New around here? When you sign up for a new account, please indicate why you want to join on the registration form so we can determine which applications are genuine and which are from spammers.

Once you've signed up, please wait 12 hours or so for your account to be approved.
You must be 16 or over to participate in the Brickset forum. Please read the announcements and rules before you join.

LEGO store return policy

edited December 2011 in Shopping USA/Canada
hello can anyone tell me the lego store return policy ie if i got something as a gift can i exchange it at a store target and walmart will not take the item thanks
«134

Comments

  • I think the official policy is that it needs to have been purchased from a LEGO store or from LEGO.com, but if it's a current item in the system, you may get lucky and find someone that will take it back and give you store credit.
  • It would help if you share with us what the Lego Item # is, it is printed on the front of the box.
  • yeah. that's a big one. you might have trouble exchanging that. i myself haven't seen that one at target or at walmart. TRU will let you exchange without a receipt, but they're going to give you the lowest possible price for it, which could be as low as 50% off. if the box is sealed, your best bet might be getting store credit at the lego store. if your box is open, your best bet is selling it on ebay.
  • without a receipt it's store credit only, has to be an item they still stock.
  • Actually for that set, you might be better off selling it on eBay than trying to return it anywhere.

    Someone at the Lego store might take it, but it also is probably missing the Lego price sticker on the bottom of the box, so they might not. Depends on the person you get and how you ask. :)
  • edited December 2011
    There doesn't need to be a sticker on the bottom nor any proof it was bought at the LEGO Store. The official policy is that they will take aback any LEGO set without receipt as long as it is sealed and currently stocked. You will get store credit. This policy is on the back of the receipt.

    LEGO Stores will take down your name, address and phone number. This prevents abuse of the store's insanely generous return policy.

    I have returned LEGO sets for store credit more than once. I'm simply honest: I got this as a gift, I do not know where it came from, can I get store credit?
  • I have returned LEGO sets for store credit more than once. I'm simply honest: I got this as a gift, I do not know where it came from, can I get store credit?
    Did it worked like that? I mean, they took the returned item without asking further questions?

  • I watched a guy return 2 Roble Houses just the other day, apparently without receipt. The guy seemed pretty squirrelly IMO so I imagine he got them at B&N for a big discount or such.

    I like knowing that I can return a gift to them without having to bug someone for a gift receipt but I worry that this opens up LEGO stores to the "pilfered resealed box" situations.
  • Unopened Sets: Simply return your unopened LEGO set with your original packing slip or receipt, and we'll give you a full refund in your original payment method – no questions asked! We can also replace or exchange your unopened set. Returns of unopened sets that are not accompanied by a packing slip or receipt will be issued a merchandise credit only.

    Straight from LEGO.
  • Just curious... What's the form of the store credit when you return a set without a receipt? A gift card with an expiration date, maybe?
  • Hmm, does seem open to abuse. Say I got a couple of 50% off sets, then exchanged them for an exclusive that doesn't get reduced at all...am I ripping lego off? I think so, and since there's no store near me, I won't be doing it, but I think it would be tempting to do it once or twice to get those big modulars...
  • Hmm, does seem open to abuse. Say I got a couple of 50% off sets, then exchanged them for an exclusive that doesn't get reduced at all...am I ripping lego off? I think so, and since there's no store near me, I won't be doing it, but I think it would be tempting to do it once or twice to get those big modulars...
    I have worked at various retail outlets in my time and the general rule of thumb was if you didn't have a receipt you got the lowest price in the last 30 days. So, if an item was on sale or sold for 50% of purchase price, that is the credit the customer got that didn't have a receipt. It's always good to give gift receipts with your gifts for this reason.

  • The "lowest price" point is generally valid, but LEGO doesn't tend to discount much, so it's not really an issue there.

    I'd imagine if you did too many of these returns, they'd block you. If you're an AFOL with a relationship with the store personnel, you probably don't want to burn that bridge.

    Brent
  • I have returned LEGO sets for store credit more than once. I'm simply honest: I got this as a gift, I do not know where it came from, can I get store credit?

    Did it worked like that? I mean, they took the returned item without asking further questions?

