-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Retailer revoking keys due to price mistake; is this allowed?
- Thread starter TheVoidDragon
- Start date
You are paying the agreed amount, you have a bill emited by the shop that proves it.
But the retailer didn't agree to this price. it was a price error.
BlitzerRadic
Member
Wait, so you are telling me that if enter into a contract with you, and you substantially breach the contract, I have to continue to perform until a judge tells me I don't?
I'm sure that this would go both ways and Games Republic would give you a refund and revoke your key if you somehow accidentally bought and activated it on Steam, right (say, your kid used your credit card, or you were drunk, or clicked the wrong game without noticing, or coded a program to automatically find and purchase particular deals)? Oh wait:
You have a right to refund up until you start downloading the game. And by the way, you must agree that "downloading the game" begins when a game is available for download, or you have the key.
Alright then.
It's funny, I made that example above to include accidentally activating the game on Steam, because I figure that's what it would take for it to go both ways (assuming they've gone through with revoking activated keys), but it seems like you wouldn't even need to go that far. As long as you buy the game and they've delivered the key, you're locked in according to their TOS, because you can't get a refund if you've begun downloading the game and downloading the game is defined by just receiving the key. Lol.
You have a right to refund up until you start downloading the game. And by the way, you must agree that "downloading the game" begins when a game is available for download, or you have the key.
Alright then.
It's funny, I made that example above to include accidentally activating the game on Steam, because I figure that's what it would take for it to go both ways (assuming they've gone through with revoking activated keys), but it seems like you wouldn't even need to go that far. As long as you buy the game and they've delivered the key, you're locked in according to their TOS, because you can't get a refund if you've begun downloading the game and downloading the game is defined by just receiving the key. Lol.
Spacejaws
Member
Sorry but I just read the chess analogy and I want to fix it.
This is as if, while playing chess, one player sneezes and drops his queen into an obviously accidental end game manueveur. OP quickly takes Queen while 'Game Retailer' is still wiping their nose and says 'legal move play on.' Player 'Games Retailer' says no it's not you cheating bastard.
Word of the law OP is right. But that's not really the spirit of the law is it.
Chess is so cutthroat.
This is as if, while playing chess, one player sneezes and drops his queen into an obviously accidental end game manueveur. OP quickly takes Queen while 'Game Retailer' is still wiping their nose and says 'legal move play on.' Player 'Games Retailer' says no it's not you cheating bastard.
Word of the law OP is right. But that's not really the spirit of the law is it.
Chess is so cutthroat.
sammyCYBORG
Member
It's bullshit.
If you buy a product legitimately through their site without hacking etc then nothing should be revoked or nuked.
Depressing to see so many people siding with the business over the consumer. It's that reason that so many game companies screw over consumers.
If you buy a product legitimately through their site without hacking etc then nothing should be revoked or nuked.
Depressing to see so many people siding with the business over the consumer. It's that reason that so many game companies screw over consumers.
The ratailer did legally agree when accepted the payment and emited the bill.
They would have to prove it otherwise. The only case I know a judge ruled in favor of the shop in a case like this here in Spain was in 2011, when a shop sold 1000 macbooks for 70 .
The judge argued the sell price was more than ten times below the market price.
CheDominik
Member
Jesus Christ, yes he agreed but he agreed in error. But you can void a contract ex-tunc if you were in error about the value.
If you run a garage sale and the crappy painting of a soup can turns out to be an Andy Warhol work you'd be in your right to declare the contract void. No judge needed.
Of course a judge is needed, because the consumer is in his right to rely on a valid contract that was signed by mutual agreement. The shop could be perfectly lying so they will have to prove the judge it was a mistake for him to nulify the contract.
If the judge rules in favor of the consumer, they will have to indemnify him for breaking the contract unilaterally.
This is actually a very interesting question, because clearly virtual goods can be returned at the behest of the retailer and not the consumer. It raises questions as to what the limits are for a retailer to claw back sales after they're made.
In this case, the people who got it for cheap are like that "first guy." If I bought something in a store, the store and I agreed on the sale, and I have a receipt, what recourse does the store have?
It's more like Prince of Persia, the sands of time when you fall off a cliff, and you say, "nevermind, didn't want to do that. I have plenty of sand in my hourglass so I'm reversing time."
In this case, the people who got it for cheap are like that "first guy." If I bought something in a store, the store and I agreed on the sale, and I have a receipt, what recourse does the store have?
It's more like Prince of Persia, the sands of time when you fall off a cliff, and you say, "nevermind, didn't want to do that. I have plenty of sand in my hourglass so I'm reversing time."
So a bug makes a price display incorrectly, the internet jumps all over it costing said company tens of thousands over something out of their control and by your opinion refunding everyone's purchase price is screwing over the consumer? Wow.
