I don't intend to spark a war here, but I'm getting tired of seeing responses about exchanging items at stores being 'fraud.'
There is no precise legal definition of fraud. The term is used to describe such acts as theft, deception, bribery, forgery, corruption, false accounting and conspiracy to commit these offences. A query to the police department resulted in the following statement: "For practical purposes fraud may be defined as the use of deception with the intention of obtaining an advantage, avoiding an obligation or causing loss to another party."
Exchanging an item at a store does not qualify under any of these definitions. First of all, when you exchange an item for an identically-priced item (as is the most common policy), the store doesn't gain or lose money in the transaction. You could argue that the store is hurt by inventory changes, but that's a pretty weak argument any way you look at it. My second point is that a store has the right to refuse any exchange. If it would hurt them in any way, it is well within their right to refuse the transaction. The store may volunteer to exchange the product to keep customers satisfied. Based on the definitions of fraud, it only applies if the store suffers a loss, which simply does not happen here.
Usually when I go to exchange an item, if I have no receipt I say it was received as a gift. This would be truthful in the case of this Hot Deal.
I understand the arguments against threads like 'Get a free Microsoft Intellimouse under warranty when yours isn't broken!!!" but those ethical objections simply don't apply to exchanging items. Please, save your comments about fraud for cases in which they are truly warranted.
--Michael