Lowe's Home Improvement refused to issue rebate, unclear terms and conditions on receipt, marketing materials clash with rebate associates communication Nationwide

My father recently bought a new washing machine. On the receipt was the printout for a mail in rebate and the terms and conditions.

It reads as follows (and I am dictating it EXACTLY as they wrote it, puntuations and all):

"PURCHASE AN LG FRONT-LOAD WASHER OR (1) LG TOP LOAD DRYER PLUS (1) LG SIDEKICK PEDESTAL WASHER AND RECEIVE A $150 LOWE'S GIFT CARD BY MAIL. PLEASE VERIFY PURCHASES QUALIFY FOR THE ABOVE TERMS BEFORE SUBMITTING"

I've polled facebook and personal friends, and I've talked to grammar teachers and Academic logicians. Here are the only two interpretations I get:

1. you get the rebate if you buy the front load washer OR you get the rebate if you buy the top load dryer and sidekick washer - buy (washer) OR (dryer and pedestal)

2. Buy any of the two out of the three items and you get the rebate - buy (Washer and dryer) OR (washer and pedestal) OR (dryer and pedestal)

However, after being rejected for the rebate (my father only bought the front load washer), I called Lowe's myself, and they told me it means the following:

Buying the front load washer is a necessary but insufficient purchase to get the rebate. In addition to the front-load washer, you must also buy either the top load dryer or the sidekick - Buy (washer and dryer) or (washer and pedestal).

However, after viewing the real marketing materials with diagrams online here (lg.com/us/promotions/pdf/2017-LG-Fall-Laundry-Bundle-Rebate-Offer-final.pdf), not even the Lowe's associate can get it right. it claims you buy (washer and pedestal) OR (Dryer and Pedestal).  

Lowe's refuses to accept that it's a grammar mistake (the placement of the word "OR" is very misleading, as well as the lack of a comma after the descriptiong of the dryer and before the word "PLUS", and finally the lack of a preceding "(1)" before the description of the washer). Lowe's would not even admit that it's confusing. 

If this isn't outright malicious in its wording, it is at least a mistake of grammar, and they should make up for that by offering the rebate anyway. 

Pretty slimy.