A bug is a demonstrable mistake, a human mistake is not.
I think people are not aware of what would happen if any shop was able to revoke a purchase unilaterally arguing it was a mistake. The consumer would be in tremendous disadvantage.
Both fall under a invalid contracts. It's unrealistic to expect businesses to foot bills for software bugs and huge pricing errors.
ViolentP
Member
Thing is, it isn't and never was out of their control. They simply didn't have a protocol in place to prevent such an error. The result of not having those systems in place resulted in them pulling what they legitimately offered. While it may help them financially, I'm fairly certain many will be soured by the experience to overlook them as a content provider in the future. That's what kills companies.
This is not a huge pricing error, a huge pricing error would be selling an item several times below its market value.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
um
MillionStabs
Banned
I didn't know people were being refunded, my bad.
BRocknRolla
Member
Is a pricing error of $30 dollars not a "huge pricing error" if thousands, tens of thousands take advantage of it?
You're drawing an arbitrary line; a line that has no clear test. It's a judge making a decision based on a perceived idea of fairness. This is precisely why the legality of this is wholly up in the air.
And you don't see the difference here between digital and physical? The difference that is stated in the post you quoted?
They are not like that "first guy". Since it is digital, there are thousands of people who took advantage of the error, not just one "first guy".
When it's a small damage to the store vs additional risk of false advertising, then sure the guy might be able keep it, just to avoid the courts and discussions. If it is worth it to them, they can sue you and try to get the item back.
But here its probably tens of thousands of euro in damage which can bankrupt the store. In this case i don't see a problem with giving a refund. And if you believe they have acted in bad faith and did this as false advertisement or something similar, you can still sue them. It's probably worth it to them to risk the lawsuit and maybe lose, than to go bankrupt right now.
Of course, a judge will have the final word, but as I have already aid, a judge will always rule in favor of the consumer unless the pricing mistake is several times the market value.
At least here in Spain.
1x below market value would be free. But I get what you mean. Still, RRP is 59,99 EUR, I think it is very realist to assume from a consumer standpoint that 13 GBP is a pricing error on such a recent release. And even if you didn't consider it an error, I think GamesRepublic handled it rather well, reimbursing you the money, letting you keep a free game and offering a 20% discount on a next purchase.
I'm not saying they are in the right, revoking licenses, but if I had purchased said key, I would be satisfied by their offer. With pricing mistakes, you win some and you lose some, this is a pretty good middle ground.
For those who still feel wronged, have you tried contacting GamesRepuplic about the issue? Perhaps their is still something they can offer to better satisfy you.
Visualante2
Member
I feel like if it's a technical fault then they should be allowed to revoke. If it's just somebody with clumsy fingers then they should not be able to revoke.
False.
Last year Target fucked up and had the Rock Band "Band in a box" editions ($200+ value) for $60. I bought the two that were left, cashier didn't say anything because that is the price that reflected on their system at the time.
Flipped both, I was LTTP too (It was all over Slick Deals).
BlitzerRadic
Member
It's more than likely the buyer did not even fully fulfill his side of the deal if this was a credit card transaction since it would a few days for the money to actually transfer from the buyer to the seller which in that case there is no doubt on the legitimacy of the seller's withdrawal from the transaction.
It would be akin to you and I having a deal where I sell you something, and you write me a check, but then your check bounces and I demand you return the item you purchased from me.
Visualante2
Member
Yeah you have to be an asshole cashier to be like "this is too good to be true, sorry i'm going to have to refuse this sale". Especially if you're minimum wage. You just don't need that sort of unhappy customer causing a stink.
TheVoidDragon
Member
Can you explain how this is "non-performance of a contract"? Assuming the contract was for the purchase of the game by the customer, and for them to provide it, that happened. The game was purchased, the transaction completed and the game provided by the retailer. Isn't that then the end of that contract?
Good for you. Sucks to be them. You sure showed them!
Did you expect them to file a lawsuit against every one who took advantage of it? It's not practical even if they legally could.
Edit: and i would assume that the damage to target from that mistake wasnt that big as to this store.
If a judge finds the contract invalid, he can force the shop to return the money and the consumer to return the item.
But if he does not, the shop will have to compensate the consumer
Lister
Banned
What self entitled attitude.
