Consumer: If you buy a watch at a department store and use it only in

Question

Consumer: If you buy a watch at a department store and use it only in the way it was intended to be used, but the watch stops working the next day, then the department store will refund your money. So by this very reasonable standard, Bingham’s Jewelry Store should give me a refund even though they themselves are not a department store, since the watch I bought from them stopped working the very next day.

The consumer’s argument relies on the assumption that

(A) one should not sell something unless one expects that it will function in the way it was originally designed to function

(B) a watch bought at a department store and a watch bought at Bingham’s Jewelry Store can both be expected to keep working for about the same length of time if each is used only as it was intended to be used

(C) a seller should refund the money that was paid for a product if the product does not perform as the purchaser expected it to perform

(D) the consumer did not use the watch in a way contrary to the way it was intended to be used

(E) the watch that was purchased from Bingham’s Jewelry Store was not a new watch

tkorzhan1995 · Answer

GMATNinja , Bunuel, please advice if my answer is right:
Case1: Department store-watch stops working --> customers should be refunded money.
Case 2: BJS - watch stopped working the next day --> customers should be refunded money. 
Issue: Assumption should fill the gap of applying logic from Department stores to BJS.
(A) one should not sell something unless one expects that it will function in the way it was originally designed to function

(B) a watch bought at a department store and a watch bought at Bingham’s Jewelry Store can both be expected to keep working for about the same length of time if each is used only as it was intended to be used - Incorrect
Correlation between amount of time to use watch and using watch as it was intended to be used does not underline this argument. Assumption should strengthen correlation between product does not perform as it is expected and customers are refunded money. 
(C) a seller should refund the money that was paid for a product if the product does not perform as the purchaser expected it to perform- Correct
I did not negate this statement since I found there are several ways to negate this statement. 
I selected this answer choice because it provided a link between course of action between department stores and BJS.

(D) the consumer did not use the watch in a way contrary to the way it was intended to be used

(E) the watch that was purchased from Bingham’s Jewelry Store was not a new watch

PyjamaScientist · Answer

Bunuel  and  GMATNinja  have their hands full. Lets see if we can help each other here.

(C) can not be the answer. I will explain why. The premise states that the refund happens only  (1)   If the watch is "used" the way it was intended to be used  . This piece of information is missing from the conclusion. So, this " has to be assumed " to reach to the conclusion.

Also, observe that the premise talks about the watch bought from a departmental store, whereas the consumer bought the watch from the jewelery store.  Premise   and  Position   of the consumer have a  mismatch . What if the watch sold at the departmental store is different from the watch sold at the jewelery store?  (2)  There has to be some linkage between two  . No? Or how else can you apply the same logic to two different entities.

So, if you look at the options only ( B ) and ( D ) make some sense. Rest are  irrelevant .

( B ) Touches upon both the aspects, first it equates both the watches (one bought from D. Store and other from J. Store), and then it states that they are same   if   watch was used " the way it was intended to be used ". So, the consumer should be refunded.

( D ) states that the watch was used the way it was intended to be used but says nothing regarding whether the two watches are   same or alike.  So that the logic of refund that applies to one can also be applied to the other.

( B ) though tries to touch upon both the issues at hand it presents a possibility. It does not state explicitly that the consumer "did definitely" use the watch " the way it was intended to be used ". ( D ) states that part explicitly and mildly helps in our conclusion.

The ambiguity this question leaves is characteristic of LSAT questions. This is why  carcass  has advised in past to not go for LSAT questions while preparing for GMAT.

SaiPavanR · Answer

I came down to B, C and D.

Logic -> Department store(DS) -> to provide refund, provided that the watch is used the way it is meant to be used
 Jewellery store(JS) -> to provide me refund

It is evident that there is a gap in logic. Why should JS provide refund as DS does? Did the watch bought from JS meet the condition of DS i.e., the watch is used the way it is meant to be used

Option D fills the gap in logic.

So, option D is right. Let me know if I wrong. Thanks!

Bunuel · Answer

EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT

Wait, what? You could drive a truck through the holes in the logic here. My first two objections would be: 1) How did you use the watch? Did you use it only in the way it was intended to be used, or did you use it improperly and smash it up somehow? And 2) why do you expect Bingham’s, which is not a department store, to offer the same return policy as a department store? These are pretty big holes.

The question asks us to find an assumption on which the argument relies (a necessary assumption) and I think my two objections, above, are going to point out the answer. Let’s see.

A) The argument is not about who should or should not  sell  something. It’s about whether Bingham’s should take back the watch. This can’t be the answer because it’s just not related to the conclusion of the argument.

B) It’s not about length of time. He only had the watch for one day, for one thing. Not even close.

