Charge Back and Refunds

JohnP0100

This is a continuous topic in various threads where people think because the payment was X days/months/Years ago, they cannot get a refund from CIG or do a charge back.
That thinking is false, no matter what CIG tells you.

The '14 days' grace period applies after the goods is delivered as promised.
1. 'as promised' doesn't even qualify with what's in the PU. This is the reason why CIG does not contest a charge back from the credit card company. They have to prove it and CIG knows they cannot. Yes, fanboys will try and contest this through mental gymnastics but this is between CIG and VISA/MC.

2. If CIG go down the 'it was a donation' path, ask why they are charging for VAT for UK transactions. This involves TAX (which all companies dread) so CIG will 100% back down from that path, else the UK tax department will be more than happy to go 'can we see your books please?'.

3. The response from CIG might have some threatening words like 
"I would also need to advise you that if you request a chargeback incorrectly that this would in itself be considered a fraudulent action." 

Those words are meaningless as they don't apply here and it is a scare tactic. The statement is also illegal in countries like USA/UK.

I'd also like to point out that 'As Promised' includes 'time of delivery' which as we all know, Chris Roberts has decided to not give one because people kept on asking him about missed deadlines.

Charge Back Reference Material
1. The first thing would be your correspondence email with CIG when you asked for a refund. If there are threatening words by CIG in there, highlight them cause banks generally don't like their customers being threatened.

2. What is in the PU is not enough 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__BVG8bx-e0&feature=youtu.be&t=36m&ab_channel=ImperialNewsNetwork
"It is not what most company would consider Alpha" 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAE9co2LJq8&feature=youtu.be&t=2310&ab_channel=StarCitizen
Q: "Can you name a feature in the PU that is actually finished?" A: "No" / "Nothing is finished" 

3. According to Chris Roberts, 'really upset' is a valid reason to get a refund and they have refunded 1200 backers.
http://massivelyop.com/2015/08/22/star-citizen-has-refunded-over-1200-backers/

4. Additional scope will not delay the project delivery date of Nov - 2014 (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen/description)
Ex1. https://web.archive.org/web/20121103204818/http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/star-citizen-faq/

Ex2. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/12734-Draft-FAQ
The purpose of the higher stretch goals is to ensure that the game-as-described is finished in the two year time period. 

This turned into

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14839-Letter-From-The-Chairman
Will it take longer to deliver all this? Of course! When the scope changes, the amount of time it will take to deliver all the features naturally increases.

5. TOS changes 
https://web.archive.org/web/2015022...ustries.com/tos
Accordingly, you agree that any unearned portion of your Pledge shall not be refundable until and unless RSI has failed to deliver the relevant pledge items and/or the Game to you within eighteen (18) months after the estimated delivery date. 

https://web.archive.org/web/2013092...ustries.com/tos
Accordingly, you agree that any unearned portion of the deposit shall not be refundable until and unless RSI has failed to deliver the pledge items and/or the Game to you within 12 months after the estimated delivery date.

https://web.archive.org/web/2013081...ustries.com/tos
https://web.archive.org/web/2012091...tries.com/terms

6. Various features are now in question or gone
Original KS link https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen/description

a. Oculus Rift support for SC / SQ42 -> http://www.twitch.tv/cigcommunity/v/38006332  - "I can't answer that" 
b. Single Player – Offline or Online(Drop in / Drop out co-op play) -> http://massivelyop.com/2015/07/31/co-op-missions-yanked-from-star-citizens-squadron-42/
c. Mod-able multiplayer (hosted by YOU) -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaoGxOxzAwc&feature=youtu.be&t=1h50m50s&ab_channel=geekdomo - "We will be live and in operation for some time before anybody even looks at private servers."

Latest deadline missed; Feb-2016
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15138-Letter-From-The-Chairman
Our goal is to release a new update every month (so January’s would be SC Alpha 2.2). 


