Taurus Firearm Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
20,085 Posts
I happen to agree with a lot of the article’s commentators - this is going to backfire worse than the SCOTUS’ support for the private cake baker. And, since this suppresses a Citizens’ right to spend their money how they want and it extends across state lines, it will end up as a federal legal nightmare. And since no equal moves have been made against alcohol and tobacco, this stands out. Can you say RICO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,090 Posts
Yeah, this arbitrary decision is not going to work out well for them.
What if they decided to single out alcohol sales, or tobacco, or contraceptives?
You can't single out a legal product just because you don't approve of it when you are a financial and credit institution.
I hope they have to make restitution to all the sellers who they have now stiffed. They certainly should be made to do so.
Guess I'll have to buy the H&R Block tax prep software from now on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,370 Posts
If you read the article, many of these transactions were cancelled and reversed AFTER product had shipped to the customer. This means there can be hundreds if not thousands of cases of grand larceny against Intuit and also because it was more than 1 person, conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to commit a felony crime. Every person who works for Intuit can now go to prison for terms exceeding 25 years. All it's going to take is for an AG somewhere to press the charges and it's game over for the company. Now on to the financial side.... FDIC will strip their insurance which will tank their stock value, the fact they're publicly traded now brings SEC violations up the wazoo. The BOD will not be protected nor will upper and executive management. To quote the Federal Agent in the Movie National Treasure: "Somebody's got to go to jail".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,735 Posts
If you read the article, many of these transactions were cancelled and reversed AFTER product had shipped to the customer. This means there can be hundreds if not thousands of cases of grand larceny against Intuit and also because it was more than 1 person, conspiracy to defraud, conspiracy to commit a felony crime. Every person who works for Intuit can now go to prison for terms exceeding 25 years. All it's going to take is for an AG somewhere to press the charges and it's game over for the company. Now on to the financial side.... FDIC will strip their insurance which will tank their stock value, the fact they're publicly traded now brings SEC violations up the wazoo. The BOD will not be protected nor will upper and executive management. To quote the Federal Agent in the Movie National Treasure: "Somebody's got to go to jail".
Grand Larceny? That's a huge stretch, as Intuit gained nothing financially. They are in possession of neither the funds nor the goods. They are a private business and are free to conduct it as the see fit. The only recourse would be a civil suit, and unless it was a class action it wouldn't be worth the trouble.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
I can see a civil suit happening primarily focused on the fact that Intuit credited its card users’ accounts after they had received the merchandise. The transaction between the store and the customer was completed. In effect that is a contract because there was an offer, an acceptance, and consideration that changed hands. So it seems to me that an unrequested refund without the return of the goods amounts to contractual interference. Maybe we have a lawyer among us who can opine on the legality of Intuit’s actions.

A terrible complication is that when the FFL processes a NICS application the serial number of the gun is reported and eventually end up at the ATF. So if a person gets a credit and is willing to return the gun can it be done in light of the fact that it is already assigned to a NICS transaction. I think what I am asking is can you return a gun after NICS has processed the application? I do not know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,878 Posts
I could care less if they stop. Its their right. What bothers me is how they did it. Crediting back sales rather than just stopping new sales. Also, did they give their customers any notice? Maybe they did, but if the article mentioned it I missed it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,806 Posts
All they did was erase any credibility they might have had. As a business owner, you can be sure I will never again accept any credit cards issued by any Intuit affiliated company. Accepting one of their cards now, would be almost akin to accepting Confederate money as payment...:dunno:...your chances of getting paid are slim to none.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,614 Posts
They own Quickbooks, an accounting program for small businesses (like local gun stores). There are other programs out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rollin thunder

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,370 Posts
Grand Larceny? That's a huge stretch, as Intuit gained nothing financially. They are in possession of neither the funds nor the goods. They are a private business and are free to conduct it as the see fit. The only recourse would be a civil suit, and unless it was a class action it wouldn't be worth the trouble.
Grand larceny in most jurisdictions indicate theft of anything with a value of $1000. Considering that a great many firearms and firearm accessories exceed that threshold mark, Yes, Grand larceny is a very reasonable charge. Remember, they accepted the money from the buyer, product shipped, then Intuit returned the money. The buyer now gets their money back AND the product. That is theft by deception exceeding $1000 so it's grand larceny. It's also brank fraud. Bank fraud is a federal felony. so yea, people be making reservations at the extended stay graybar.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top