Only 1 VW Camper poly per household via [email protected]

cheshirecat

Xefan said:

Or in other words, I'm merely pointing out the hypocrisy of those crying "It's in the T&Cs!" because I doubt for one second they've followed or even read all the T&Cs they've "agreed" to so it's silly to expect anyone else to, especially when there is more prominent text elsewhere contradicting them.

With one or two possible exceptions (i can't be bothered to go back and look at what everyone has said) that's not the issue. The issue isn't that you shouldn't hope to get a free poly, but that you can't really complain when you don't get a free poly, if you know before hand, or even after the fact checking the T&C, that you shouldn't get one.

LegoFanTexas

cheshirecat said:

The issue isn't that you shouldn't hope to get a free poly, but that you can't really complain when you don't get a free poly, if you know before hand, or even after the fact checking the T&C, that you shouldn't get one.

Sure I can, I'm the customer!

There is a saying:

The customer may not always be right, but they are always the customer.

As someone else posted in the "discounts on exclusives" thread:

TLG can make it simple, or the customer can make it simple for them.

princedraven

Xefan said:

The point is, you have to decide whether T&Cs are relevant to the discussion or not, on one hand you've made comments suggesting that it's in the T&Cs so Lego is in the right, then on the other you've suddenly decided discussion about T&Cs is irrelevant because it'd never be taken to court. Which is it, are they relevant or not? They can't just be relevant when it suits you and not when it doesn't.

It doesn't matter if Lego can ban you from the shop or whatever if you decided to argue because that's ultimately after the fact. They'd still have to honour their legal obligations at the end of the day which is really what's being discussed here.

Oh my god, how do you guys not get this. The T&C's are COMPLETELY relevant, they are the TERMS and CONDITIONS for the offer.
@Xefan stated they are irrelevant because they are not enforceable, a fact I dissagree with.
But, even on the off chance that some random dude on the internet is correct and that TLG (and every other company) waste a large amount of money creating lots of 'small print' that is not enforceable, the average Joe is not in a position to prove that the T&C's are not enforceable, so in reality they are the Terms and Conditions for the deal and what you have to live by.

Simples...

LostInTranslation

I never thought I'd say this, but @Pitfall69, where are you with a Star Wars quote to break the tension here?!

princedraven

How about this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WretchedHive

Hardrada

It seems this thread has reached its conclusion. Those who think that the cart at checkout overwrites the small print and think that TLG should own up to their own mistakes are immoral pricks and have inferior ethics compared to some holier than thou individuals. Case closed.

Good to know that I'm a lowlife immoral system abuser scumbag if I feel entitled to an item a company put into my cart themselves or to the possibility to terminate my purchase at no cost to me if they won't let me have that item and remove it after I paid.

After all why engage in a debate when one can simply declare that one's own set of morals are the benchmark and those who don't agree with him over a tiny little issue are 'quality' and abusers? Are you this confrontational and judgemental in real life as well?

princedraven

Hardrada said:

It seems this thread has reached its conclusion. Those who think that the cart at checkout overwrites the small print and think that TLG should own up to their own mistakes are immoral pricks and have inferior ethics compared to some holier than thou individuals. Case closed.

Good to know that I'm a lowlife immoral system abuser scumbag if I feel entitled to an item a company put into my cart themselves or to the possibility to terminate my purchase at no cost to me if they won't let me have that item and remove it after I paid.

After all why engage in a debate when one can simply declare that one's own set of morals are the benchmark and those who don't agree with him over a tiny little issue are 'quality' and abusers? Are you this confrontational and judgemental in real life as well?

Man oh man, this is not about morals, there are TERMS and CONDITIONS for the offer. TLG have just enforced THEIR terms and conditions. Accept it.

princedraven

The lengths people on here go to to try to justify why they should be entitled to break rules, why they deserve to be treated better than anyone else, why the Terms and Conditions shouldn't affect them or shouldn't be enforceable. IT IS A COMPLETE JOKE.
You placed an order with a company who delivered as per the conditions.

Hardrada

princedraven said:

Man oh man, this is not about morals, there are TERMS and CONDITIONS for the offer. TLG have just enforced THEIR terms and conditions. Accept it.