C) I think this one would be the answer if it was a Sufficient Assumption question, because if this answer is true, then Bingham’s probably has to take back the watch, but I don’t think this is a good answer for a Necessary Assumption question. In other words, I think this answer could be untrue (not all sellers have to refund all purchasers) and the argument would still stand. Remember, the correct answer on a Sufficient Assumption question, if true, will force the argument to win. The correct answer on a Necessary Assumption, if false, will force the argument to lose. This is a Necessary Assumption question, so we’re still looking.

D) If this is untrue, then I think the argument completely collapses. If the guy used his watch as a doorstop for a day, or as an anvil, and then it stopped working, then why on earth would Bingham’s be obligated to issue a refund? This is the best answer so far. If it’s untrue, the argument is in big trouble. That’s what “necessary” means.

E) None of the facts is about whether a purchased watch is “new” or not. This is irrelevant.

So our answer is D.

unraveled · Answer

Consumer: If you   buy  a watch at a department store  and   use  it only in the way it was intended to be used , but the watch   stops  working the next day , then the department store will   refund  your money . So by this very reasonable standard, Bingham’s Jewelry Store should give me a refund even though they themselves are not a department store, since the watch I bought from them stopped working the very next day.

The consumer’s argument relies on the assumption that

(A) one  should not sell  something unless one expects that it will function in the way it was originally designed to function - WRONG. It is not about not selling.

(B) a watch bought at a department store and a watch bought at Bingham’s Jewelry Store can both be expected to  keep working for about the same length of time  if each is used only as it was intended to be used - WRONG. Nothing was wrong except the "length of time" usage as it modifies the passage.

(C) a  seller should refund the money  that was paid for a product if the product does  not perform as the purchaser expected  it to perform - WRONG. On both highlighted parameters this choice falters. Both are out of scope and a bit of exaggeration.

(D) the consumer  did not use the watch in a way contrary to the way it was intended  to be used - CORRECT. Going by the passage this one touches intended way of usage and if that doesn't happen then passage is broken apart.

(E) the watch that was purchased from Bingham’s Jewelry Store  was not a new watch  - WRONG. New or old is irrelevant.

Answer D.

KarishmaB · Answer

Premises: If you buy a watch at a department store and use it only in the way it was intended to be used, but the watch stops working the next day, then the department store will refund your money. The watch I bought from Bingham’s Jewelry Store stopped working the very next day. Conclusion: By this very reasonable standard, Bingham’s Jewelry Store should give me a refund even though they themselves are not a department store The consumer says that the department stores have a certain standard. By that standard, BJS should give him a refund i.e. if the same standard is applied on BJS, they should give him a refund. He tells us that he deserves to get the refund because the watch stopped working the very next day. But he doesn't tell us whether he satisfied the second condition for refund - the watch was used only in the way it was intended to be used. This is an assumption he makes. (A) one should not sell something unless one expects that it will function in the way it was originally designed to function There is no discussion on conditions under which one should sell something. (B) a watch bought at a department store and a watch bought at Bingham’s Jewelry Store can both be expected to keep working for about the same length of time if each is used only as it was intended to be used The length of time for which the watch should keep working is not discussed. This would be a discussion on the lines of - a watch of this quality sold in departmental stores is expected to work for 20 years but my watch gave way after just 15 years even though I bought it from BJS. BJS sells used watches. The discussion is about defective products - the watches that go bad next day itself. Also, it is not about the similarity between watches sold at departmental stores and BJS - the point is that the stores use a certain standard and if that standard is used on BJS then by that standard BJS should refund the money. (C) a seller should refund the money that was paid for a product if the product does not perform as the purchaser expected it to perform This generic statement is not an assumption made by the consumer. There is no discussion of purchaser expectation - that is a totally different discussion. Different purchasers could have vastly different expectations - say a watch should last 20 yrs vs it should last 50 yrs so even beyond this argument, it doesn't make sense. The consumer is using a defined standard used in stores to establish his expectations. (D) the consumer did not use the watch in a way contrary to the way it was intended to be used This was what was missing from our premises. He tells us that his watch stopped the next day but doesn't tell us that he used it only in teh way it was intended to be used. This is an assumption he makes that it is obvious I used it only in the way I was supposed to use it. So I should get a refund. Correct. (E) the watch that was purchased from Bingham’s Jewelry Store was not a new watch The consumer does not assume that it was not a new watch. Answer (D) Discussion on Assumption Questions: https://youtu.be/O0ROJfljRLUA Hard Assumption Question: https://youtu.be/0j4tovGifIg

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Consumer: If you buy a watch at a department store and use it only in

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Consumer: If you buy a watch at a department store and use it only in

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards