SC-Many Retailers-Restocking Fees

[davidfrank]

Many online retailers charge "restocking fees" on returns if the purchase price is refunded back to the customer's credit card, but charge no such fees if given as store credit.

if the purchase price is refunded back to the customer's credit card, but charge no such fees if given as

for purchases that are refunded to the customer's credit card, but not when those purchases are refunded as

when the purchase is refunded back to the customer's credit card, but not given in the form of

if the purchase price is refunded to the customer's credit card, but not if the refund is given as

whose purchase prices are refunded to the customer's credit card, and charge no such fees if refunded

I am not able to understand how two elements in the correct answer choice is parallel. How to arrive at the right answer for this question? Please advise

[tim]

the correct way to approach parallelism is not to try to figure out why two things are parallel but rather to identify any ways in which the sentence violates parallelism. how do you think the correct answer violates parallelism?

[davidfrank]

I feel that the given sentence does not have any parallelism issue....
charge "restocking fees" on returns if the purchase price is refunded back to the customer's credit card, but charge
verb (charge) x parallel to verb (charge) no y.

Please clarify if I am not thinking in the right direction

[rupali.kunmun]

Problem with B and C purchases cannot be refunded to credit card only price can be refunded

Problem with A and C -back and refunded are redundant

Problem with E instead of and, but is necessary to express a contrast

Only D expresses the parallelism correctly

if the purchase price is refunded to the customer's credit card, but not if the refund is given as

[tim]

not sure there are any questions here; please re-post if you have any issues you need us to address..

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Hi, I have a couple of questions on this problem:

A) I read this as -- charge fees if the purchase price is refunded back to the customer's credit card, but charge no such fees if[the purchase price is] given as -- i'm having a hard time seeing why this isn't accurate? The explanation in the CAT is a little hard for me to follow.

Additionally, the MGMAT CAT explanation states that -- This construction illogically suggests that the retailers themselves are given store credit. -- I don't see this?


B) The cat says that "those" refers to the same purchase before the comma. Aren't we talking about the exact same purchase but just different instances of their return? I felt like this was perfect parallelism -- fess for purchases that are refunded ..., but not when those purchases are refunded...


E) Similar problem to A.

[RonPurewal]

A) I read this as -- charge fees if the purchase price is refunded back to the customer's credit card, but charge no such fees if[the purchase price is] given as -- i'm having a hard time seeing why this isn't accurate? The explanation in the CAT is a little hard for me to follow.

"if given"—or, more generally, "if __ed" or "if (adjective)"—ALWAYS refers to the subject of the sentence.

e.g.,
Marilyn may not talk to you if distracted by the lights.
this means that, if marilyn is distracted by the lights, then she might not talk to you.
it is definitely not talking about a situation in which you might be distracted.

here, "if given as xxxx" refers to a refund. so, for this construction to work, it must be attached to something whose subject is "refund".
e.g.,
The refund will be equal to 100% of the original purchase price if given in the form of store credit.
(... but we'll deduct some amount if it goes back on your card)

[RonPurewal]

B) The cat says that "those" refers to the same purchase before the comma.

"those purchases" = exactly the same purchases described earlier.

the purchases described earlier are "purchases that are refunded to the customer's credit card"—i.e., specifically the purchases that are NOT given in the form of store credit.
therefore, it's nonsense to speak of instances in which "those purchases" are given in the form of store credit.

[abhinavsingh.iitr]

Hi Ron... This is my first post.. Regrading the Verb ed modifiers, you said that they would always modify the subject of the preceding or following clause. But this situation is only applicable if the verd ed modifiers are separated with comma. If it directly follows a noun or directly comes before it, verb ed will act as an adjective and it will modify that noun . Am I correct ?

[AnupamaW260]

Hello

Could you please tell me "when" in choice B and C are wrong. We need to use "if"...because "when" is used to indicate point of time. ?

Thanks
Anupama

[ashleyj985]

Hi Ron,
I have a doubt:

[, but] should only be used to join two independent clauses. In this particular question, no answer option seems to provide two independent clauses.

am I wrong anywhere?

[anveshr735]

Hi Ron,

I have two examples-
1-The mountains are beautiful if it rains,but not if it....
2-The players play well if..,but do not if..

Is the "do" necessary in the 2nd sentence?
I thought it was and so,i eliminated option D in this question.

Please help

[AbhishekD643]

Hello Manhattan GMAT Staff!

My query is as follows- The verb in the subordinate clause (beginning with "but") must make sense with the subject in the main clause, unless a new subject is introduced. In the OA, however -

Many online retailers charge “restocking fees” on returns if the purchase price is refunded to the customer's credit card, but not [charge?] if the refund is given as store credit

Is the word "charge" supposed be in ellipsis? Either way, the subject ("retailers") doesn't seem to make sense with the verb in dependent clause ("not charge"). I eliminated it because I was looking for something like "don't", instead of "not".

Can you guys tell me where I went wrong in my elimination?

(edit: my query is the same as @anveshr735's)

Cheers!
Abhi