Update Feb - 2016
This story had a happy ending as the bank sided with the client but it can catch you if you are not careful.
Chris Roberts is on record that 'financial hardship' is a valid reason for requesting a refund.
http://www.polygon.com/2015/8/20/9180067/star-citizen-backers-claiming-refunds-are-getting-their-money-back
If there are cases where people are really upset, or facing personal hardships, on a case by case basis we take a look and we refund

However, CIG refused to refund this person's pledge because of this reason.
When the person tried to argue of 'non-delivery' in the charge back the bank got the response of 'no, that client claim financial hardship. This is fraud.' from CIG.
Client amended the story to be both 'financial hardship and non-delivery' and the bank sided with the client.
As I said before, always always stay factual and objective. Use the reference material here. CIG missed every promise date including Jan / 2015.
There are enough materials out there for the system to side with YOU and not CIG.

Kiyoris

JohnP0100 said:

3. The response from CIG might have some threatening words like 
"I would also need to advise you that if you request a chargeback incorrectly that this would in itself be considered a fraudulent action." 
OR
"I am very sorry you felt the need to perform this, however chargebacks should only ever be used for cases of genuine fraud, where you have had no recollection of making the payment yourself. Using a chargeback as a means to gain a refund is a misuse of the system, and damages both us, and your own ability to use the payment provider in the future."

Yep, companies do this all the time. If you charageback they start with threats. Ignore it.

The only reason they do this is because they get fined by the credit card company when a chargeback happens. And if enough chargebacks happen, usually the Credit Card company starts an investigation against the company.

Ignore the threats.

It has nothing to do with you. You just get your money back if the credit card company agrees. The fine is between the CC company and the gaming company.

Sovrath

Whether or not you can submit a "chargeback" depends on the issuer of your card. Every bank is different and I believe debit cards are significantly different from credit cards.

VideoJockey

Both you and your bank can be subject to legal action after a chargeback. You may be required prove you were a victim of fraud in court. Your bank will use you as a legal meat shield. Good luck. 

Kyleran

Except when you buy into this program, aren't you making a donation rather than purchasing a product?

Hey, if you can live with yourself after it, fine, ethically I wouldn't do it.

I "donated" to the CU Kickstarter a few years ago, regardless if nothing ever comes from it, I wouldn't ask for a Chargeback.

Kiyoris

The company made promises, they broke pretty much all of them.

Everyone who spent money on Star Citizen has a 101% right to chargeback every penny.

Know your rights and leverage them to the full extent.

CrazKanuk

JohnP0100 said:

This is a continuous topic in various threads where people think because the payment was X days/months/Years ago, they cannot get a refund from CIG or do a charge back.
That thinking is false, no matter what CIG tells you.

The '14 days' grace period applies after the goods is delivered as promised.
1. 'as promised' doesn't even qualify with what's in the PU. This is the reason why CIG does not contest a charge back from the credit card company. They have to prove it and CIG knows they cannot. Yes, fanboys will try and contest this through mental gymnastics but this is between CIG and VISA/MC.

2. If CIG go down the 'it was a donation' path, ask why they are charging for VAT for UK transactions. This involves TAX (which all companies dread) so CIG will 100% back down from that path, else the UK tax department will be more than happy to go 'can we see your books please?'.

3. The response from CIG might have some threatening words like 
"I would also need to advise you that if you request a chargeback incorrectly that this would in itself be considered a fraudulent action." 
OR
"I am very sorry you felt the need to perform this, however chargebacks should only ever be used for cases of genuine fraud, where you have had no recollection of making the payment yourself. Using a chargeback as a means to gain a refund is a misuse of the system, and damages both us, and your own ability to use the payment provider in the future."

Those words are meaningless as they don't apply here and it is a scare tactic. The statement is also illegal in countries like USA/UK.
A. How is it 'incorrect' when even CIG doesn't contest a chargeback cause they know they haven't delivered what was promised?
B. If goods aren't delivered 'as promised', what do you call that? FRAUD.
C. Using a charge back to get a refund is what a CHARGE BACK is suppose to do; if the merchant refuses to provide 'as promised' or refund themselves. What "misuse"?

