March 30, 2016 at 7:19 am #2807simonbullParticipant
[quote quote=1479]ToS v1.1 of 08/29/13 IV. Charges & Billing “RSI agrees to use its good faith business efforts to deliver to you the pledge items and the Game on or before the estimated delivery date. However, you acknowledge and agree that delivery as of such date is not a promise by RSI since unforeseen events may extend the development and/or production time. 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.”[/quote]
THIS SAYS IT ALL CitizenCon 2016 SHOULD READ CONSUMERCON VERY APT NAMEApril 10, 2016 at 8:08 am #2875
Here is a refund email that someone (he spent over $2,500) sent them before doing a chargeback.
I appreciate that you are taking the time to make a personal response. I also appreciate that you have given these requests consideration in the past- that consideration and the fact that you followed up shortly afterwards with a your Alpha release is what prompted me to put money back in. Unfortunately the company has failed to live up to that standard in the months since, releasing virtually no further improvements and refusing to speak to release dates. The latest indication by Chris Roberts that he no longer intends to produce a significant portion of the product despite having sold it as being nearly out the door for the entirety of the last year is my final straw (http://www.informationredux.com/index.php/2016/01/25/star-citizens-star-marine-module-officially-cancelled/). There is nothing fraudulent about filing a chargeback claim in this case. Shall we go over the reasons?
Valid chargeback reasons:
Non-receipt of information.
Canceled / returned merchandise.
Non-receipt of goods or services.
1) Services not provided or merchandise not received
1a) The pack that I am pledged for, the Armada pack, includes a copy of Squadron 42 for digital download and a copy of the Star Citizen persistent universe. Squadron 42’s initial release date was somewhere in 2014. Citations:
i) Interview with CEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYFCfRK4e6Y&t=1187s
ii) Article from a separate interview with CEO: http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/883/feature/7539/Star-Citizen-E3-2013-Chatting-Star-Citizen-with-Chris-Roberts.html
1b) Somehow that release date has slipped and slipped again. In 2014, you said 2016. Citations:
i) Producer Eric Peterson and Phil Meller discussing the release date on your channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fllp5o5Qkq0&t=23m58s
ii) Erin Roberts in an interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fllp5o5Qkq0&t=23m58s
1c) Now you will not even give release dates. Judging by what you have done with the Star Marine section of the game, where your CEO extremely dishonestly insisted that it was not cancelled (Citation i), and multiple representatives of your company maintained that party line (Citation ii), until a few days ago when it was announced that what has been released in your alpha test build was the intended product all along- based on this, it is incredibly difficult to believe that you have any intention of delivering the other products that you sold to me.
i) “In January (2014), Roberts said that Star Marine would be arriving in the spring. The module was delayed and is now slated to arrive some time in the next few weeks. At the time of the delay, earlier this year, Roberts had no new release date and several outlets, including Polygon, reported it as being “delayed indefinitely,” something at which the studio bristled.” http://www.polygon.com/features/2015/8/31/9211969/what-the-hell-is-going-on-with-star-citizen
ii) The saga of Star Marine: http://www.justagamemode.com/
1d) I cannot link you the sales description of the Armada Pack because you have actually removed it from your website(Citation i). However, according to the version attached to my account, it should come with the following ships in-game: Gladius, Super Hornet, Starfarer Gemini, Vanguard, Idris-P Frigate, Retaliator, Constellation, Freelancer MIS. Not only are two of those ships, whose individual values total well over $1000, still in production after three years, but the ships that you have provided are non-functional in almost every way. I would not bring this up except you are citing the current state of the game as grounds for refusing refunds, so I am assuming you expect that you have satisfied the terms of your sale. The turrets do not work (Citation ii), the stations do not work (Citation iii), and the game itself is practically non-functional in its current state (Citations iv, v, vi). Since you announce no dates and have issued no significant improvements since the launch of the game last year I can only assume that the current unacceptable state is your intended release. The merchandise you have delivered is in unacceptable condition and is not remotely what you promised during sale.
i) Armada Pack 404s- https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/Combos/Armada-Pack
ii) Current gameplay in Retaliator and Constellation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONW_ciiHym8
iii) Current gameplay: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIqrn49mZ5c)
iv) Current gameplay- (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJfh3r7nq9o)
v) Current gameplay- (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Go1oFvxUoeI)
vi) Current gameplay- (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55HXtqdiqsA)
I also find it interesting that not even 5 months ago you were publicly giving full refunds (http://www.polygon.com/2015/8/20/9180067/star-citizen-backers-claiming-refunds-are-getting-their-money-back) but now feel that you delivered sufficient content to warrant their denial, per your letter above, which appears to be boilerplate: (https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/3zb4iv/refund_denied/)
In any case- thank you for your time. I will now pursue a chargeback.April 10, 2016 at 12:26 pm #2876lir bigParticipant
Derek, since we have passed the date of march the 31st and the 18 months time, shouldn’t the refund option be back in the loop by default? It is clear anyone can demonstrate with CIG own words that they have not fullfill their own claims. I mean it would be in their best interest to give a positive response because from now on they can’t go very far.
Also this in their ToS : “Any taxes paid, such as VAT, are not refundable beyond 30 (thirty) days after the purchase.” Yeah well , what VAT? isn’t that supposed to apply on finnished products? this line is a fraud in itself. Their atual ToS anyway is still the same legal mess joke.April 10, 2016 at 1:19 pm #2877
[quote quote=2876]Derek, since we have passed the date of march the 31st and the 18 months time, shouldn’t the refund option be back in the loop by default? It is clear anyone can demonstrate with CIG own words that they have not fullfill their own claims. I mean it would be in their best interest to give a positive response because from now on they can’t go very far. Also this in their ToS : “Any taxes paid, such as VAT, are not refundable beyond 30 (thirty) days after the purchase.” Yeah well , what VAT? isn’t that supposed to apply on finnished products? this line is a fraud in itself. Their atual ToS anyway is still the same legal mess joke. [/quote]
Going by the Nov 2014 ship date, the 18 month shift would be to May 31st. Thus far, they haven’t change the ToS.April 19, 2016 at 9:40 pm #3123lir bigParticipant
That’s right I had made a mix march-may . What I don’t get is what would refrain them to change the ToS again and set a new release date whenever they like? wait, the E.L.E. ?
Ok so they ‘ll have no choice but to force a commercial release before the end of May , wich would explain the MVP fiasco.
And fits perfectly with this lol :
Try this for context: pic.twitter.com/fubNdNftze
— Derek Smart (@dsmart) March 19, 2016
So we are now right before the ChumpRun point.
Final Act has begun playing.May 22, 2016 at 8:28 am #3462
The current ToS 1.2 expires on May 31st. If you want a refund, do NOT agree to the new one. Sources say they may change it; hence the reason they released 2.4 prematurely to the standard (from Evocati) PTU, and are now inviting more people (e.g. those who subscribed) than before. The issue is that if they change it, and you login to the site, you will need to agree to it, and thus be bound by whatever new one they come up with.
So watch out for this!May 22, 2016 at 8:37 am #3463
The Nov calendar date count-down has nothing to do with a lawsuit being filed.
ToS v1.1 of 08/29/13
IV. Charges & Billing
“RSI agrees to use its good faith business efforts to deliver to you the pledge items and the Game on or before the estimated delivery date. However, you acknowledge and agree that delivery as of such date is not a promise by RSI since unforeseen events may extend the development and/or production time. 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.”
ToS v1.2 of 02/01/15
VII. Fundraising & Pledges
“RSI agrees to use its good faith business efforts to deliver to you the pledge items and the Game on or before the estimated delivery date communicated to you on the Website. However, you acknowledge and agree that delivery as of such date is not a firm promise and may be extended by RSI since unforeseen events may extend the development and/or production time. 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.“
This TOS is material and key to legal action. For those of you who don’t understand the process, lawsuits are not the sort of thing you just file on a whim. They are not fun for anyone involved in them.
And you can’t threaten it, then not file because you can get sued for that!
Regardless of how many causes of action you list, once you do file it, the other side has thirty days to respond. Once they do, you’re off to the races.
And once that race starts, the attorneys start picking apart the causes of action in an attempt to get the whole thing tossed. And in their response, depending on the insanity levels, they get to file a counter-suit as well if they want.
Each of the “causes of action” that gets tossed by the judge, means an award of fees to the side that got it tossed. It’s can be demoralizing to some extent. Especially if the judge tosses a key cause of action and upon which the merits of the case hinges.
And in responding to their responses to the lawsuit, you now also get to respond to their counter-suit (if any) and try to get them tossed as well.
It’s a dance.
And an expensive one depending on how much useless time wasting shit you have to fight. Which is why we anticipated spending around $100K by discovery. Assuming the case even goes that far and doesn’t get settled especially if the liability insurance companies get involved in the fray.
Given that we fully expect them to rightfully defend against any lawsuit, I am resigned to the fact that it could cost well over $250K by discovery. And I have no problems with that because I believe that what I’m doing is right and just. When they made this personal back in July, then singled me out, they cast the first stone and signaled that they did in fact have something to hide. Here we are.
Them suing me is an inconsequential non-issue for me financially because i) they have no leg to stand on any of that ii) anti-SLAAP is a real deterrent; esp here in FL iii) I have robust liability insurance for that; and the best that money can buy.
And Chris Robert’s insane diatribe against me and The Escapist in early October has caused a massive legal nightmare for them in terms of the litany of causes of action that it contains and which weren’t even a factor prior to him writing that.May 22, 2016 at 4:11 pm #3471RedrickParticipant
“delivery date communicated to you on the Website…”
What does it mean?
- The forum ‘Main’ is closed to new topics and replies.