Charge Back and Refunds

Erillion

JohnP0100 said:

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

You do remember that people signed a "timeframe is subject to change" caveat together with the TOS (in EVERY version of the TOS) ?


Have fun

JohnP0100

Erillion said:

JohnP0100 said:

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

You do remember that people signed a "timeframe is subject to change" caveat together with the TOS ?


Have fun

'Time frame is subject to change' does not mean the company can provide 'no deadline'.

Erillion

JohnP0100 said:

'Time frame is subject to change' does not mean the company can provide 'no deadline'.

Your opinion is duly noted.


Have fun

JohnP0100

Erillion said:

JohnP0100 said:

'Time frame is subject to change' does not mean the company can provide 'no deadline'.

Your opinion is duly noted.


Have fun

Remember when I said 'the mental gymnastics that the fanboys will do' in the OP?
You are seeing another one right here.

Like I said in my OP, when you buy something it is
A. An agreed product 
B. An agreed time of delivery

Both of which CIG has publicly said 'we are changing A and B'.
Come to think of it, most of the materials I gave to my bank for the charge back was created by CIG.

Hatefull

Erillion said:

JohnP0100 said:

'Time frame is subject to change' does not mean the company can provide 'no deadline'.

Your opinion is duly noted.


Have fun

And so is yours.  That little document has no relevance.  Any 2 dollar layer (if CIG were inclined to dispute charge backs, thus far they aren't) could get the players money back in small claims court.  The very fact that CIG will not open it's books, has changed delivery estimates several times, and any other inconsistency with it's development cycle would give any lawyer enough to work with.

Saying the time frame can change is one thing, it being in pretty much constant change, weakens CIG's position considerably.  Oh I know you are super fan boi and CIG can do no wrong, but your argument's are getting weaker by the day.

You can go ahead and quote whatever you want from Chris, or CIG, it does not make it fact in any way. 

JohnP0100

Hatefull said:

Erillion said:

JohnP0100 said:

'Time frame is subject to change' does not mean the company can provide 'no deadline'.

Your opinion is duly noted.


Have fun

And so is yours.  That little document has no relevance.  Any 2 dollar layer (if CIG were inclined to dispute charge backs, thus far they aren't) could get the players money back in small claims court.  The very fact that CIG will not open it's books, has changed delivery estimates several times, and any other inconsistency with it's development cycle would give any lawyer enough to work with.

Saying the time frame can change is one thing, it being in pretty much constant change, weakens CIG's position considerably.  Oh I know you are super fan boi and CIG can do no wrong, but your argument's are getting weaker by the day.

You can go ahead and quote whatever you want from Chris, or CIG, it does not make it fact in any way. 

Quoting Chris or CIG is a bad idea for fanboys which is the really hilarious part.
2015 Delivery! - CIG
Additional scope will not impact delivery date! - Chris
We will no longer give deadlines! - Chris

To anyone afraid that the 'to change' might cause an issue for you.
Explain to the bank like this;
I pre-ordered product A and it had a delivery time of ABC (depends on when you bought SC as the time has changed a LOT).
ABC has passed with no Product A but now, the company is trying to sell me product B instead with no time frame on when it can deliver.

Erillion

Hatefull said:

And so is yours. 

My opinion is : 

Let them get refunds. For everyone leaving it seems to me that hundreds of ships per day are added to Star Citizen - a long-time trend going on for years now. If someone is unhappy with the project ... let them go. There are plenty of others that DO like it and join and enjoy it (judging from personal chats i have with such people when i am online in the Alpha).

W.r.t. charge back ... IMHO contesting is simply not worth it. Considering the size of the overall project thats spare change.


Have fun

JohnP0100

Erillion said:

Hatefull said:

And so is yours. 

My opinion is : 

Let them get refunds.

Unfortunately CIG doesn't share your opinion and decided to deny refunds from now on.
Hence why people have to 'Charge Back' if they want out.

And looking at SC-Trades https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_trades;  even the whales are looking to cash out.

Erillion

JohnP0100 said:

And looking at SC-Trades https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen_trades;  even the whales are looking to cash out.

