-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony featured on Watchdog (Thursday 28th, 8pm UK) - theft and "no refunds."
- Thread starter toythatkills
- Start date
Whilst I can agree, you just have to look at my account...I've spent thousands on PSN, been on it since it started - subbed to PS plus since day one...never had to ask for a refund, tried to get a refund on DLC purchased for PS3 (accidentally, meant to buy PS4 version) and frankly just been argued with and told they refuse to escalate or let me speak to a manager.
They risk polluting the message attempting to spice things up for TV. They also require better fact checkers. But if it improves the process, good.
Bootador83
Member
No unless there was anything later in the show they just released a statement.
No interview. Just moving onto things like ASDA mistaking kiwi fruits with Kiwi boot polish.
As you do.
Well that's a shame would have been better negative PR for them. Still one would hope they will keep to their word and truly re-asses their stance on this.
I am not sure how that's possible really. If you make your case clear - you should get your refund. I've never had issues with these type of situations but I usually go in ready to pigeonhole them into the refund knowing they can BS you at any sign of weakness in the argument - that's customer service 101. Can't say much about the case in OP - this type of case could of been malicious - even if it was not - I can understand their take. The jiggles case with USFIV however - give the man the damn refund Sony. My guess is that CS doesn't have a notice yet about USFIV being broken - giving them permission to issue refunds. Nonetheless, I do hope that the case gets resolved in a weeks time for those that do indeed want a refund for USFIV - more than enough time for Sony to get their CS sorted on how to behave for USFIV.
Edit: Seems some are already getting USFIV refunds. Hopefully jiggles gets it.
I made the wrong purchase during one of their sales, i meant to get Ratchet and Clank PS3 instead of Vita but i fucked up and bought the PSVITA version by mistake cause the icons were the same,.
Called Sony up, they were very courteous to me and put the money back in my PSN wallet.
The same thing happened to me when i accidentally bought another thing and i could not fit it on my HDD, i had not downloaded it yet. They gave me a full refund and put the money back on my PSN account.
The only time they have actually refused to do so was when i called and made the mistake of saying that i just didn't like the game, and wanted to get something else.
They went into the whole "you must make an informed purchase" speil and said their terms of service didn't cover merely not liking the game.
But in extreme cases, yes they have given me second chances on accidental buys.
Now did i have the money returned to my actual bank account instead of my PSN wallet? No, but i wasn't trying to get my money back, just back from that specific purchase.
Called Sony up, they were very courteous to me and put the money back in my PSN wallet.
The same thing happened to me when i accidentally bought another thing and i could not fit it on my HDD, i had not downloaded it yet. They gave me a full refund and put the money back on my PSN account.
The only time they have actually refused to do so was when i called and made the mistake of saying that i just didn't like the game, and wanted to get something else.
They went into the whole "you must make an informed purchase" speil and said their terms of service didn't cover merely not liking the game.
But in extreme cases, yes they have given me second chances on accidental buys.
Now did i have the money returned to my actual bank account instead of my PSN wallet? No, but i wasn't trying to get my money back, just back from that specific purchase.
zerokoolpsx
Member
I got a refund before from Sony before. Accidental purchase and they gave me the option of refunding it back to my bank account or steam wallet. Just be persistent about it.
In the OP case, since it was fraud, If all else fails, and you don't care about your account, do a chargeback. This is the absolute last option of course.
In the OP case, since it was fraud, If all else fails, and you don't care about your account, do a chargeback. This is the absolute last option of course.
toythatkills
Member
It wasn't an option, the hacker used funds from his PSN account, not a credit card.
Anyway, did everyone hear Sony's really funny joke where they went on national television and literally said that they have "industry-leading measures" in place to protect their customers?
INDUSTRY-LEADING MEASURES!!!!!
OldSkoolFool
Member
Wow. Just watched the segment. Pretty damning for sony especially on a prime time uk bbc1 programme. Even dragged out the psn hacking debacle from last year to add further salt into the wound.
Not the best publicity for a casual gamer looking to buy.
Sony did come back with a statement saying they reinstated the people who lost their accounts, but that people should be careful for it not to happen to them.
The conclusion was be careful if you have a psn account as there is a possibilty you could get hacked.
Not the best publicity for a casual gamer looking to buy.
Sony did come back with a statement saying they reinstated the people who lost their accounts, but that people should be careful for it not to happen to them.
The conclusion was be careful if you have a psn account as there is a possibilty you could get hacked.
MrRudiMentary
Member
This is perfect.
Their policies are no different.
Garrett Hawke
Member
Sounds like they really went the extra mile
Ive gotten refunds on PSN before in NA... a few times actually. I was just really nice and explained the mistake/error and it always worked itself out. Obviously i never asked for a refund because a game was shitty or broken, thats not their fault. Those instances are teach you to value your $60 and actually research your purchase or be prepared for disappointment.
But in regards to accts being hijacked... Yes that is bullshit and Sony needs to get a better handle on that, whether its phishing, hacking, or CC fraud. Two-step auth, more security, email/text notification of suspicious activity... i dont know im not an IT guy but they need more.
