Charge Back and Refunds

JohnP0100

Xeno.phon said:

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.

Are you a lawyer? ROFL!

If I get charged for product A and the company publicly says 'we aren't making A, we are making B' afterwards, I can (as a customer) ask for a refund because that's not what I thought I was buying.

Brenics

JohnP0100 said:

Xeno.phon said:

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.

Are you a lawyer? ROFL!

If I get charged for product A and the company publicly says 'we aren't making A, we are making B' afterwards, I can (as a customer) ask for a refund because that's not what I thought I was buying.

Exactly yet this does not compute with the white Knights

Kiyoris

pinktailz

ppl need to realize they are not gonna see game or their money back

learn your lesson and move on

Distopia

JohnP0100 said:

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!

HE should have never done so to begin with, because folks don't understand when a dev says "we plan to" it is not a promise, it is nothing more than the current plan, which can change at any time for a myriad of reasons. 

If people want to charge-back their donated funds they can, that's up to them, I'm not going to say it's the right thing to do at present, yet it's not my money, they'll do as they please in that regard.

Yet let me ask you this, if they release this game, and get most of what they "plan" to into it, wouldn't it be a better game than originally planned? In such a case would there be any victims in this at all?

Seems like many just lack patience to me. 

JohnP0100

pinktailz said:

ppl need to realize they are not gonna see game or their money back

learn your lesson and move on

Have you read the OP? Or am I being trolled?

Do a 'charge back' to get your money back.

Talonsin

Erillion said:

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

Where did you get that figure from?  CIG has not put out any finance numbers that I know of.  Are you using information from Derek Smarts blog? 

Could you please link the source of that 2.6 number?  Thanks.

JohnP0100

Distopia said:

HE should have never done so to begin with, because folks don't understand when a dev says "we plan to" it is not a promise, it is nothing more than the current plan, which can change at any time for a myriad of reasons. 

If people want to charge-back their donated funds they can, that's up to them, I'm not going to say it's the right thing to do at present, yet it's not my money, they'll do as they please in that regard.

Yet let me ask you this, if they release this game, and get most of what they "plan" to into it, wouldn't it be a better game than originally planned? In such a case would there be any victims in this at all?

Seems like many just lack patience to me. 

There is a difference between 'change of plan' and 'we have a different plan'.

Where is this 'donation' angle coming from?
CIG doesn't say it is a donation.
None of CIG's staff / communication has said the word 'donation' so I'm curious why people think it is.
Like I said before, CIG charges VAT for the transaction which is illegal if it was a donation.

Brenics

Talonsin said:

Erillion said:

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

Where did you get that figure from?  CIG has not put out any finance numbers that I know of.  Are you using information from Derek Smarts blog? 

Could you please link the source of that 2.6 number?  Thanks.

They got it from CR when he said 3m a month. It is one of his videos or the letter to Escapist.

Talonsin

Xeno.phon said:

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

Sure Greed Monger was cancelled but should those people have "calmed their tits" (Your words) and waited till they heard the news it was cancelled and ignored all the negative facts about the game?  NOPE!  Investments are like plants, they need tended to.  A person should keep track of them and remove them if the information shows they wont bear fruit.


Did backers sign a contract with a promise date -
OMG, this is the most silly excuse I have ever heard.  I accepted a terms of service that said if the game was not released one year after the proposed 2014 date that CIG would return all the money.  Once they realized they would miss the date and have to give that money back, they changed the terms of service. 

 
Did we pay for a gold status product? Yes.   Are we participating in the development of said product? Yes -   LOL, I guess the current PU also known to the rest of the gaming industry as a DEMO is a gold status product to you but most of us would not consider it "Gold Status"


Are the promised features being built into the game, if albeit slowly? Yes
I dont know, I dont see anything being added to the game except new ship jpegs they are selling.  The FPS module was indefinitely postponed and all the stuff they said was being delivered in a few weeks never appeared.  How much slower can you get?

Distopia

JohnP0100 said:

Distopia said:

HE should have never done so to begin with, because folks don't understand when a dev says "we plan to" it is not a promise, it is nothing more than the current plan, which can change at any time for a myriad of reasons. 

If people want to charge-back their donated funds they can, that's up to them, I'm not going to say it's the right thing to do at present, yet it's not my money, they'll do as they please in that regard.

Yet let me ask you this, if they release this game, and get most of what they "plan" to into it, wouldn't it be a better game than originally planned? In such a case would there be any victims in this at all?

Seems like many just lack patience to me. 

There is a difference between 'change of plan' and 'we have a different plan'.

