The sneaky way would be to go and buy another lens, then take your scratched one back in it's place, complain to the store that they sold you a scratched lens and ask for a refund.
or is that dishonest :angry:
Yes, it would be sneaky. Yes, it would be dishonest. Yes, it would show a lack of personal responsibility. If you wrote this in jest, it isn't funny. This type of comment stinks of immaturity. I seriously hope that you wouldn't do anything like this.
Before taking up photography full-time, I worked in retail as a corporate buyer, assistant manager, and a sales person for a 22 store chain, which had one of the best return policies in the nation. We took back everything from dog beds that were torn to shreds from a dog biting, chewing, and roughing it up, to tents that worked just fine but came back moldy because the customer failed to dry the tent before storage. Many times, we would be able to get refunded from the manufacture or distributor, but often that item would find its way into the dumpster. Sometimes, I couldn't believe some of the clothing that was returned, shoes worn for a year, clothing ripped by thorns, dresses worn out for a night. Jerseys stinking of bar. Hiking boots obviously worn until they couldn't be worn anymore. Several kayaks and canoes that were beaten up and returned because they got scratches, baseball bats that got dented, skis that got a scratch from skiing over rocks, inline skates that needed new wheels, arrows that bent, fishing rods that broke from abuse, don't even get me started on the bikes, and some of the exercise equipment, torn coats, dirty sleeping bags, and I could fill up this forum with more and more examples.
Sometimes, it was a honest defect, but most of the time, it was abuse and the customer was just trying to get a deal or a new item for something they had obviously done. And you know what, after seven years of seeing, at least, two to three dishonest returns everyday, you get to know what is a honest return and what isn't. All in all at a $25 million a year store in a $300 million chain, the dishonest returns put a very little dent in overall profit margins. And you want to know why they do?
Because, we ran the stores shooting for a specific margin goal for each store, and rewarded greatly the managers and assistant managers when they hit this goal. Guess who paid for the dishonest returns? The customers. We passed the cost onto them. The manufactors do the same (How do I know? I've worked with 100s of them.) So, if you think it doesn't cost the customer in the long run, listen to experience, it does.
It's ideas like these that really show the state of personal responsibility or lack there of.