Never chargeback on your acct, its CC fraud in Sony's eyes and youll lose access to your purchases. It says it right in the TOS. If you cant live without the funds in the CC or Debit card attached to your acct, dont attach a card to your acct. Simple.
But in regards to accts being hijacked... Yes that is bullshit and Sony needs to get a better handle on that, whether its phishing, hacking, or CC fraud. Two-step auth, more security, email/text notification of suspicious activity... i dont know im not an IT guy but they need more.
Never chargeback on your acct, its CC fraud in Sony's eyes and youll lose access to your purchases. It says it right in the TOS. If you cant live without the funds in the CC or Debit card attached to your acct, dont attach a card to your acct. Simple.
NullPointer
Member
They should still provide refunds for busted games if they're the ones selling it.
Why?
NullPointer
Member
Because the product is defective and they (PSN) would be the store you're "returning" it to.
Who else would process the refund?
Isn't broken code the responsible part of the developer and not the storefront? Its not a physical item you can't return it like if you have a CD that was broken, which is directly an issue with the retail handing side.
I don't think a retail store would accept a game back just because it was a glitchy mess as their end was held up
They didnt break it though, its not like Jimmy the stock boy dropped the game while shelving it. Its a digital game, the developer and publisher are responsible for that. Unsatisfied customers flood social media and forums about how broken games are, devs/pubs either release a patch or authorize PSN to refund users. You cant take a game back to Gamestop and say the framerate sucks and their is a progress-blocking glitch and expect a guaranteed refund, thats up to the manager or whatever but they are not required to do that.
NullPointer
Member
So in the case of my busted Battlefield 4 bought on the PS4's PSN I should've sought out EA/Dice for compensation? How would that work?
In the EU it is the retailer is who is responsible. Nobody else.
Chargebacks are an official method of combatting fraud, which is what this is. Sony are not above the law.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
I wouldn't expect them to announce any changes to the refund policy, it would be a quiet change and an update of Terms and Conditions. I hope this brings to light how bad policies like this can be. I think all companies need to take a "trust their customer" approach when it comes to chargeback, because although the bank generally refund quickly, if it's not fraud, they will take the money back again.
I do think it's rather ironic that Sony's prepared to push their brand into one that is supposedly "pro-consumer" and attack their competitors on this basis... yet are perfectly happy to shaft their customers with these undeniably anti-consumer stances and policies.
I've had a couple of run-ins with Sony support, so it makes these posts easy to believe. Mine were always DLC related, but when I'd open a ticket, they'd simply never do anything with it. If I called, they'd tell me to expect a call-back that would never come. It was maddening, and I never did get anything resolved.
Edit: SCEA in my cases
Edit: SCEA in my cases
Doesn't matter as under UK trade act if a good isn't sold in an acceptable condition, in this case a broken game is clearly not fit for purpose, then the person has the right to demand a refund.
This sounds like victim blaming, if Sony a big company is incapable in protecting customers details then they shouldn't be surprised when customers starts demanding for a refund and if Sony refuses then of course they are going to go with a charge back option.
Agreed, I never saw Sony as a "pro-consumer" company.
That's not really "attacking their competitors", there was a lot of people asking questions about that subject at the time concerning both consoles and that's an answer to the question that they were asked. If their answer reflected badly on a competitor then that's purely down to that competitor.
That doesn't in any way excuse what this thread is about though.
The biggest problem is Sony's UK customer support.
Their policies are poor, but a bit of common sense and leeway from the support team can mitigate that. However in my experience, Sony don't allow their people to use any common sense.
Well to start with the obvious, you should have checked reviews and such to make sure you werent buying a broken game from a store that has NO REFUNDS plastered everywhere. Then you just sit back and wait for patches, which is what EA and DICE decided to do instead of authorizing refunds.
Well i wasnt speaking for EU law (i know thats what the OP is about, but i stipulated im in NA). Chargebacks are there for consumer protection, yes, but plenty of people abuse that system and with digital content being the way it is, they have to ban you for them. Otherwise i could just buy a new release, chargeback, beat the game while its being processed, the game is removed from my acct long after im done with it, repeat.
NullPointer
Member
I did both of those things. Even here on GAF there were people saying the game was fine before I pulled the trigger. It wasn't.
And I waited for the patches and followed statements from both EA and DICE and provided those statements to Sony support. At some point DICE removed the save-game bug from the list of problems they had on their forums, and yet didn't actually fix the issue and then released their premium DLC - something they publicly promised they wouldn't do until the game was fixed.
It was only at that point that I went to Sony to seek a refund. And got one two weeks later. Store credit to be precise but I also offered a trade for another game, which they declined.
So we're talking about a game whose problems were so bad it made headlines across the gaming world. It even led to public statements by both EA and DICE promising to fix the game's issues. And beyond that I asked to trade it in for Knack of all things, and yet my demands were seen as too onerous, so I had to fight them and later threaten them with BBB action before they turned around and returned some store credit. Should've been open and shut really.