I'd also like to point out that 'As Promised' includes 'time of delivery' which as we all know, Chris Roberts has decided to not give one because people kept on asking him about missed deadlines.


It is disappointing to see CIG use such tactics towards their supporters but there are protections for you and you absolutely have the right to use them.

This isn't a CIG tactic. I worked for a SAAS eCommerce provider for over 5 years and I can tell you that people who chronically purchase and return items can actually have their credit card revoked. Similarly, merchants running a higher than normal chargeback rate can have their abilities to accept those cards revoked. 

So to be accurate in your statements:
A) Companies CAN contest chargebacks, but it's a question of worth. Also, as a customer, you could be taken to small claims court if the company really wants to fight for their money, but I'd say that's not likely. 

You would have a very difficult time with your definition of "as promised" since all that's every been given are estimates. You cannot say whether the product has been delivered as promised. Also, you probably agreed to TOS when you purchased, so if the chargeback rate starts to exceed 1 or 2% and they wanted to look like real aholes they could probably fight it. 

C) Just to be clear, a refund is NOT what a chargeback was designed to do. Has it become a popular way to leverage a refund? Yes. However, the expressed purpose is for fraudulent or disputed charges. So, once again, yes, if you believe that a chargeback == a refund then your credit card will soon cease to function. 

TalulaRose

I got my refund early. I figured the longer the wait went on and the more and more complaints that came, there would come a point where getting a refund would become difficult/impossible.

Last time I go down the road of kick-starter.

Sovrath

CrazKanuk said:

This isn't a CIG tactic. I worked for a SAAS eCommerce provider for over 5 years and I can tell you that people who chronically purchase and return items can actually have their credit card revoked. Similarly, merchants running a higher than normal chargeback rate can have their abilities to accept those cards revoked. 

So to be accurate in your statements:
A) Companies CAN contest chargebacks, but it's a question of worth. Also, as a customer, you could be taken to small claims court if the company really wants to fight for their money, but I'd say that's not likely. 

You would have a very difficult time with your definition of "as promised" since all that's every been given are estimates. You cannot say whether the product has been delivered as promised. Also, you probably agreed to TOS when you purchased, so if the chargeback rate starts to exceed 1 or 2% and they wanted to look like real aholes they could probably fight it. 

C) Just to be clear, a refund is NOT what a chargeback was designed to do. Has it become a popular way to leverage a refund? Yes. However, the expressed purpose is for fraudulent or disputed charges. So, once again, yes, if you believe that a chargeback == a refund then your credit card will soon cease to function. 

I think all of this is pretty much the "right" of it.

From what I understand it is doubtful that a company will take you to small claims court for an internet purchase but if you use your "chargebacks" as a regular refund, credit card companies might not be amused.

spidii

I went to my bank, explained the whole situation, showed them all of the documentation and they charged it back happily. 

JohnP0100

VideoJockey said:

Both you and your bank can be subject to legal action after a chargeback. You may be required prove you were a victim of fraud in court. Your bank will use you as a legal meat shield. Good luck. 

This is only if the merchant actually challenges the charge back and VISA/MC agrees.
CIG doesn't even contest a charge back.

JohnP0100

Kyleran said:

Except when you buy into this program, aren't you making a donation rather than purchasing a product?

Hey, if you can live with yourself after it, fine, ethically I wouldn't do it.

I "donated" to the CU Kickstarter a few years ago, regardless if nothing ever comes from it, I wouldn't ask for a Chargeback.

It is ILLEGAL to charge Value Added Tax (VAT) to a donation in the UK.
Guess what? CIG charges VAT!
This means CIG doesn't consider the transaction as a donation.

Now, you might think 1+1 = 3 and that's fine. Just be aware that's factually wrong.

kitarad

This would be disastrous if more people started doing this for any Kickstarter and not just Star Citizen.

Kyleran

It seems to me the people most worried about refunds and chargebacks are those who actually don't have any money invested in the game.  I have not seen a long line of $500+ backers looking for their refunds here and claiming they've been cheated/lied to/defriended in facebook.

