$80 Price Adjustment: What Happens When Entitled Customers Try To Cut Corners

The chaos of a home improvement store aisle is familiar territory for anyone who’s taken on a big DIY project. But for one Redditor, a quick supply run turned into an infuriating odyssey of line-cutting, entitlement, and attempted petty fraud.

Exhausted after navigating their enormous supply cart through aisle traffic, the customer was then cut in line by a family who didn’t want to wait. The entitlement of their maneuver was followed up by outright dishonesty at the register. The trio was trying to get twelve sheets of expensive drywall rung up as six.

The Redditor, pushed beyond his limits, delivered an absolutely perfect act of malicious compliance.

This shopper was testing the patience of everyone around them:

The level of poetic justice here is truly a thing of beauty. These customers were so wrapped up in their own perceived entitlement that they pulled a double offense: they broke the social contract of waiting in line, and then tried to break the legal contract of honesty at the register.

The fact that the OP, who was clearly already frustrated, waited until the cashier hit the total button to drop the correction is peak strategic revenge. He gave them the satisfaction of the perceived discount and then watched it crumble into an $80 ‘A-hole Tax.’

The Cost of a “Small” Lie

This scenario perfectly illustrates a classic psychological theory of human dishonesty. These customers were engaged in what behavioral economist Dan Ariely calls “The Fudge Factor” in his work on why people cheat. This theory suggests that people will lie and cheat just enough to benefit themselves, but not so much that they damage their own self-image of being an “honest” person.

By trying to ring up six sheets as twelve, they lied by half, it was an incremental lie, an attempt to make the situation look like an honest mistake that could be rationalized later.

But this kind of consumer dishonesty has real-world effects that go way beyond an $80 swing. When a customer or group actively misrepresents items at checkout, it contributes to “inventory shrink.” According to insights from a 2023 National Retail Federation report, losses due to inventory shrink across U.S. retailers (a measure that includes everything from shoplifting to fraud and administrative error) totaled over $112 billion.

The honest shoppers end up absorbing this financial loss through higher prices, making the customer’s decision to speak up feel like a small victory for everyone.

Here’s how the community reacted:

The justice felt sweet, and the revenge was deemed appropriate by most Redditors.

Others celebrated the perfect writing and the execution of the plan.

How to Navigate a Situation Like This

If you ever find yourself witnessing blatant consumer dishonesty or dealing with aggressive line-cutters, your blood pressure will likely spike, just like the OP’s did. The best approach to low-stakes theft is to avoid a direct confrontation.

Instead of making the cashier, who is likely just trying to get through a shift, feel like they’re being tested, talk to a manager. This outsources the uncomfortable policing to someone who is actually paid to deal with inventory issues.

However, in this case, the OP’s decision to speak directly was brilliantly executed because he could cite an easy, non-confrontational way to check the facts, asking the cashier to confirm with a supervisor. He presented himself as a concerned citizen fixing an honest error, rather than a vengeful person correcting a thief. It let them twist in their own narrative of entitlement.

In The End…

This is the ultimate vindication for every shopper who has patiently waited their turn while someone else pushes their way to the front. These shoppers started with bad manners, progressed to blatant disrespect, and finished with attempted theft. The universe, or in this case, one very patient, very tired renovator, was there to correct the error.

What do you think? Did the OP wait too long to speak up, or was the timing absolutely perfect?