They are absolutely required to do that. It is from that store you purchased the product, the name of their company on the receipt. If it is defective, they are responsible from a consumer-oriented view. If you rent a car from Hertz and it won't start in the parking lot, do you sit there waving at the office manager through the window while calling Ford?
Are you saying it's a prerequisite to read reviews and scour their prose for mentions of technical issues? That anyone who doesn't is at fault for buying a product that doesn't work as advertised? That consumers should assume a product is faulty unless otherwise self-informed? What happens if critical reception is mixed, or contradictory? Is it also your fault for believing IGN instead of Gamespot?
Patches are not guaranteed or even required of a company. Their potential appearance cannot be a justification for being given faulty product.
The thread is specifically addressing a UK case. Why would you preface your post by pointing out that your statement isn't applicable to the point of the thread?
Chargebacks aren't automatic. They go through a dispute process. Banning your account is outside of that dispute process; a purely punitive measure to try and prevent customers from exercising their consumer rights.
How the hell did you come up with these opinions? It seems almost masochistic.
Caveat emptor, man. They promised to fix the game, and they did. Sony doesnt require the game to be bug-free or something, they just require it to not brick your system. Coding is on the devs and pubs.
And i can truly sympathize, dont think I am just talking out of my ass. Im a massive BF fan and bought BF4 Digital + Premium on launch day and dealt with the same shit as everyone else. Thankfully DICE did pull through and fix the game. If not, that would have been a $110 lesson learned and EA wouldnt get my business after that.
It really wasn't. They were capitalising on Microsoft's missteps.
Well considering this is discussing an EU issue, it's kind of the point. Besides, citing the example you raise, how is it acceptable to revoke prior purchases? At most, the account should be banned, fineI think most can accept that. But prior purchases must be accessible.
NullPointer
Member
They didn't fix the savegame issue though. And as far as I know they never did. I waited months for that patch to come before seeking a refund.
You'd think. The digital world is still the wild wild west where service providers want to have all of the privileges and none of the responsibility.
See bolded.
I'm stunned that you don't think Sony has a responsibility to sell their customers goods that fit the descriptions they advertise them with.
But that wasn't your initial claim, your original claim was that there was an attack and now your claim is that they were capitalising on some pretty public mistakes that Microsoft made.
Everybody who was a competitor benefited from Microsoft's missteps. Would you perhaps suggest that during that confusion caused by the mixed messages from Microsoft that Sony should have continued the confusion amongst gamers and ignoring what people were asking of them? To capitalise on Microsoft's missteps, all it would take is for them not to repeat the mistakes that they were very publicly suffering from making and for any company to repeat those mistakes after the amount of negativity that was created would be nothing but ridiculous.
You only have to look at threads on here around that time to see the concerns that people had over used games on both consoles. Those doubts were in no way exclusive to GAF.
Any competitor of Microsoft would have to have really invested some effort effort and money into not benefiting from the mistakes that Microsoft made. It would be almost impossible not to have capitalised on it.
NullPointer
Member
And they'd be completely wrong.
This is some Monty Python levels of evasion you're spinning with. This parrot isn't dead, its resting! Its stunned!
What criteria should Sony use when deciding if a purchase should be refunded or not? What game fits this criteria that wasnt refunded or patched?
EDIT: What im getting at is if it deserves a refund, it should have never shipped. Its on the dev/pub. They should be the ones held accountable here. Sony shouldnt have to QA every game that comes through to make sure the last boss is beatable or the framerate is stable.
Same thing.
They should use the criteria outlined by the law of the jurisdiction they sell in. It really is that simple. You can't sell defective products and then blame the producer for it. That's not how retail works dude.
30yearsofhurt
Member
I worked in a call center when I was in uni (health insurance information line). We were given a days training and a folder. We were explained in detail complex legislation. We were run through every type of caller we would get. We were always told a supervisor will be listening and you can always ask them for advice and clarification.
After a week we were fucking experts.
If SONY aren't doing this properly then they should be held to account for it. Consumer rights legislation isn't rocket science. Accepting fraudulently obtained money/credit isn't legal. I really can't see how they have a leg to stand on in 2015. They've been doing this for nearly ten years. How can they get it so wrong after all this time?
Of course, that's probably why you used different words that have different meanings.
OK, I don't really see any point in attempting to hold a conversation about it. If that's what you think then that's what you think and I have no issues with that.
30yearsofhurt
Member
But they do do that. SONY QA everything that goes up on their store.
They do cert, which is not the same as QA.
Certification is so the game behaves according a written document that all games have to follow so they can be released.
Microsoft used to have a "game must be beatable" check in their certification document but I don't think that is the case any more.
NullPointer
Member
Does cert include things like being able to save your game? Because I'd love to know how Battlefield 4 was even released in its state, by all parties involved.
Yes it does.
It's like the policy that is being discussed here. If the situation demands it, the checklist is not a 0-tolerance policy and can be waived. Usually a publisher has to promise that the day1 patch will fix those issues.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Poll