Grey market crashing ?  Excellent ! :-)


Have fun

tawess

personally i would encourage people to chargebacks.. on everything they are unhappy with... Not only will that limit their future ability to buy things but it will long term fuck the system over for everyone. =P 


/sarkasm

Here is the deal as far as i see it.... 

If you can´t have the foresight to manage your money, perhaps this was a good lesson for you. With any form of crowdfunder or similar it is always casino rules that apply. (as in... never walk in to a casino with money you have not already written off as a loss.) 

Asking for a refund is ok... Having a hissyfit over your own poor decisions skills and filing what is really close to a bogus claim if you get rejected... That is cute and adorable but also the result of a very bad combination of cultural standards. 

I was about to say something about how a responsible adult would handle the situation but it is pretty self-evident that the people calling for a chargeback is in fact not that. So it would be pointless. 

And before anyone ask... No i do not have a single dime invested in the game.. for just that very reason. Sure that will cost me a premium once i get the game... But i will be fully familiar with the what i am spending my money on. 

Toodles

I've charged back many a digital good when I later found out they weren't described or managed well. Wildstar is a good example. I have never had a credit card closed b/c of chargebacks. Chargebacks are there for consumer protection. Some of them take 3 months to clear and that's because a proper credit company gives the people you bought from time to explain their position... if it's a shitty explanation you get your money back. That's the common tongue version of it with all the legalese stripped out for people who haven't actually dont one but are on this forum arm-chairing the whole discussion.

UnleadedRev

The game is a total cash grab rip off.
I will believe it, when it is actually released and in a form that was promised.
Have they fixed people stealing other peoples ships yet?
LAME

Erillion

UnleadedRev said:

Have they fixed people stealing other peoples ships yet?

Why should they bother in a test version ?

At the moment you can get an endless resupply of ships for free.

If you get stranded somewhere in space ... just ask in chat. Usually someone comes and picks you up, often with a lot of good natured humor in the chat.

Or respawn back to the starter station, get a new ship and try whatever you like to do.

At the moment it is much more fun to keep the ships open, get some hitchhikers and fool around in a group.


Have fun

hfztt

Erillion said:

JohnP0100 said:

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

You do remember that people signed a "timeframe is subject to change" caveat together with the TOS (in EVERY version of the TOS) ?


Have fun

Well, they have EU departments is UK and Germany, so every EU citizen can ignore the TOS and require the them to deliver according to law, which if I rmemebr correctly allows for upto 8 weeks delay from originally agreed delivery date. That would be november 2014 + 8 weeks. No TOS can give you worse terms than the standard laws i the EU, so every EU purchaser can just ignore those terms.

Have fun.

goboygo

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.

This is probably more correct than people want to accept.  Seems people have forgotten what backing a kickstarter means, if the developer is still around making the product you backed.  People are treating there donation as if they have bought a finished game and it doesn't have the features listed on the box.

But does this logic apply to the donations, or purchases that came directly from their web site, are those still under the donation tag?  Or is that a cash shop transaction?

Brenics

ROFL, really this thread has become unbelieveable. 

@tawess  Says: "If you can´t have the foresight to manage your money, perhaps this was a good lesson for you. With any form of crowdfunder or similar it is always casino rules that apply. (as in... never walk in to a casino with money you have not already written off as a loss.) "

This is laughable because he is saying it is the consumers fault for not being smarter. Actually this isn't true because it was CR's fault for lying to the public on what he was going to create.

@k61977 Says: "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."

If CR didn't care about the little guy he wouldn't have created a new TOS that stopped all refunds. Which is the best excuse to the banks of why you should be allowed a chargeback.

It really is amazing how people in this thread are trying to blame the consumer and attempting to protect CR's back. If you guys really want to protect CR then maybe you should put a muzzle on him. He is his own worse enemy and the whales worse enemy. He could never close his mouth for 5 minutes even back in Origin days. 

Isn't it funny how some will say how great it is for the little guy throwing in 20 40 dollars really helps the company. Yet when it gets clear they are losing faith in CR, they no longer matter. Hate to tell you guys this but those are the real backbone of the KS. 

Also being forced to sign a new TOS isn't going to help CIG at all. In fact it will make getting a chargeback even better. Again CR is this games worse enemy.

Have Fun!

hfztt

goboygo 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.

