Brooklyn, NY – A Crown Heights dad seeking to help his son’s school through a Scott Tissue promotional campaign is now the target of an investigation by the toilet paper producer.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
The NEW YORK DAILY NEWS (http://nydn.us/VEXkct) is reporting that Nechemia Newman, 33, must wait to see if he is eligible to collect anything on the six figure number he claims Scott Tissue owes his son’s school.
A promotional campaign sponsored by Scott Tissue claimed the toilet paper king would pay up to $.50 to a school of choice for each box top sent into the company.
Newman claims he has sent in over 300,000 box tops to date.
In hopes of replacing the leaky roof at his son’s yeshiva and helping four other Jewish schools in Brooklyn, Newman created a network of parents, families, and friends to help. But ultimately it was his recruitment of a local Scott Tissue wholesaler that has now landed him in hot water.
The wholesaler, who sells Scott products to Brooklyn delis, bodegas, and corner stores, gives any unused box tops to Newman.
“He buys truckloads and repackages them,” said Newman. “He supplies the bodegas and throws out the packaging.”
Scott Tissue officials began receiving garbage bags full of clipped box tops from Newman about nine months ago.
“We had such an extraordinary high number of coupons redeemed by one person that we still need to figure out if the coupons were gathered appropriately,” said Scott spokesman Bob Brand. “Until we are comfortable with verifying how this was obtained we are not in a position to pay.”
Scott has hired a private investigator to handle the case.
Unless there were conditons stated that forbade what he did, Scott has to honor it’s promotion. Theyt will lose me as a customer if they don’t.
So meanwhile Mr. Newman can zeech upvishen….
This can go either way, because Scott admits to receiving “garbage bags full” of boxtops. However they might have a legal disclaimer that states what the refund limit per entree is.
Yasher koach to him anyway.
outsmarted by a yiddishe kop 🙂
It’s in the best interest of Scott to pay up… and after that they can amend their rules to limit the payouts.
This is going to be a test of will and fine points of the promotion. The maker sells to a distributor who then breaks down the packages and gives away the packaging. I don’t see any consumer being hurt by this since the smaller stores sell by the individual package and not the bulk pack. The maker also chooses to package this way. The remaining questions will be whether this violates the makers promotion per the fine print and if not whether they are willing to honor the promo or face bad press over hair splitting. The bulk packages are usually sold to consumer via he wholesale clubs. The maker knows the channels of distribution that the distributor has. They may have a weak case against paying if the terms weren’t violated.
Yasher koach for what, exactly? For taking advantage of the system and doing this in a way that is OBVIOUSLY not what Scott had in mind, and thereby making a CHILLUL HASHEM? This is why people hate Jews. He may be well within the letter of the law, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that he is not playing by “the rules”.
To modify my previous statement, allow me to say that I judge Mr. Newman favorably and assume that he simply doesn’t realize how his actions are perceived, but I believe it is a Chillul Hashem regardless.
This is similar to the wise guys who open 1,000 credit card accounts in order to take advantage of loopholes in the rewards/miles/points systems. It may be legal, but it’s far from yashrus.
Not that this is as bad as the credit card tricks, but it’s in the same general category.
LOOK FOR SOME BETTER WAYS IN BRINGING MONEY TO YOUR SONS YESHIVA
If he didnt violate any fine print contest rules, they should pony it up and pay and make a big PR event out of it and get mpore than 150k in free advertising. Unless they are anti semitic of course and would pay him if he were Black but not if he has a beard and yarmulke. If they dont pay him, we should boycott thier product. By Tuesady after Shabbos cholent they will capitulate from the decreased millions in sales.
The particpating manufacturers in ‘Box Tops for Education’ agree to pay an amount to specified charities for each box top collected from the retail purchase of a participating product.
When Mr. Newman submitted the outer bundle wrappings from Scott Toilet Tissue that had been ‘unbundled’ by a wholesaler he did NOT submit proofs of purchase for Scott tissue that had been purchased by a retail consumer. The contents of those bundles are on the shelves of small shops awaiting sale to retail customers who may be denied the chance to redeem the ‘box tops’ for the charities of their choice.
If Newman sent in an outer bundle from a 20 pack of Scott Toilet Tissue that was wholesaled, why should Scott have to pay out on the bundle wrapper and again on the individual paper wrappers from single rolls sold at the corner store?
This is just plain ganeva on Newman’s part.
One is permitted to collect the ‘box tops’ from other retail purchasers and redeem them in bulk to benefit a charity, but the bundle wrappers Newman goit from the wholesaler do NOT represent units sold at retail.
The wholesaler refuses to give his name, this attorney knows he could be charged w/conspiracy to commit fraud.
Scott-Tissue should really do the smart thing. They now have a unique PR opportunity.
If they are a good sport about this, the favorable publicity they will garner is worth a large fortune in advertising.
Conversely, if they are “Grinchy” about this, the bad publicity will be bad for business.
In the future they could/should write the proper disclaimers in the list of rules for their promotions. But THIS time they should behave like El-Al did recently.
I think that in such situations the financial loss is by far offset by great public-relations gain.
(And in this particular instance, they would get a Mitzvah too… Lucky them…)
CTJEW,
You bring up wonderful points and I appreciate your input. There are a few details that the article missed that would put all of your claims to rest.
1. The items were bought at a retail level – not a wholesale level. This means that the wholesaler bought the items just as any other consumer would buy these items from an existing retailer. He just buys it on a grander scale. This means the box top is owned by the buyer and is in perfectly redeemable as if you went to the store at bought this item.
