miscommunication gap again?

[pfcremus]

 working as intended, right? 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

[PaP_Mentoles]

Too much vodka comrades. Xmass came early 

[hellhound666]

i hope it is not truth but if it is then perhaps wargamblers could explain the logic behind the ban ...

 

or if one beats wargambling at gambling they get banned - very soviet/russian way to do stuff

[Wizard27_1979]

1 minute ago, hellhound666 said:

i hope it is not truth but if it is then perhaps wargamblers could explain the logic behind the ban ...

It is true and even explained in the topic (Quote from WG). Those accounts were frozen, so they can be rolled back. 

[Itwastuesday]

That's an intresting approach to having screwed up for sure

[Miscommunication_dept]

Banned them?

I thought they’d just roll back the account.

[Wizard27_1979]

Just now, gopher31 said:

Banned them?

I thought they’d just roll back the account.

Which is true. 

[meuhbat]

This not a "ban" but a "temporary account freeze" for easier rollback. They should be compensated. 

[Fat_Maniac]

Hmm Trading Standards would have a field day with this.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

It's still (yet another) PR fiasco..

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

31 minutes ago, meuhbat said:

This not a "ban" but a "temporary account freeze" for easier rollback. They should be compensated. 

Actually it is a 'ban' and not a ban! ^^ Word is they will be compensated which is always nice :D

[Trench4nt]

What crates do they mean? 

[Miscommunication_dept]

Mistake was so huge they couldn't really let it stand.

 

I would buy a million containers if it happened in WOWS.

 

 

[Maris_Piper]

Behind the Smile, Same old WG  

I'm still wondering what our Christmas Miscommunication will be this Year?

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

6 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

Mistake was so huge they couldn't really let it stand.

 

I would buy a million containers if it happened in WOWS.

 

 

I'm sure WG would make an exception for you especially and ban you a million times over :D

[Yedwy]

Just WG being WG

[Dutchy_2019]

1 hour ago, Fat_Maniac said:

Hmm Trading Standards would have a field day with this.

 

If you see something that is advertised for sale (or has a price tag) for a clearly absurdly low price because of an honest mistake - and a customer could reasonably be aware that this is a mistake - the seller could well be in his rights to reverse the sale. 

 

Think of something like a Ferrari that normally costs about 250.000 euro's, yet in the dealership it is accidentally priced at 25.000 euros brand new, the dealer is allowed to reverse the sale upon discovery (within a certain time of the event happening). I know the issue came up in a case with a furniture store over here not too long ago, where this happened. 

[Yedwy]

9 minutes ago, Dutchy_2019 said:

 

If you see something that is advertised for sale (or has a price tag) for a clearly absurdly low price because of an honest mistake - and a customer could reasonably be aware that this is a mistake - the seller could well be in his rights to reverse the sale. 

 

Think of something like a Ferrari that normally costs about 250.000 euro's, yet in the dealership it is accidentally priced at 25.000 euros brand new, the dealer is allowed to reverse the sale upon discovery (within a certain time of the event happening). I know the issue came up in a case with a furniture store over here not too long ago, where this happened. 

Sooo the furniture store in question was allowed to freeze the customers bank accounts, break into their apartments to take back the furniture and put few thugs on their payroll on the enterance of the building while doing all that so they can’t enter their home and leave we are sorry have a coupon letter on the table, or?

[The_Angry_Admiral]

So let's look at this logically. 

 

Instead of doing something so stupid as to roll back the accounts they could instead just let those who bought them have them and fix the price for anymore who want to buy them. By being an absolute [edited] about it you are going to ensure you sell no more. 

 

Customers will support a company who will throw their hands up, admit they made a mistake, and carry on but Wargaming is frankly so stupid they can't comprehend this. 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

19 minutes ago, Dutchy_2019 said:

 

If you see something that is advertised for sale (or has a price tag) for a clearly absurdly low price because of an honest mistake - and a customer could reasonably be aware that this is a mistake - the seller could well be in his rights to reverse the sale. 

 

Think of something like a Ferrari that normally costs about 250.000 euro's, yet in the dealership it is accidentally priced at 25.000 euros brand new, the dealer is allowed to reverse the sale upon discovery (within a certain time of the event happening). I know the issue came up in a case with a furniture store over here not too long ago, where this happened. 

You see that goes for physical retail. If WG wants to be under that umbrella then I have the right as a consumer to own my copy of every ship that I buy and if WG decided to close up shop they would owe me either the money back or a way that I could still use those ships. 

 

They can't have it both ways.

 

Your examples aren't accurate. If you gave that dealer 25k, he gave you the keys and you drove off he can't come back looking for the rest of the money later. 

[Dutchy_2019]

17 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Sooo the furniture store in question was allowed to freeze the customers bank accounts, break into their apartments to take back the furniture and put few thugs on their payroll on the enterance of the building while doing all that so they can’t enter their home and leave we are sorry have a coupon letter on the table, or?

 

My original point clearly flew over your head: In this case WG most likely HAS the legal right to reverse the sale, no matter what the buyer says or does. To make the process technically as quick and easy as possible, an account freeze is the best solution. If they do not, we all know the gigantic mess the roll backs were last year (where people wanted to keep whatever they had earned from the benefits they had received from the thing they wanted to roll back - aka: the crates they wanted rolled back had dropped coal, which allowed them to buy a coal ship - which they wanted to keep (aka they wanted to keep the coal), but also wanted a refund on the crate).

 

As for that furniture store: they themselves could not.

 

What they could do:

 

- Send notice to the buyer that something had gone wrong, and offer two options: return the furniture (seller would pick it up, free of charge) and have the money returned, or pay the difference between what they already paid and what the sale price was supposed to be, and keep the furniture.

- If the buyer refused, they could be taken to court and court, which (worst case scenario) could indeed result in either bank accounts being frozen and/or the furniture being seized.

 

[Dutchy_2019]

18 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

You see that goes for physical retail. If WG wants to be under that umbrella then I have the right as a consumer to own my copy of every ship that I buy and if WG decided to close up shop they would owe me either the money back or a way that I could still use those ships. 

 

They can't have it both ways.

 

Your examples aren't accurate. If you gave that dealer 25k, he gave you the keys and you drove off he can't come back looking for the rest of the money later. 

 

Except courts have already decided that the seller can (within a reasonable time limit) in the case of the bolded.

 

And as far as non-physical stuff (digital stuff) my guess is you are also wrong about the issue of keeping stuff and refunding - with legal precedent already set.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

6 minutes ago, Dutchy_2019 said:

 

 

What they could do:

 

- Send notice to the buyer that something had gone wrong, and offer two options: return the furniture (seller would pick it up, free of charge) and have the money returned, or pay the difference between what they already paid and what the sale price was supposed to be, and keep the furniture.

- If the buyer refused, they could be taken to court and court, which (worst case scenario) could indeed result in either bank accounts being frozen and/or the furniture being seized.

 

No the furniture can't do a thing legally once the sale has happened. The store can ask but nothing can be done. 

 

Here is how it works legally. Furniture store has €5.00 on a 5k sofa. Person walks up and says I'll take it. Furniture store realises the price is wrong and tells the customer that is incorrect and it's really 5k. Shop can refuse to sell it but if the sale was made then it's too late. 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

2 minutes ago, Dutchy_2019 said:

 

Except courts have already decided that the seller can (within a reasonable time limit) in the case of the bolded.

 

And as far as non-physical stuff (digital stuff) my guess is you are also wrong about the issue of keeping stuff and refunding - with legal precedent already set.

No they haven't - at least not in the EU.