JohnP0100

CrazKanuk said:

JohnP0100 said:

This is a continuous topic in various threads where people think because the payment was X days/months/Years ago, they cannot get a refund from CIG or do a charge back.
That thinking is false, no matter what CIG tells you.

The '14 days' grace period applies after the goods is delivered as promised.
1. 'as promised' doesn't even qualify with what's in the PU. This is the reason why CIG does not contest a charge back from the credit card company. They have to prove it and CIG knows they cannot. Yes, fanboys will try and contest this through mental gymnastics but this is between CIG and VISA/MC.

2. If CIG go down the 'it was a donation' path, ask why they are charging for VAT for UK transactions. This involves TAX (which all companies dread) so CIG will 100% back down from that path, else the UK tax department will be more than happy to go 'can we see your books please?'.

3. The response from CIG might have some threatening words like 
"I would also need to advise you that if you request a chargeback incorrectly that this would in itself be considered a fraudulent action." 
OR
"I am very sorry you felt the need to perform this, however chargebacks should only ever be used for cases of genuine fraud, where you have had no recollection of making the payment yourself. Using a chargeback as a means to gain a refund is a misuse of the system, and damages both us, and your own ability to use the payment provider in the future."

Those words are meaningless as they don't apply here and it is a scare tactic. The statement is also illegal in countries like USA/UK.
A. How is it 'incorrect' when even CIG doesn't contest a chargeback cause they know they haven't delivered what was promised?
B. If goods aren't delivered 'as promised', what do you call that? FRAUD.
C. Using a charge back to get a refund is what a CHARGE BACK is suppose to do; if the merchant refuses to provide 'as promised' or refund themselves. What "misuse"?

I'd also like to point out that 'As Promised' includes 'time of delivery' which as we all know, Chris Roberts has decided to not give one because people kept on asking him about missed deadlines.


It is disappointing to see CIG use such tactics towards their supporters but there are protections for you and you absolutely have the right to use them.

This isn't a CIG tactic. I worked for a SAAS eCommerce provider for over 5 years and I can tell you that people who chronically purchase and return items can actually have their credit card revoked. Similarly, merchants running a higher than normal chargeback rate can have their abilities to accept those cards revoked. 

So to be accurate in your statements:
A) Companies CAN contest chargebacks, but it's a question of worth. Also, as a customer, you could be taken to small claims court if the company really wants to fight for their money, but I'd say that's not likely. 

You would have a very difficult time with your definition of "as promised" since all that's every been given are estimates. You cannot say whether the product has been delivered as promised. Also, you probably agreed to TOS when you purchased, so if the chargeback rate starts to exceed 1 or 2% and they wanted to look like real aholes they could probably fight it. 

C) Just to be clear, a refund is NOT what a chargeback was designed to do. Has it become a popular way to leverage a refund? Yes. However, the expressed purpose is for fraudulent or disputed charges. So, once again, yes, if you believe that a chargeback == a refund then your credit card will soon cease to function. 

CIG hasn't contested a single charge back yet but we have lots of people on-record of doing charge backs; myself included.

It can't be delivered as promised because CIG themselves have changed the scope / game / timelines since the beginning. Customer doesn't have to prove anything when the company themselves have publicly declared to make something else entirely.

A charge back is one of the customer protection process. That's the actual definition.

When doing the charge back, make sure to point to the original KickStarter page, the various promises and deadline missed and make sure to include the 'we will no longer give out deadlines' quote by Chris Roberts.

Rhygarth

Either back a kickstarter from start to finish (with all the changes along the road) or keep your cash in the bank!

Taking cash from some people is way to easy.

Talonsin

[mod edit]

Did you say the same thing about Greed Monger?  What about Pathfinder Online?  Should those people also "Calm their tits"? 

How many times must Chris Roberts go back on his word for people to be justified in your eyes? 

Game promised in 2014 - Nope!
Stretch goals will not delay release - Nope!