I'm referring to dates... As for VAT, obviously in the EU things are different, I don't know what else to call a pledge to a game companies crowd-funding campaign, you're giving folks the money to make a game or product, with no guarantee of receiving anything in return, seems like a donation to me...

Talonsin

Distopia said:

Yet let me ask you this, if they release this game, and get most of what they "plan" to into it, wouldn't it be a better game than originally planned? In such a case would there be any victims in this at all?

Seems like many just lack patience to me. 

You ask a question that is in no way simple.  What if, during the next 4 years Elite Dangerous adds a FPS element and many of the other elements that CR has promised and Star Citizen still has not released the game?  Should we all continue to wait?  How long should we wait?  How many more changes to the terms of service should we allow?  How many more videos of the office with $1000 lamps do we need to see?  How many modules must be postponed before we should start wondering if this game will ever ship?

I love the concept of this game.  I backed it from the start on the original kickstarter.  I read they felt 2014 was a reasonable year to release the product.  I read a terms of service that said if they did not release by end of 2015 they would refund our money.  In 2013, I saw that Chris himself told an interviewer that stretch goals would NOT delay release of the game.  All those words mean NOTHING. 

I read in early 2015 when Chris said Star Marine would launch soon then in July of 2015 when he said Star Marine would launch in "weeks".  All those words meant NOTHING.

When is it no longer a lack of patience?  When is it justified to ask for a refund in your eyes?  How many more stories of coming features should I listen to and then see not delivered before the issue is no longer with me but with Chris?

TheYear1500

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. 

LOL no. 

JohnP0100

Distopia said:

I'm referring to dates... As for VAT, obviously in the EU things are different, I don't know what else to call a pledge to a game companies crowd-funding campaign, you're giving folks the money to make a game or product, with no guarantee of receiving anything in return, seems like a donation to me...

Well, CIG themselves don't believe it is and the transaction isn't done as such.
You are free to think something is a donation or not, just be prepared for someone to correct you as that is factually wrong.

CalmOceans

VideoJockey said:

Both you and your bank can be subject to legal action after a chargeback.

Your bank isn't subject to legal action because the banks are the ones who issue the chargeback. Banks are members of Card scheme networks, and they have agreements with each other regarding chargebacks.

The person requesting the chargeback isn't subject to legal action either, the worst that can happen is that the chargeback is denied.

Phry

CalmOceans said:

VideoJockey said:

Both you and your bank can be subject to legal action after a chargeback.

Your bank isn't subject to legal action because the banks are the ones who issue the chargeback. Banks are members of Card scheme networks, and they have agreements with each other regarding chargebacks.

The person requesting the chargeback isn't subject to legal action either, the worst that can happen is that the chargeback is denied.

  Chargebacks;
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/problem/how-do-i-use-chargeback

Section 75 of consumer credit act, which is usually for stuff over £100.
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/section-75-of-the-consumer-credit-act

while the bank can deny the chargeback initially, as the links describe, there is additional recourse that can be used to force the banks into carrying out the chargeback, as long as you can prove that the goods/service is not as described, but this only refers to the description of the goods/service at the time of purchase, whether they are later changed is irrelevant.
Either way, before trying to do so, you should be very sure that you do have a valid and justifiable reason for doing so, which in the case of SC, may well be the case.
interesting times indeed.
Have fun

k61977

Phry said:

CalmOceans said:

VideoJockey said:

Both you and your bank can be subject to legal action after a chargeback.

Your bank isn't subject to legal action because the banks are the ones who issue the chargeback. Banks are members of Card scheme networks, and they have agreements with each other regarding chargebacks.

The person requesting the chargeback isn't subject to legal action either, the worst that can happen is that the chargeback is denied.

  Chargebacks;
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/problem/how-do-i-use-chargeback

Section 75 of consumer credit act, which is usually for stuff over £100.
http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/section-75-of-the-consumer-credit-act

while the bank can deny the chargeback initially, as the links describe, there is additional recourse that can be used to force the banks into carrying out the chargeback, as long as you can prove that the goods/service is not as described, but this only refers to the description of the goods/service at the time of purchase, whether they are later changed is irrelevant.
Either way, before trying to do so, you should be very sure that you do have a valid and justifiable reason for doing so, which in the case of SC, may well be the case.
interesting times indeed.
Have fun

There is a flaw in your logic.  Every country has different regulations and rules regarding credit cards and taxes. 

