|
This is a bit involved so I'm going to look at this line by line....
People are more apt to take things when there is no one asking about it and no one prosecuting it. A salesperson will continue taking $200 of "someones money" as long as that holds true.
You can buy 6700's in bulk online. And who's to know if the Rep just fixes any of the returned 6700's awaiting repair and gives it back to a customer (whom thinks it was officially refurbished) and thus leaves open the opportunity for the Rep to acquire a 6800 to resell.
The number I used in this instance was "8", which was somewhat random, but used to show the amount of money in relation to salary. It could just as well be "1" or "100" per month.
They only need one 6700 to replace one 6800. Simply put:
I give them my 6700, they call it in under warranty or insurance or whatever, and they get back a 6800, and they give me their 6700.
I've heard here many times that it's random on what they get in regards to replacements in such matters. I imagine that this randomness would effectively offset some of the fraud so that it didn't seem as big a problem as it likely is. Instead of someone being able to embezzle 100% of the time they might only be able to do it 50% of the time...and if the store is looked at as a whole then the amount of embezzlement would diminish even further by proportion.
I'm skeptical on whether they have to add/subtract every refurbished/warrantied/insuranceclaim from their inventory, and if so it would seem probable there are ways around this.
I'm sure someone from Sprint could throw in some nonsense to obfuscate the issue in an attempt to thwart an investigation or public outcry, but this given scenario absolutely stands to reason that it is rather likely occurring indeed.
|