It was a mistake. It was rectified by refunding the customer. It would be a diffrent issue if they discovered the error a week after it was sold, they need ot cut their losses at that point, but this is am understandable fix for a temporary glitch.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
good publicity? for a site that many of the people who capitalized on the error would not have known about otherwise?
i'm just saying 'good publicity' whatever that means in this case isn't really worth shit. That kind of good publicity (which would serve zero purpose for them besides appeasing people who could and should have expected this to begin with) would cost paying the difference between
whatever these keys cost them to begin with (their normal selling price is 80usd and they're discounted to 68usd right now fwiw) and the 15usd they've been selling for.
hobblygobbly
Member
I believe under EU law once a transaction takes place where you receive the goods and a payment has been made they cannot demand or take back anything. They can request it and offer a refund and possible discount on a future purchase, but you are not obligated.
However this is different if it's something like a preorder or whenever you do not receive the goods around the the time of purchase - e.g "instant delivery", they do not have to honour the price or you have yet to receive the goods. General rule is once you've actually received what you paid for, they can't take it back.
(I'm not a lawyer but AFAIK this is how it is in EU and other countries).
However this is different if it's something like a preorder or whenever you do not receive the goods around the the time of purchase - e.g "instant delivery", they do not have to honour the price or you have yet to receive the goods. General rule is once you've actually received what you paid for, they can't take it back.
(I'm not a lawyer but AFAIK this is how it is in EU and other countries).
TheVoidDragon
Member
I've yet to see any quotes either way, really. I've seen things mention that they can cancel orders involving misprices and such, but that seems to be before those orders have actually been completed and provided to the customer, so they're not entirely the same situation as this.
Anyone know what EU law says about orders that have already been completed?
drhankmccoyphd
Member
In a case like this your best bet is to bitch at their customer service and or social media, cite the ToS and demand the game. If they refuse just say you won't purchase from them again because you cannot be sure they will honor the purchase. Either they make it right or you tell them to go kick rocks.
In the end, if EU law is on your side, are you going to make a case on it? Have you even tried contacting them to voice your displeasure?
CheDominik
Member
There is no European law regarding and it's up to a country's juridiction. I posted the German civil law which Poland to my knowledge adopted on the previous page.
In Belgium on the other hand buyers don't have that right if it is an obvious pricing error.
BlitzerRadic
Member
They didn't keep their end of the deal by revoking your license to the game.
In any case, as I mentioned in an earlier post, it's likely the money was never transferred from your account to theirs (since credit card transactions take a few days to process), so you never really purchased the game to begin with.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Thanks for the snide.
But let's word it another way - prevention of bad publicity. If this had been a physical purchase the delivery of the key to the inbox of the purchaser would have been the same as the delivery of the disc to the purchaser's house, and that would have been that. This isn't an exploit that customers are using to get the game illegitimately - the store got it wrong, and the transactions were completed.
In the UK in bricks and mortar stores, consumers have long believed (incorrectly) that it is your right to buy something at the marked price. The exchange of money for the goods is the agreement of price between the store and the customer, and the contract is complete. At the check-out either party is free to withdraw until the cash is handed over.
TheVoidDragon
Member
That doesn't really clarify things. Their end of the deal was to provide a working license for the game, that is what they did. After that point, isn't the contract considered completed and there is no obligation for either party relating to that?
They have to demonstrate it is a pricing error, and it doesn't count just saying "hey, we fucked with the price".
My point is that you overestimate the fucks that these near-minimum wage cashiers have to give. They're more concerned about getting btiched at for not keeping the line moving.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
My non lawyer interpretation of the EULA doesn't really rule out the deactivation of the keys, but rather the information about the games themselves. But it really depends on your interpretation of the words. They make no claims on the validity of the licenses of the games.
Plus the end of the EULA makes this whole discussion moot anyway because you have no leverage to make a claim:
If you don't want your games taken away, don't buy digital games on a storefront where such a thing is technically possible...
Edit: Though I will say, that bit I quoted may not mean what I think it means. Not a lawyer.
Plus the end of the EULA makes this whole discussion moot anyway because you have no leverage to make a claim:
If you don't want your games taken away, don't buy digital games on a storefront where such a thing is technically possible...
Edit: Though I will say, that bit I quoted may not mean what I think it means. Not a lawyer.
The recent price on steam for Civ V, the 6 year old predecessor is 7,50 on sale (rrp is 29,99) the current rrp for Civ VI is 59,99. I think they have a pretty good argument claiming a pricing error was made.
TheVoidDragon
Member
Under what laws is this legal? Cancelling an order before it's completed, yes, but i've not seen anything about fulfilling an order and then deciding you're going to go back on it.
You can buy keys of Civ VI for ~40, maybe less if you have a discount code.
Dropping the price to 16 could perfectly be a commercial strategy to draw consumers to your shop, in the end some of them would buy more than one game, but you will only revoke Civ VI key arguing it was a mistake
This is why the law protects the consumer, and if someone sues them, they would have to prove it was a mistake.
Similar threads
- Locked