    Yes. LEGO has a no-questions-asked return policy. They don't care if it came from somewhere else, as long as the original seals are still there and they still carry the item. I even told them it might have come from another store, they said it does not matter.
  • edited December 2011
    @Ma1234 Did they requested any type of document from you (Driver's License to store on their system) or did they asked for your VIP number? I suppose they can check your VIP account and see if the sets you are returning actually came from a LEGO store. Other retailers store your driver's license info if you are returning without a receipt, like Target or Wal-Mart. Anyone knows what's their procedures on this?
  • They just ask you to fill out your name, address, and phone number on the bottom of the return receipt.
  • Everyone, just be careful, if you abuse this, it will get changed.

    It is one thing to return an item here and there, perhaps you got on BOGO or on sale from Amazon. If you start walking in with a dozen boxes, they do reserve the right to say no.

    Keep it modest, buy 3x what you return, and we'll keep this privilege.
  • I was thinking of exactly 3 sets I have duplicates here that will be discounted on the 26th that I could return now. Nothing big.
  • edited December 2011
    The "no questions asked" statement, as written, applies to items with a receipt or packing slip. In practice, I think this often carries over to returns without receipts, but imo, knowingly bringing in an item that was purchased for cheaper elsewhere is unethical, regardless of whether you are doing this frequently or only occasionally.
  • what about opened sets? specifically the Heroica game. I played it one time and didn't like it. I'll never play it again.
  • The "no questions asked" statement, as written, applies to items with a receipt or packing slip. In practice, I think this often carries over to returns without receipts, but imo, knowingly bringing in an item that was purchased for cheaper elsewhere is unethical, regardless of whether you are doing this frequently or only occasionally.
    Absolutely. But if you receive an item as a gift and don't know where it came from (and don't want to ask the giver), just tell the LEGO Store employee the truth, and they'll likely accept the return. It's a rarity these days, but their official return policy does not require a receipt. And they do take down your information, which will stop abusers.

  • Seems kinda dishonest to me, especially if you buy it somewhere else at a discount and return it for full retail. Are people really this dishonest?
  • @Bosstone100 it brings to mind a scene from the movie 'Family Man' with Nicolas Cage if you recall:

    Don Cheadle as God's Helper: "You see that? Character! And for what, for nine bucks? I mean, thats just so disappointing"

    Even more disappointing is doing it to a company that sincerely cares about its customers.
  • @BrickDancer - Exactly! They MAKE the product! Why screw them? It doesn't make any sense to me.
  • edited December 2011
    If it's part of their policy, I don't see how returning a few sealed sets that are in production without a receipt can be considered a dishonest act. I've seen people buying stuff at Wal-Mart, use it, and try to return it Target for a refund - THAT's dishonest.

    Now this policy is just LEGO backing up its own product, and having that policy benefits them more than anything, because it's perceived as a good policy by customers in general, even if they don't return anything, ever, but to know that you have that possibility brings more customers to them. Don't forget that they are competing against its own major clients: TRU, Target and Wal-Mart.
  • I disagree. You buy a $100 at Wal-Mart for $60, then return it for $100 credit at a Lego store. That's a $40 loss right off the bat for Lego. THAT'S dishonest!
  • edited December 2011
    They are not losing anything. They sold that set originally to Wal-Mart at wholesale cost. They are giving you credit on their store for that set at regular MSRP. You'll use that credit to get another set from them, let's say set #2, at regular MSRP, and they will give it to you in exchange for the store credit. Set #2 got to the LEGO store shelves at UNDER cost, because they manufacture it, let's call it PRODUCTION cost, which is under wholesale cost, which is what TRU, WalMart and Target pay to LEGO. So, in reality, they are making money on that set. That's why they don't ask much and they don't care where you bought it and at which price, as long as it's MISB, and it's in production and can be displayed on their shelves with other similar sets.
  • I agree with @coolpix. If TLG was being gouged for, let's say $10 on every set they took back, they wouldn't use the current policy! I do agree that the current system should not be abused, however. But if you get a BOGO from TRU and want to trade in one of the sets for another one that you could not get for whatever reason, then go for it! Just don't do it too often.
  • They are not losing anything. They sold that set originally to Wal-Mart at wholesale cost. They are giving you credit on their store for that set at regular MSRP. You'll use that credit to get another set from them, let's say set #2, at regular MSRP, and they will give it to you in exchange for the store credit. Set #2 got to the LEGO store shelves at UNDER cost, because they manufacture it, let's call it PRODUCTION cost, which is under wholesale cost, which is what TRU, WalMart and Target pay to LEGO. So, in reality, they are making money on that set. That's why they don't ask much and they don't care where you bought it and at which price, as long as it's MISB, and it's in production and can be displayed on their shelves with other similar sets.
    Your logic that led you to think they are making money is flawed because you neglect to include the set given as an exchange which has come off of LEGO's books.

    The best way to look at it is that TLG will not lose anything if we assume that they will be able to resell the returned set for the same value of the set which they gave as an exchange. That condition is an important distinction because let's examine a few scenarios:

    Worst-case: the LEGO store is not able to sell the set you returned (i.e. no demand), but would have been able to sell the set(s) that you acquired in your exchange. In this case, the swap deprived LEGO of a sale.

    Best-case: the LEGO store gives you full retail value for your set and sells it for full retail value. Net gain for LEGO is zero.

    In between these two points are intricate scenarios: say you return a set for full $100 retail value, and then buy 50% clearance items from the LEGO store with that credit, which LEGO only takes half profit on as opposed to full profit. LEGO is now short the difference in profit until (and if) they can resell your returned set.
  • But if you get a BOGO from TRU and want to trade in one of the sets for another one that you could not get for whatever reason, then go for it! Just don't do it too often.
    If you need to qualify this by saying that one shouldn't do it too often, you are implying that there is something wrong but that there is some threshold where it shifts from tolerable to intolerable. What if 10,000 people read this forum and all do the same thing?

    Again, the policy as written says that they'll take an unopened set back without a receipt and my belief is that it is left deliberately vague. They don't want to advertise that they'll take sets back from other stores, but they don't want to disallow returns without a receipt because that would exclude a great deal of legitimate returns.

    Let's put it this way: if you know for sure that it was purchased elsewhere,I challenge you to let the LEGO employee know, and then let them decide if they'll honor it. Claiming false ignorance or anything else indicates you think something's rotten in the state of Denmark :P
  • Your logic that led you to think they are making money is flawed because you neglect to include the set given as an exchange which has come off of LEGO's books.
    Both sets come from LEGO anyway. Let's not forget that the LEGO store belongs to the company that makes LEGO bricks and sets, which also sells these sets to big box stores like WM, Target and TRU. My point is that it's obvious that if a set's retail price is $100, and if it's wholesale cost to the other stores is, let's say, $30, LEGO stores pay to TLG less than that. Probably $20 or even $10 per set. I can't imagine the wholesale cost being the same for LEGO Stores and other stores.
    The best way to look at it is that TLG will not lose anything if we assume that they will be able to resell the returned set for the same value of the set which they gave as an exchange. That condition is an important distinction because let's examine a few scenarios:
    Let's do it...
    Worst-case: the LEGO store is not able to sell the set you returned (i.e. no demand), but would have been able to sell the set(s) that you acquired in your exchange. In this case, the swap deprived LEGO of a sale.
    I don't agree with that logic. LEGO will sell the sets anyway, regardless which one it is because they only take items that are in production, and what's not good for an AFOL is certainly good for a kid. We love Modulars, but most people don't even look at them at the store. Even on a after Xmas sale with mark downs, I can bet they still make some money. They sold SW Mon Calamari last year for $30 after Xmas (look at @brickupdate 's blog). I bet they still made at least $5 on that set.

    Using your logic, buying an item at a Target store, and returning it without a receipt or 91 days later (you can do it once a year and they register your info on the system, and the limit is $75- their policy) can be as damaging to Target as your scenario, because that item being returned may be an item they don't carry anymore therefore it will be discarded anyway, and you'll get store credit to get a brand new item. They are then loosing money, right. No, because big box stores can return such items they don't carry anymore or are defective to the manufacturers for credit themselves, so, again, they also don't loose money.
    Best-case: the LEGO store gives you full retail value for your set and sells it for full retail value. Net gain for LEGO is zero.
    Again, if they accomplish that, they are actually making some money on the set, because they got paid $30 for the set by the other retail store originally, and when I return to them and get something at their store for the same MSRP value, it actually cost them less to put another set on the shelves. I guarantee they are not loosing anything.

    The only exception would be for licensed sets. If I return a regular LEGO property set (City, Atlantis, Alien Conquest) and get something Licensed (Star Wars, Harry Potter, PotC), then they are at a disadvantage because they have to pay licensing fees, but still, without knowing the actual numbers, I still feel that even so, they don't loose anything because their wholesale cost is probably way inferior than those they charge from other retailers, even when comparing with licensed sets.
    In between these two points are intricate scenarios: say you return a set for full $100 retail value, and then buy 50% clearance items from the LEGO store with that credit, which LEGO only takes half profit on as opposed to full profit. LEGO is now short the difference in profit until (and if) they can resell your returned set.
    I insist that they are still not loosing anything. You can't think in terms of profit alone. You must take cost into consideration. Think about this: It's common sense that LEGO Stores don't do clearance sales like the large retailers. They sell only one product, and they plan their strategy on when to make a sale, which is when an item is discontinued. So, in reality, I am returning something that's full MSRP (a production item), and getting in exchange discontinued sets that they want to get rid of. For them it's an advantage to have a brand new item on the shelves, and help them clear out the store of older sets that are on sale, so they can bring in new product, at that point, they are not making any profit on clearance items anyway, and are getting in something they can sell for full price.

    I dare to say, in all scenarios, it's a triple-crown win for LEGO. They will never loose money on this transaction, because it's their product all the time, and they will get the money out of it anyway. At the same time, they keep customers happy and coming back to the stores all the time.

    And as far as what @teal93mr2 said, as long as the policy is in place, even though it's vague, it's written and it's the law, so if there are no limits, like Target does for similar returns, you can have someone like @LegoFanTexas getting all his purchases for the past month and bringing to the store, for store credit, with no problems at all. They are not giving him money, just about $20,000 in store credit for their own product that is in production and can be sold. It's the policy, so if you follow the policy, there's no abuse.

    It would be abuse if all sets were open, or with boxes smashed, or something similar, even so, they say on their policy that they take opened sets, as long as you have the receipt, and no parts of the set are missing, for store credit. Again, LEGO will never loose.

  • To each his own, I guess. IMO, intentionally buying sets on sale from one retailer to then return them to another retailer for full credit seems just plain wrong. I'm all for trying to get the best deals, but to me, that is fraud. And the end result will likely just be a more strict return policy from TLG. But one can rationalize anything in this world. I would just challenge you to be completely honest with the store when you do this since you feel it's a win win for them. This way, they can make an informed decision.
  • edited December 2011
    I mentioned before I have 3 sets I'd return, not 300, and I plan on telling them they were not purchased there. No reason to lie, because their boxes are marked with the price sticker on the bottom, and these don't, so they'll know anyway. By the way, all 3 sets I have repeats and they were purchased originally at MSRP, it's 3 Star Wars sets, and I plan on get City sets in exchange. I am not trying to commit a fraud, just playing by their own rules, and I don't think they'll change their entire policy because I am returning 3 sets that were bought elsewhere.
  • 3 sets x 1 AFOL x 2000 Forum members...
  • Damaging, isn't it? I doubt too many people would actually do this... it's a lot of work, plus most people stick to the stuff they buy, so I'd not worry much. Plus not all of them have a LEGO store nearby...
  • I think it is the "too often" part that is key here...

    After all, if you return a MMV that is MISB and use the store credit to buy Public Transport, both sets cost the same, what does the store care?

    They are just taking one sealed set of plastic bricks and swapping it for another sealed set of plastic bricks, both current production, both in stock. I would think that if Walmart asked them to do that, they would do it for them, why not do it for Joe retail customer?

    The other issue is, are you buying more than you're returning? If you take back a $100 set and buy $300 worth of stuff, I can't see the downside for the store there if what you've given them can just be stuck on the shelf and sold as new.
  • To each his own, I guess. IMO, intentionally buying sets on sale from one retailer to then return them to another retailer for full credit seems just plain wrong. I'm all for trying to get the best deals, but to me, that is fraud.
    It is fraud if it was against Lego policy, or they required you to certify that the item was indeed bought at the Lego store or S@H.

    I've bought in sets that I did buy from S@H, had the packing slip and everything, and they just processed it as a no-receipt return, said it was just easier and they didn't care.

    The other day, I swapped out my 4 Fire Brigade 39R1 sets for the 44R1 sets, they didn't even bother processing them in the computer, just took mine and handed me 4 replacements and said have a nice day.

    They are really nice and clearly are putting customer service first. I think this does for them what it does for Amazon, they might lose out a bit here and there, but it gains them a world of goodwill from joe consumer who just wants to know there are no hassles.

    I've watched people return stuff that clearly was not what you're suggesting, they fret about receipts, packing slips, or it was a gift, etc. they are always relieved when they are told "no problem, we'll take care of it".

    Those are powerful words in today's customer unfriendly environment at many stores.

    Today I picked up some orders from TRU at the store that I ordered online, 3831 that I got BOGO at the $29.99 price (so the second one was $14.99). They had more in the store, so I asked if I could get more at the same price that was clearly shown on my paperwork. Oh my lord, you would have thought I asked them to part the red sea, they can be so hard to work with sometimes...

    So they didn't want to do it, ok I can understand that, but really, you don't have to give me a hard time about it. The attitude is a large part of it, sometimes I don't agree with every decision, but how you tell me is just as important as what you tell me. )
  • edited December 2011
    It is fraud if it was against Lego policy, or they required you to certify that the item was indeed bought at the Lego store or S@H.
    I agree with all your points, including the TRU part, whose customer service can be annoying at the least sometimes, specially at this time of the year, but what I quoted above is the key message I was trying to put across all along: It's not a fraud, because it's their policy, and they welcome it. It's a LEGO store, and all LEGO comes from LEGO... in the end, everything is at home.

    I've collected stuff from Hasbro, Wizards of the Coast, Scalextric, Tamyia and many other brands, but I've never seen one with such a great customer service that listens to their customer and with so many policies in place to favor their customers, and leave them happy and faithful, like LEGO. To me, this plays a HUGE part on this hobby, and one of the reasons I keep buying their products, and most of the time at their stores.

  • As I said, to each his own. But I believe I used the word correctly.

    fraud
    noun
    1. deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.
    2. a particular instance of such deceit or trickery: mail fraud; election frauds.
    3. any deception, trickery, or humbug: That diet book is a fraud and a waste of time.
    4. a person who makes deceitful pretenses; sham; poseur.

    fraud
    —n
    1. deliberate deception, trickery, or cheating intended to gain an advantage
    2. an act or instance of such deception
    3. something false or spurious: his explanation was a fraud
    4. informal a person who acts in a false or deceitful way
  • For the 'this is fraud' thinkers: the value of an item is never what you paid for it, it's what the NEXT person will pay for it (and under what circumstances)... The $100 set that you pay $50 for in Walmart is NOT worth $50 in the Lego store, it's worth $100... just like the same set purchased in Lego for $100 is only worth $50 at Walmart.

    What if I bought a set in walmart for Lego RRP and lost my receipt and they wouldn't take it back. Now is it OK to go to a Lego store and exchange it for something else of equal value? What if you paid RRP + TRU luxury tax, lost the receipt, and you just want something else. Now is it OK to exchange it at a lego store for a loss?

    Is there really any difference as far as the Lego store is concerned how much you originally paid for the item? Again, what matters to them is how much the set is worth and that is determined by how much the NEXT person is going to pay. And that will be RRP.
  • For there to be a fraud, Lego would have to be experiencing some sort of a loss. Exactly where is the loss? I can't figure it out.. if they start the day with 1,000 sets in stock with a cumulative RRP of lets say $100,000 and the only transaction was me returning lets say a FB that I paid $75 for and then used my $150 credit to take home a Pet Shop.. wouldn't they end the day with 1,000 sets worth $100,000? Where is the loss?


