Woman Sues Neiman Marcus for Rejecting Return of Items Husband Bought for Mistress — Is It Fair?
Here’s a storyline that could have been pulled from an episode of ‘The Young and the Restless.’ A former Neiman Marcus customer is suing the high-end retailer for refusing items she attempted to return. The items were gifts that the woman’s ex-husband allegedly purchased for his mistress, who not only works as a personal shopper for the store, but was also the plaintiff’s personal shopper.
But it ‘s even more complicated.
Patricia Walker was confined to a bed for three years after a terrible car accident. During that period, her husband, Robert Tennison, began spending more and more money on lavish items at Neiman’s, which Walker claims were for his lover and her personal shopper, Favi Lo.
Lo, who remains an employee of the store, earned a substantial commission from the gifts that were purchased, making it a doubly sweet deal for her.
Walker’s attorney, Mark Ticer, pointed to an increase in Tennison’s purchases from 2007 through 2010, the alleged time of the affair with Lo. He maintains that his client had no prior knowledge of the relationship until divorce proceedings and that Lo was never disciplined by her employer over these transgressions.
However, when Walker attempted to return the luxury items to the store, employees reviewed the merchandise, but did not accept them nor did they explain why they were rejecting the items. How Walker came to possess items bought for her then-husband’s mistress is not clear.
Walker isn’t so much interested in getting her money back as she is about exposing the principle of the matter. In fact, she blames the retailer. Her lawyer said, “The real villain in this case is Neiman Marcus. After learning of this affair decided they weren’t going to do anything about it.”
Neiman Marcus declined to comment.
We can understand Walker’s fury at her personal shopper sleeping with her husband and receiving both gifts and a commission on top of it. But her statements about the store’s culpability are emotionally charged and the store’s accountability isn’t exactly clear.
Also, an employee having an affair with a customer is a private matter. If Lo was picking out gifts and having Tennison buy them for he so she could receive a commission, that’s an entirely different matter that would seemingly be grounds for dismissal.
Neiman’s is also known for a generous return policy, so it’s unfortunate that Walker’s items were rejected, especially if they are in unused condition.
One thing is certain: this is a high-end mess.