2. He then resells the individual tissues which do not have the box tops on it. The wrapper was being thrown out in the middle of this process. This was no gimmick
is the packaging of the small units that the wholesaler repackages marked “not for resale” if so… fraud has been committed.
This guy cheated, plain and simple. You have to play by the rules, b’pashut. He is an embarrassment to all of us.
The participating “boxtop” companies are commiting themselves to pay for every boxtop they print. Although, if every single one printed would be redeemed they would loose more then they are prepared to payout – they rely on the fact that many will not cash-in their coupons. Scott is the one trying to get away “scott free” by backing away from their promotion when its inconvenient for them. This is similar to collecting soda cans that you yourself did not purchase – totaly legal and it is illegal for a store to refuse to pay you for it.
I do want to apologize to Mr. Newman for anything I wrote above which may have offended him – it is nothing person, I don’t know you and I don’t know all of the particulars of this situation. I am basing it just on what I’ve read here on VIN. My main point is that this is sort of paying your utility bill in pennies, or taking your soda bottle back to the bartender for 500 refills in one evening . . . . it may be within your rights, but that doesn’t mean it’s not going to leave a very bad taste for the folks on the other side of the deal. And yashrus means going beyond what you can get away with, even if you are 100% in the right.
Sounds like they’re trying to get off “Scott free”
CT Jew and USE YOUR HEAD,
Thank you for your continued input in this civil conversation. I would like to give you my point of view on your points.
1. I don’t know where you got the idea that these were from 20 pack Scott tissues but these were not from such a product. The individually wrapped rolls do not say “not for resale” nor do they have individual box tops.
2. When I say these were bought on a retail level – it means he paid the same price any consumer would have paid if they would have bought these packages from this retailer and they were bought from a retailer. It is as if 100,000 people bought from this store the product and they all gave the coupons to the schools to be redeemed. I do not see a major difference to Scott tissue between one person donating 100,000 box tops to a school or 100,000 people redeeming one box top.
3. I understand your point about yashrus and I think you would have a very good point if these were bought at a wholesale level (wholesale prices) or outside the retail level of distribution. In addition these coupons were not used to benefit me personally. They were used solely to benefit the schools that they were donated to.
Not quite the same thing, but those of you old enough to remember Green shield Stamps might remember the hullabaloo over the guy who had enough books to redeem for a car. I wish I could remember what ultimately happened, but I do remember the company was looking to weasel out of the deal. Sounds very similar to this situation.
I hate shtick, and this is why
(copied with permission from Artscroll Baba Kamma 113a)
Chillul Hashem:
The Gemara forbids even behavior that would otherwise be permitted, lest it desecrate the Divine Name. Anyone who acts toward a Jew or non-Jew in a manner that is *perceived* as unjust or improper has desecrated the Name, even if the deed in question is not an actual transgression. The duty to avoid such conduct is especially incumbent on those who are conspicuous as pious Jews, insofar as they are judged by higher standards. Rambam writes: “When a person who is great in Torah scholarship and renowned for piety does things that cause people to murmur against him, although they are not transgressions, he thereby desecrates the Name. For example, he buys and does not pay immediately … or he does not speak with people pleasantly, or he does not receive them with a cheerful expression on his face (Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 5:11).”
contd.
contd.
Rambam writes: “The Torah scholar conducts his business affairs honestly and faithfully … He is strict with himself in his calculations, but he gives liberally to others when buying from them and is not strict with them. He pays for his purchases immediately. He does not commit himself formally … so that he never has to renege on a commitment … If others are legally obligated to him, he extends the time for their payment and pardons them. He lends to others and grants favors. He does not compete against the business of another. He never in his life causes distress to anyone. The sum of the matter is that he puts himself among those who, though they are pursued, do not pursue; among those who, though they are offended, do not offend. A person who observes all these practices and their like is described in the verse (Yishayah 49:3): He said to me: You are My servant, Israel, through whom I am glorified (Hilchos Dei’os 5:13).”
CT Town:
It does not say anywhere in the rules on boxtops website that the box top has to come from Retail sales. Please confirm where you got this info from if not from the official rules. A spokesmen can say whatever they want, but it has to follow the official rules.
You accused the wholesaler of fraud!! What fraud did the wholesaler do? It seems like he was trying to do something completely legitimate by donating the packages. Is that fraud?
What Gneyva did Mr. Newman do? He was just trying to follow the rules and get money for his school?
The packages shows look very similar to the 20 pack, 24 pack, 30 pack, 36 pack. Hmm I didn’t know you were such an expert in toilet paper.
The official rules need to be shown here to stop this debate…or maybe it will prolong it subject to interpretation of the rules by everyone. Mr. Newman may or may not have been contest terms correct, but his heart appears to be in the right place for wanting to help his son’s school out….the same applies to the Wholesaler who has been helping him.
Seems like CT Jew is at a loss of words. A simple copy and paste would answer my question about where it says anything about retail sales in the rules. I read them over a few times at I couldn’t find it.
All you guys are missing the point. Even if what he did was within the rules, he should not have done it because it looks like he is exploiting the system. Clearly, he’s a nice guy because he did it for tzedoko. But the bottom line is that such behavior is a chillul Hashem. See comments 37 and 38.
Ask yourself: Would the Chofetz Chaim have done this?
Kim Li – I understand your position but CT Jew was attacking him based on the actual rules – if he is an attorney as he claims then he is making a very poor argument. Remind me not to use him if I need an attorney.