at the time, so it wouldn't surprise me if the message didn't get passed along.

Besides, this was the first time we had received unsolicited prints with a demand to pay or return them. In the past, we had always been sent a proof sheet or advance notice asking if we wanted to order pictures.

I find that very hard to believe. Life Touch does our photos, and the company sends reminder slips for both fall and spring pictures, and picture days are listed on the school calendar at the beginning of the year. It is also listed on the school website. As for "demand"ing to pay for the pictures, that's a little dramatic, don't ya think? They come with a note stating that you may purchase them if you are interested, and if not, just send them back. That is hardly a demand. Good grief...

 

[bcla]

Apples and oranges. Your example isn't even remotely the same.
Your example is a case of someone accidentally losing something, in which case, any honest and ethical person would try to give it back to them.

The school pictures situation is a company intentionally sending you something you didn't ask for.

Also, the photography companies aren't doing something in violation of the law. They are just doing something unethical, by misleading people and stating that they have to return the pictures or pay for them, when the law makes it very clear that they do not have to.

Most unsolicited merchandise laws I've seen state that an honest mistake by a business is an exception, such as addressing a package to the wrong recipient. The business may be obligated to pay for the cost of return.

And they technically would be doing something illegal, although it may be just a civil statute with only civil fines. The main "fine" appears to be the forfeiture of merchandise. It's certainly not costing a business anything in terms of stuff they don't receive back. Printing is a sunk cost. It's no different than an amusement park making prints that they say the people photographed are under no obligation to purchase. However, they're not stupid enough to give it and then ask for payment. It's available for purchase at their business.

 

[MSLRAC]

Of course they are a gift. The law states very clearly that they are a gift. You may think it's a dumb law, but it is the law and it's there for a very good reason. To protect consumers from being manipulated and taken advantage of by unethical business practices. I'm not particularly concerned about what "most" people think because I've found that "most" people are extremely gullible and lack the capacity to use logic and reason.

You keep twisting and manipulating things to suit you all you want. I think your unethical and unscrupulous. You may think that everyone doesn't have the capacity to use logic or reason but I think it's more along the lines of most people have morals and do the right thing more often than not.

And again I ask, if Life Touch is being so unethical and taking advantage of parents nationwide by breaking these laws and sending out these pictures, why are they still in business? Why have they not been shutdown? I'm sure they've been reported to countless DA's and AG's and yet nothing had been done.

 

[kidshop]

You keep twisting and manipulating things to suit you all you want. I think your unethical and unscrupulous. You may think that everyone doesn't have the capacity to use logic or reason but I think it's more along the lines of most people have morals and do the right thing more often than not.

And again I ask, if Life Touch is being so unethical and taking advantage of parents nationwide by breaking these laws and sending out these pictures, why are they still in business? Why have they not been shutdown? I'm sure they've been reported to countless DA's and AG's and yet nothing had been done.

Life touch knows the law too. They cannot make you pay or send back in. They know most will pay, some will send it and some won't. . This is the way they have chosen to do business. And it must work for them to continue. I don't get the moral outrage. This is the way life touch operates. It is not a surprise for them, and I'm guessing only a small percentage of pics don't get returned. Which is the risk they take and accept. Otherwise they would operate like at our school here...you prepay pics before you ever see them, and if you don't like, they refund you.

 

[MolonLabe]

Life touch knows the law too. They cannot make you pay or send back in. They know most will pay, some will send it and some won't. . This is the way they have chosen to do business. And it must work for them to continue. I don't get the moral outrage. This is the way life touch operates. It is not a surprise for them, and I'm guessing only a small percentage of pics don't get returned. Which is the risk they take and accept. Otherwise they would operate like at our school here...you prepay pics before you ever see them, and if you don't like, they refund you.

I'm not seeing it either.

It's not like that hasn't been the law for a very long time, longer than life touch was doing this for years and then the law changed all of a sudden.

These laws all predate 1991 ( http://www.wysk.com/index/minnesota...lifetouch-national-school-studios-inc/profile ) which is when Life touch incorporated.

What's wrong is a government agency changing the rules after a family bought grazing rights and used them for 137 years and then some armed goons came in and started charging boatloads of fees for "turtle protection" and stole all your cows or anything.... that would be something to get morally outraged about.

This picture thing reminds me of the bait and switch some charities use by sending you a dime or a nickle, it seems everyone is doing it nowadays.

 

[kaytieeldr]

And FYI, I didn't have to spend time scouring the law and I wasn't trying to justify anything because I didn't keep the pictures anyway. I thought it was fairly common knowledge that unsolicited merchandise is legally considered a gift.

That's interesting - because it took me less than a minute, including typing what I was searching for.

 

[bcla]

What's wrong is a government agency changing the rules after a family bought grazing rights and used them for 137 years and then some armed goons came in and started charging boatloads of fees for "turtle protection" and stole all your cows or anything.... that would be something to get morally outraged about.

I know the case you're referring to, and your description is incorrect. The family never bought any rights. They secured permits from the federal government agency with jurisdiction and those agencies changed over time. Those terms changed over the years, including having to pay grazing fees.

BLM didn't actually charge more. The fees were the same as any other cattle rancher in the west (I heard $1.25 a head per year). What they did (consistent with rulings from federal judges) was reduce the number of head he would be allowed to graze. And at that point he refused to recognize that the federal government owned public land in Nevada. He'd been grazing for over 20 years without a paying grazing fees and I heard over 15 years without a permit at all (took time to get it revoked). This was all sent to him by unarmed bureaucrats. They only sent armed agents to oversee the seizure of his cattle to satisfy the judicial orders to pay his fines and unpaid fees. I don't know about where you live, but around here if the sheriffs dept evicts or seizes property to satisfy a judicial ruling, they sent out armed deputies.

I'll just say I think he's a crackpot. I heard after he thought he'd won, he started making demands on the state and federal government to kill fees for entrance to state and national park lands.