    Here's another good one.. lets say I pay $99 for a Robie House at B&N on BF but the box is damaged and it was the last one. Is it OK for me to exchange the $99 Robie House for a $199 Robie House at Lego? Is this somehow different?
  • I don't agree with that logic. LEGO will sell the sets anyway, regardless which one it is because they only take items that are in production, and what's not good for an AFOL is certainly good for a kid. We love Modulars, but most people don't even look at them at the store. Even on a after Xmas sale with mark downs, I can bet they still make some money. They sold SW Mon Calamari last year for $30 after Xmas (look at @brickupdate 's blog). I bet they still made at least $5 on that set.
    My hypothetical is not saying the LEGO store chooses not to sell the set, I am examining a scenario where they are unable to sell it, as stated -no customer demand. Perhaps you'll understand better if I name sets. Let's say you return a Robie House that was purchased with the Barnes and Noble 50% off coupon and get enough credit to buy two Emerald Nights. Let's say the Emerald Nights would have otherwise sold, but Robie House does not. So by accepting your exchange, the LEGO store has given up two sales of Emerald Night for a Robie House that is sitting on it's shelf. As long as Robie House is unsold, they have lost out on two sales and not until they sell the Robie House will they have a net gain of zero.
    Using your logic, buying an item at a Target store, and returning it without a receipt or 91 days later (you can do it once a year and they register your info on the system, and the limit is $75- their policy) can be as damaging to Target as your scenario, because that item being returned may be an item they don't carry anymore therefore it will be discarded anyway, and you'll get store credit to get a brand new item. They are then loosing money, right. No, because big box stores can return such items they don't carry anymore or are defective to the manufacturers for credit themselves, so, again, they also don't loose money.
    It's not a good comparison because in your example Target is shifting the loss back to the manufacturer. LEGO is the manufacturer and can not redirect the loss.
    Best-case: the LEGO store gives you full retail value for your set and sells it for full retail value. Net gain for LEGO is zero.
    Again, if they accomplish that, they are actually making some money on the set, because they got paid $30 for the set by the other retail store originally, and when I return to them and get something at their store for the same MSRP value, it actually cost them less to put another set on the shelves. I guarantee they are not loosing anything.
    How are they making money? You exchanged a similarly valued item; the net gain is zero. I didn't say they were losing money in this scenario. By your logic, TLG could employ people to buy sets from other retailers endlessly and take them back to the LEGO store, while taking a similarly priced item off the shelf, and somehow from this zero sum exchange, they would become the most profitable company in the world.
  • I don't think it is so much the cost of the item as it is the intent of the consumer. Do they know they are walking into a Lego store after buying a Lego set somewhere else for 50% off, trying to get something bigger and costs more than what they spent? I kinda did the opposite. I had bought a Black Pearl from Target at full price but noticed on the back of my catalog from Lego a coupon for 10% off, so I went to the Lego store, bought another Black Pearl and returned it to Target with my Target receipt from the first set. No questions asked. I wasn't intending a deceipt. I just figured it was easier than returning the one Black Pearl first and then hoping Lego store would have one.
  • For there to be a fraud, Lego would have to be experiencing some sort of a loss.
    To me, that is ancillary as I don't define my sense of right and wrong by the outcome. But I've said my $.02 here.

  • edited December 2011
    Yes, but right and wrong is an opinion, and we are all entitled to have our own. However the concept of returning things to Lego for store credit as per their policy was being called 'fraudulent' and that's what I had a hard time understanding.

    What about those examples I gave? I am genuinely curious to hear what you (and anyone else) has to say about them.
  • My original comment was as follows:

    To each his own, I guess. IMO, intentionally buying sets on sale from one retailer to then return them to another retailer for full credit seems just plain wrong. I'm all for trying to get the best deals, but to me, that is fraud.

    These are just my opinions based on my own sense of right/wrong. I don't think I can add much to your examples because they are mostly unrelated to my point.

    But if that argument is your lynchpin, I think you need to account for the change in inventory profile even if the dollars still match. Stores replenish their stock based on usage and forecast. If Bob returns 5 Robie Houses for store credit and then purchases 10 EN, he has impacted their profile on both sets but in opposite ways not to mention losing 6 sales to 6 store credits.

    None of us knows how any of these changes impact the store, it's management, their forecast or their individual and/or group goals. Maybe it has no impact. All I'm saying us that there are likely a lot more moving parts to this system than just the aggregate inventory value.

    But like I said, this is moreso just a question of right/wrong for me.
  • Called the store today. Told them I have sets that were not purchased there, and I'd like to know if they would take them for store credit, and the manager said it's perfectly fine. I can bring as many sets as I want, as long as they don't have price stickers or labels from other stores, are factory sealed and they scan into their system. Thought I'd like to mention this here. I'm going there tomorrow.
  • edited December 2011
    IMO, you're a dbag if you return an item to a Lego store if purchased the item for less than what they give store credit for.

    Edited for content by Yellowcastle 12-23-11
Sign In or Register to comment.
Recent discussions Categories