For instance in the US if your chargeback is denied the only other recourse for you is to sue the company yourself for breach of contract or attempt to sue the credit issuer which you will never win.  You could start a class action hoping to get others to join in which would really be the best way to handle it.  You have to prove they did something wrong, and good luck with that because they are still in development cycle and giving just enough stuff to say development is still moving foward, so most courts would throw it out at this point. 

The only people that may be able to sue and win would be someone that backed the kickstarter with the delivery of 2014 stated somewhere on a jpg which still may be thrown out because backing a kickstarter is not an official contract.

People really need to have some self control and do research on things before spending their money to start with.  You should never give money to anyone who you haven't vetted yourself.

Turrican187

Would be enough if they revamp your ShipJpegThing - Then they initially sold you something but altered it later.
Indeed you're right if there is no case then there is no case (and class actions doesn't exist in the EU).

JohnP0100

k61977 said:

There is a flaw in your logic.  Every country has different regulations and rules regarding credit cards and taxes. 

For instance in the US if your chargeback is denied the only other recourse for you is to sue the company yourself for breach of contract or attempt to sue the credit issuer which you will never win.  You could start a class action hoping to get others to join in which would really be the best way to handle it.  You have to prove they did something wrong, and good luck with that because they are still in development cycle and giving just enough stuff to say development is still moving foward, so most courts would throw it out at this point. 

The only people that may be able to sue and win would be someone that backed the kickstarter with the delivery of 2014 stated somewhere on a jpg which still may be thrown out because backing a kickstarter is not an official contract.

People really need to have some self control and do research on things before spending their money to start with.  You should never give money to anyone who you haven't vetted yourself.

This entire post is essentially the 'mental gymnastics' that I was talking about.
Lets get some basic facts first.
1. There is no evidence that CIG has contested a single charge back as of this post, despite people (including myself) doing so.
2. Even CIG themselves don't believe they can use the 'in development cycle' as an excuse to the credit card company, let alone in court. 

When I backed it, it stated 'delivery late 2015'. Well now, we have something in PU that is not what I backed with a deadline that CIG refuses to give. Yep, charge back time cause the CIG refused to give out my refund.

CIG can't use the 'in development' excuse because they themselves publicly declared that they are building something else. They also can't use the 'it is just a bit late' excuse cause Chris Roberts decided to 'not give deadlines'.

Playing 'internet lawyer' with arguments that CIG themselves have considered 'dumb' is probably not a good thing.

Arglebargle

Brenics said:

Talonsin said:

Erillion said:

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

Where did you get that figure from?  CIG has not put out any finance numbers that I know of.  Are you using information from Derek Smarts blog? 

Could you please link the source of that 2.6 number?  Thanks.

They got it from CR when he said 3m a month. It is one of his videos or the letter to Escapist.

That's based on a rough estimate of expense per employee in the game/mmo industry.  Doesn't include things outside the employee's purview, but does give a idea of what the cost of a certain number of employees will run.  I have heard the general figure quoted by other folks working in other game projects.

Doesn't include mocap shoots, audio recording sessions,  marketing, fancy coffee machines,  etc;  nor any indulgences, extravagances, expenses of error, or shenanigans.....

k61977

JohnP0100 said:

k61977 said:

There is a flaw in your logic.  Every country has different regulations and rules regarding credit cards and taxes. 

For instance in the US if your chargeback is denied the only other recourse for you is to sue the company yourself for breach of contract or attempt to sue the credit issuer which you will never win.  You could start a class action hoping to get others to join in which would really be the best way to handle it.  You have to prove they did something wrong, and good luck with that because they are still in development cycle and giving just enough stuff to say development is still moving foward, so most courts would throw it out at this point. 

The only people that may be able to sue and win would be someone that backed the kickstarter with the delivery of 2014 stated somewhere on a jpg which still may be thrown out because backing a kickstarter is not an official contract.

People really need to have some self control and do research on things before spending their money to start with.  You should never give money to anyone who you haven't vetted yourself.

This entire post is essentially the 'mental gymnastics' that I was talking about.
Lets get some basic facts first.
1. There is no evidence that CIG has contested a single charge back as of this post, despite people (including myself) doing so.
2. Even CIG themselves don't believe they can use the 'in development cycle' as an excuse to the credit card company, let alone in court. 

When I backed it, it stated 'delivery late 2015'. Well now, we have something in PU that is not what I backed with a deadline that CIG refuses to give. Yep, charge back time cause the CIG refused to give out my refund.

CIG can't use the 'in development' excuse because they themselves publicly declared that they are building something else. They also can't use the 'it is just a bit late' excuse cause Chris Roberts decided to 'not give deadlines'.