This is probably more correct than people want to accept.  Seems people have forgotten what backing a kickstarter means, if the developer is still around making the product you backed.  People are treating there donation as if they have bought a finished game and it doesn't have the features listed on the box.

But does this logic apply to the donations, or purchases that came directly from their web site, are those still under the donation tag?  Or is that a cash shop transaction?

Kickstarter is NOT a donation. It is crowdFUNDING. That is, an organised preorder for a product that only happens if enough people pledges to pay. Once the funding phase ends,and enough people have pledged, your pledge becomes a purchase. You have indeed bought a product in accordance with what you pledge level entitels you to.

KTHXBYE

Distopia

Talonsin said:

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?

As I said you can charge-back your money at anytime. I like how you cut that out btw....

As for it being justified.... By my understanding original backers had an option to pull out when plans changed.. How true that is I have no idea, I have only seen it brought up in these discussions ( multiple times)..

I've also seen many posts about receiving a refund, just as recently as a couple days ago Eadan1 posted about getting his/hers after about a two week wait...

SO if that is what you want to do, do it.. IF you say you were slighted in the original KS, what more justification do you need personally?

Why does it matter what I think? IF you really want to know, I doubt you will like it, but here it is.. I don't think people should get their money back unless it can be proven it was used unwisely after the company is bankrupt, or when the product releases and isn't anything close to what it was supposed to be. IMO people should have conviction in their pledge, or they shouldn't give one at all...

 Conviction means seeing it through to the end, as well as taking responsibility for the choice to pledge.. They shouldn't start acting like victims because things aren't going the way they thought it would (time-tables, problems, etc) or things changed (especially if the above is true about having the option to get a refund before the project changed course)...

This is why I do not contribute to these things, I don't have such conviction, I would regret it...

Brenics

Distopia said:

Talonsin said:

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?

As I said you can charge-back your money at anytime. I like how you cut that out btw....

As for it being justified.... By my understanding original backers had an option to pull out when plans changed.. How true that is I have no idea, I have only seen it brought up in these discussions ( multiple times)..

I've also seen many posts about receiving a refund, just as recently as a couple days ago Eadan1 posted about getting his/hers after about a two week wait...

SO if that is what you want to do, do it.. IF you say you were slighted in the original KS, what more justification do you need personally?

Why does it matter what I think? IF you really want to know, I doubt you will like it, but here it is.. I don't think people should get their money back unless it can be proven it was used unwisely after the company is bankrupt, or when the product releases and isn't anything close to what it was supposed to be. IMO people should have conviction in their pledge, or they shouldn't give one at all...

 Conviction means seeing it through to the end, as well as taking responsibility for the choice to pledge.. They shouldn't start acting like victims because things aren't going the way they thought it would (time-tables, problems, etc) or things changed (especially if the above is true about having the option to get a refund before the project changed course)...

This is why I do not contribute to these things, I don't have such conviction, I would regret it...

I don't think it has to do with conviction, it is more a trust thing. After this long it is clear Chris Roberts can't be trusted. Like people he worked with at Origin and other places, all say the samething, CR can't be trusted to stay on his own plans. He has always wanted to change things in either his game's or his movie's. I know I keep repeating that fact but it seems that very fact is refused by majority of whiteKnights. 

Have Fun!

Octagon7711

People who trust their money with a stranger always take a big risk.  But it's their money so good luck with that.  

Burntvet

I wrote this in the other thread but it is just as applicable here:

Honestly, the CC company doesn't care... until you pay your bill, it is their money in play, and they are only too happy to chargeback. They take your word for it, because there is no incentive for them to take a vendors word for it. It is you that is the customer.

I have done maybe a dozen chargebacks in 20+ years of using a CC, and I have never been refused by the CC company and I have never, ever had a chargeback adversely affect my credit. (For that, the average customer has to charge back several times a year, for several years in a row before there is any negative effect at all.)

So the only people that try to scare people from charging back are morons who do not understand how things actually work, or the vendors themselves.

And for the record, in the US at least, pre-release software can ALWAYS be charged back, it expressly falls into the definition of an incomplete product (or so says corporate counsel for my company, who had to get involved in a commercial software dispute with a vendor).

