A Consumer World reader, M.D., wrote to say that CVS shortchanged him recently when he went to purchase a pair of Dr. Scholl’s insoles after applying various coupons.
In particular, M.D.’s order included a Dr. Scholl’s product with a $21.49 regular price. He tendered two coupons: a $5-off Dr. Scholl’s manufacturer’s coupon and a CVS 50% off coupon on any one non-sale item. (To simplify this example, we are omitting CVS ExtraBucks credits, other account credits and sales tax that would otherwise apply in our consumer’s actual transaction.)
M.D. was expecting to get the Dr. Scholl’s insoles for around $5.74:
$21.49 Dr. Scholl’s regular price
-$10.75 50% off CVS coupon
$10.74 Price after 50% off
-$5.00 $5 manufacturer’s coupon
=================================
$ 5.74 net price
Instead, according to his receipt, he was charged $8.24:
$21.49 Dr. Scholl’s regular price
-$5.00 $5 manufacturer’s coupon
$16.49 Price after mfr. coupon deducted
-$ 8.25 50% off CVS coupon
==================================
$ 8.24 net price
The difference in those two totals is caused by the order in which the discounts were applied. If the percent-off discount is applied first followed by the deduction for the dollars-off coupon, the consumer comes out ahead and pays a lower price. If the dollars-off coupon is applied first followed by the percent-off discount, then the store comes out ahead and the consumer pays more. It’s simple math.
In our consumer’s example, CVS programmed its checkout system to use the second method saving it $2.50 on the transaction. It doesn’t matter the order the consumer presents the coupons to the checkout clerk because the checkout system juggles the order to the company’s benefit. And the CVS coupon policy says they can do just that:
*MOUSE PRINT:
CVS’ internal policy of ordering the coupons to its own benefit is not uncommon. Kohl’s, which offers percent-off and dollars-off coupons simultaneously,does it the same way — dollars-off coupons first, then percent-off coupons. The difference is that Kohl’s clearly discloses this method in their coupon acceptance policy and they don’t accept manufacturers’ coupons.
In our consumer’s particular case, there is an additional important distinction to be made. The $5 off coupon he presented was a manufacturer’s coupon and the 50% off coupon was a CVS one. We believe, as does M.D., that CVS should not get an extra benefit because the consumer also tendered a manufacturer’s coupon. They offered 50% off the regular full price of an item via their own coupon, and it was their obligation to do just that. Instead, contrary to the terms of the coupon, they only gave the consumer 50% off a reduced price.
If the consumer was savvy enough to use a manufacturer’s coupon to save more, good for him. After all, the store is getting that full $5 back from the manufacturer no matter what. Now, had both coupons been from CVS, there is a stronger argument to be made since both discounts were coming out of the store’s own pocket that the store can decide in what order they are applied.
We asked the PR folks at CVS to comment on this case, and whether they will change the company’s algorithm to apply a store coupon first when a manufacturer’s coupon is also tendered.
Their PR spokesperson’s reply in relevant part only restated the company’s policy:
As outlined in CVS Pharmacy’s coupon policy which is included both online and in each store, we reserve the right to process coupons in any order.
We think CVS missed an opportunity to stand back and re-evaluate its coupon acceptance policy to make it more fair for customers.