Playing 'internet lawyer' with arguments that CIG themselves have considered 'dumb' is probably not a good thing.

Yes lets get some basic facts first.  CIG doesn't care about your single charge back or 100 single chargebacks at this time, the only people they would care about are the whales that have given thousands of dollars.  It isn't worth their time to care about you as a single player. 

Now that is out of the way I was just giving an example of what your recourse would be if a chargeback was denied.  And if it was you wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court if you live in the US.  We don't have the same laws as Europe that protects consumers upfront our laws are more corporate friendly.  That was my point.  

Now post your link that shows CIG thinks my argument is considered dumb and I will concede and say you are right.  Without proof you have nothing but your own beliefs about what they think.

Xeno.phon

Talonsin said:

Sure Greed Monger was cancelled but should those people have "calmed their tits" (Your words) and waited till they heard the news it was cancelled and ignored all the negative facts about the game?  NOPE!  Investments are like plants, they need tended to.  A person should keep track of them and remove them if the information shows they wont bear fruit.


Did backers sign a contract with a promise date -
OMG, this is the most silly excuse I have ever heard.  I accepted a terms of service that said if the game was not released one year after the proposed 2014 date that CIG would return all the money.  Once they realized they would miss the date and have to give that money back, they changed the terms of service. 

 
Did we pay for a gold status product? Yes.   Are we participating in the development of said product? Yes -   LOL, I guess the current PU also known to the rest of the gaming industry as a DEMO is a gold status product to you but most of us would not consider it "Gold Status"


Are the promised features being built into the game, if albeit slowly? Yes
I dont know, I dont see anything being added to the game except new ship jpegs they are selling.  The FPS module was indefinitely postponed and all the stuff they said was being delivered in a few weeks never appeared.  How much slower can you get?

It is not an excuse, it is what you have to ask yourself when claiming a charge back. Seeing as you may be challenged on the stipulations, product not being delivered on time is moot in this instance.

No, the current PTU is not a "Demo" to the rest of the gaming industry, it is an ALPHA. Meaning Not a Beta and not a gold status game (Launched). So you have no right to claim product not delivered.

The FPS was exactly what you said, a module. The features the FPS module was going to TEST for the actual game are still planned, so your point is invalid. They have no obligation to give you anything but a finished product. When participating in the development your job is to test for bugs and provide feedback if asked for it. Your job as a TESTER is not to demand they alter the entire development of the game to suit your whim (a minority whim I might add).

I am not slow, I am just staying on the topic of the OP, you should try it sometime.

Turrican187

Xeno.phon said:
[...]

No, the current PTU is not a "Demo" to the rest of the gaming industry, it is an ALPHA. Meaning Not a Beta and not a gold status game (Launched). So you have no right to claim product not delivered.
[...]

According to Lando it is a pre-Alpha.

JohnP0100

k61977 said:

Now post your link that shows CIG thinks my argument is considered dumb and I will concede and say you are right.  Without proof you have nothing but your own beliefs about what they think.

Yes, because CIG themselves has used those reasons for denying a charge back. Hang on a min...

CIG declares publicly that they are developing a different product than originally pitched.
CIG declares publicly that they won't be giving out deadlines for anything any more.

Apparently 'publicly declaring' something and then saying something else to the court / credit card company works. /sarcasm

JohnP0100

Xeno.phon said:

It is not an excuse, it is what you have to ask yourself when claiming a charge back. Seeing as you may be challenged on the stipulations, product not being delivered on time is moot in this instance.

No, the current PTU is not a "Demo" to the rest of the gaming industry, it is an ALPHA. Meaning Not a Beta and not a gold status game (Launched). So you have no right to claim product not delivered.

The FPS was exactly what you said, a module. The features the FPS module was going to TEST for the actual game are still planned, so your point is invalid. They have no obligation to give you anything but a finished product. When participating in the development your job is to test for bugs and provide feedback if asked for it. Your job as a TESTER is not to demand they alter the entire development of the game to suit your whim (a minority whim I might add).

I am not slow, I am just staying on the topic of the OP, you should try it sometime.

Did you read the OP? Or are you trolling? Once again, the mental gymnastics are out!
Not sure how 'not delivered on time' is moot when 'As promised' includes 'product as agreed at an agreed time'.

What is this 'tester' thingy? When I backed the project, it was for 'Product A in 2015' as a CUSTOMER.
CIG publicly declares that they aren't making Product A and will now make Product B.
CIG publicly declares that Product B has no deadline cause Chris Roberts said so.

Well, it looks like CIG is not 'delivering the product as agreed at an agreed time'.