Here is a list of all the promised features to be in the game that Chris has made over the last few years and how many are actually in the game.  Notice how long the list is of missing features...  It will take 4 more years at the very least to get all those features in the game. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/2e2vk5/keeping_em_honest_take_ii_a_breakdown_of_claims/

How can you tell people who signed up for the initial kickstarter back in 2012 and were told they would have a complete game by 2014 that they should calm their tits and wait until 2020? 

JohnP0100

Kyleran said:

Except when you buy into this program, aren't you making a donation rather than purchasing a product?

Hey, if you can live with yourself after it, fine, ethically I wouldn't do it.

I "donated" to the CU Kickstarter a few years ago, regardless if nothing ever comes from it, I wouldn't ask for a Chargeback.

Ethics... ROFL!
So.. hang on.
KS from 2012, 4 years on, every single feature has been changed and CIG doesn't have a deadline to anything (let alone the game) cause 'Chris Roberts - we will not give out deadlines anymore'.

Ethics? Really? ROFL!

Adjuvant1

CalmOceans

JohnP0100 said:

"I would also need to advise you that if you request a chargeback incorrectly that this would in itself be considered a fraudulent action." 

Threats like these are illegal.

I have done several chargebacks for things that were damaged or didn't arrive on time.

Xeno.phon

Talonsin said:

[mod edit]

Did you say the same thing about Greed Monger?  What about Pathfinder Online?  Should those people also "Calm their tits"? 

How many times must Chris Roberts go back on his word for people to be justified in your eyes? 

Game promised in 2014 - Nope!
Stretch goals will not delay release - Nope!

Here is a list of all the promised features to be in the game that Chris has made over the last few years and how many are actually in the game.  Notice how long the list is of missing features...  It will take 4 more years at the very least to get all those features in the game. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/2e2vk5/keeping_em_honest_take_ii_a_breakdown_of_claims/

How can you tell people who signed up for the initial kickstarter back in 2012 and were told they would have a complete game by 2014 that they should calm their tits and wait until 2020? 

Greed Monger was canceled by the devs if i recall, so like I said, until roberts does that no one has any place to talk shit or legal grounds to do ANYTHING.

Did backers sign a contract with a promise date? No

Did we pay for a gold status product? Yes

Are we participating in the development of said product? Yes

Are the promised features being built into the game, if albeit slowly? Yes


Tell you what, why no go charge back your ISP when your speed dips below the stated amount and see how far you get in the ensuing court battle. No dates were promised, features stated are being worked on, game is not yet released and you are getting everything you were told you would get at this stage in the games development.

Play what if all you like to fuel your bias, I will stick to reality tyvm.

Erillion

Adjuvant1 said:

Go ahead ... Switch to "Month" ... Show Nov and Dec with over 5 Million $ each and January with 2.7 M$. 

Compare with estimated current monthly burn rate of around 2.6 M$. 


Have fun

Adjuvant1

Erillion said:

Go ahead ... Switch to "Month" ... Show Nov and Dec with over 5 Million $ each and January with 2.7 M$. 

You really don't see what I see, do you.

Arglebargle

kitarad said:

This would be disastrous if more people started doing this for any Kickstarter and not just Star Citizen.

Star Citizen only raised about 6 million under the aegis of Kickstarter.  All the rest of the money came from  their own efforts.   Now, they've tried to screw the Kickstarter folks by declaring the game 'done.'  Which is cheezy.   The Cash-Shop-in-Advance is different.   But a  little bit of nebulous ground so far.

Kiyoris

maskedweasel

Xeno.phon said:

Talonsin said:

[mod edit]

D

Tell you what, why no go charge back your ISP when your speed dips below the stated amount and see how far you get in the ensuing court battle.

I do this all the time.  If I find I'm not getting good speeds or my internet goes down I contact my ISP.  If they see issues that cause this , they credit my account for my downtime.  no need to even deal with chargebacks or disputes.  I have COMCAST too, which has often been called the worst customer service in the US.  If they're willing to give me back some of my money when they know they're in the wrong, then shouldn't every company?