Also for the the record, a TOS does not and will never trump existing US law, i.e. UCC regulations governing credit card charge backs.


Edit: Most software companies know that customers are legally allowed to chargeback pre-release software, which is why they do give customers refunds for the same. If they did not, the company would get hit with the chargeback fee on top of the refunded money.

Distopia

Brenics said:

Distopia said:

I don't think it has to do with conviction, it is more a trust thing. After this long it is clear Chris Roberts can't be trusted. Like people he worked with at Origin and other places, all say the samething, CR can't be trusted to stay on his own plans. He has always wanted to change things in either his game's or his movie's. I know I keep repeating that fact but it seems that very fact is refused by majority of whiteKnights. 

Have Fun!

You say this like there is actual documented proof he is as you say (the bits about origin and behind the scenes antics, etc..)... IF so I have to ask how he raised 100 mil to begin with?  Some links would help as well. I know there is a poster who consistently says this, that doesn't exactly make it true... It's not exactly evidence either. 

Secondly this isn't just about Chris Roberts, he has a rather large staff in place, most of which I'd assume want to get this game done, because it's as good for them as it is for him to do so... 

Trust is most certainly an important factor in Crowdfunding, which I would assume would lead to folks researching a bit about who they're dealing with. It's just weird that he's known to be as you say.. Yet can rake in so much cash at the same time. 

waynejr2

tawess said:

personally i would encourage people to chargebacks.. on everything they are unhappy with... Not only will that limit their future ability to buy things but it will long term fuck the system over for everyone. =P 


/sarkasm

Here is the deal as far as i see it.... 

If you can´t have the foresight to manage your money, perhaps this was a good lesson for you. With any form of crowdfunder or similar it is always casino rules that apply. (as in... never walk in to a casino with money you have not already written off as a loss.) 

Asking for a refund is ok... Having a hissyfit over your own poor decisions skills and filing what is really close to a bogus claim if you get rejected... That is cute and adorable but also the result of a very bad combination of cultural standards. 

I was about to say something about how a responsible adult would handle the situation but it is pretty self-evident that the people calling for a chargeback is in fact not that. So it would be pointless. 

And before anyone ask... No i do not have a single dime invested in the game.. for just that very reason. Sure that will cost me a premium once i get the game... But i will be fully familiar with the what i am spending my money on. 

I wouldn't encourage that.  If people get used to just doing a charge back whenever they are disappointed, eventually the rules for doing a charge back will be changed.  I understand, this generation of people don't like to work at being a good consumer.  Why check out a game before spending money when you can just say f-it I will let the credit card company do all the work.  Lazy people.

Renoaku

Which is the reason that things have to be word carefully " By purchasing "Star Citizen" You are making a (Donation for future development of the game) You will also Receive X Product, and content here, when the game is released.

. Keep in mind if it doesn't specify an exact date it will be released that time could be 100 million years and not be fraud.

If they don't specifically list it as this to the public then the user is buying a product, if they fail to deliver that (Exact Product 100%) as they described and you saved proof of this then you could (Sue) for your money back, in the U.S I try to get everything done within the 30 or 90 day Laws, I am not sure about the after delivery thing but if there is a Law in your country that applies to this then until they deliver you the actual product you would be able to file for a charge-back?

You see a lot of game companies like "NCsoft" "Daum Games" Include 3rd party Anti-Cheat software which I Consider Malicious as well, their agreements and wording doesn't inform people of this either so you could legally sue them if you had the lawers to do such?

Talonsin

Erillion said:

My opinion is : 

Let them get refunds. For everyone leaving it seems to me that hundreds of ships per day are added to Star Citizen - a long-time trend going on for years now. If someone is unhappy with the project ... let them go. There are plenty of others that DO like it and join and enjoy it (judging from personal chats i have with such people when i am online in the Alpha).

W.r.t. charge back ... IMHO contesting is simply not worth it. Considering the size of the overall project thats spare change.

Then let me ask you, why are some people having an issue getting refunds?  If everything was going great and the company had tons of money coming in and in the bank as many people claim, why the resistance to refunds? 

If only a few people are claiming refunds, whats the big deal?  Why the big resistance to refunds if everything is fine at CIG?