When I check out with my cart and they take my money for it, that's a contract. If it's at odds with their terms and conditions they can refuse the sale and I'm fine with that. What I'm absolutely not fine with is them sending out a modified / incomplete order without asking me whether I still need it and being called an exploiter, etc. by judgemental individuals if I want to return the order at the company's cost for not getting exactly what I ordered and what they have taken my money for.

Xefan

So the T&Cs are relevant now because it suits again? In that case re-read my original post on the topic rather than dismissing it as it explains why T&Cs aren't a get out of jail free card for companies and cites some examples (i.e. PPI). You're taking it to the extreme in the assumption that because T&Cs aren't a trump card that they're 100% worthless - they still allow companies to define fair and reasonable terms providing they don't contradict them elsewhere which is why companies continue to do them but they're not a trump card and that's why your argument that "It's in the T&Cs so that's all there is to it" is wrong. To counter your suggestion that T&Cs must be wholly enforceable otherwise companies wouldn't produce them, consider this, if T&Cs are the trump card you claim then why did the banks lose their PPI test cases? Why are they now out by billions in compensation given that the T&Cs would, if they were a trump card, have protected them?

Another example is a mobile provider (Vodafone?) selling someone a 12 month contract that increased in price at the end of the contract but not informing the customer of that price increase and only having this in the T&Cs online. This wasn't enforceable because the customer could not be expected to go out their way looking for something that contradicts what they have been told during the sale.

I'm sorry if the truth is inconvenient for you but you may just have to accept that the T&Cs argument isn't a valid path to go down in trying to back up your argument.

You can argue as to whether you feel people should be allowed more than one poly and you can give your opinion as to whether you feel it's right that people should or shouldn't complain and so forth and that's fine because that's all just personal opinion. But if you're going to start arguing against established fact then it just undermines anything you have to say as it means you're arguing for the sake of simply not conceding a point, even if you are wrong on that particular point.

Ultimately I think it's pretty hard to make a case that Lego aren't in the wrong here in terms of the way their sales process advertises the poly and I certainly don't think they'd have any legal basis on which they could defend themselves. Whether people who have read the T&Cs and are aware of the policy have the right to complain, well, that's a different issue and I agree it's not as clear cut though given the prominence of the item in the basket vs. the relative obscurity of the T&Cs I suspect they're still legally in the right, even if you feel they're not morally in the right. Ultimately you can add stuff to your basket, go to checkout, be given a list of products and a price and are given the option to accept that price and hand over the money for that list of products. If that list changes after you've handed over the money then that comes across as moral indefensible on Lego's part IMHO.

I get the impression most of those arguing against those who are annoyed are doing so more out of frustration at people who hoard to resell more than anything but if that is the case then again, it's a different issue and you can't blame honest customers who have no resale intentions for feeling cheated by TLG in this case.

LegoFanTexas

Hardrada said:

When I check out with my cart and they take my money for it, that's a contract. If it's at odds with their terms and conditions they can refuse the sale and I'm fine with that. What I'm absolutely not fine with is them sending out a modified / incomplete order without asking me whether I still need it and being called an exploiter, etc. by judgemental individuals if I want to return the order at the company's cost for not getting exactly what I ordered and what they have taken my money for.

^ This, right here, is the long and short of it.

If TLG doesn't want to fulfill the order as it stood at the time of checkout, they have the option to cancel the order, or contact the customer and give them the option.

What they don't have the option of doing is removing parts of the order and shipping other parts without notice.

mountebank

Well, this is nice.

mountebank

That's very impolite of you @princedraven. But I won't hold it against you.

On edit: ha ha, you edited to refer to a post above mine.

cheshirecat

Hardrada said:

princedraven said:

Man oh man, this is not about morals, there are TERMS and CONDITIONS for the offer. TLG have just enforced THEIR terms and conditions. Accept it.

When I check out with my cart and they take my money for it, that's a contract. If it's at odds with their terms and conditions they can refuse the sale and I'm fine with that. What I'm absolutely not fine with is them sending out a modified / incomplete order without asking me whether I still need it and being called an exploiter, etc. by judgemental individuals if I want to return the order at the company's cost for not getting exactly what I ordered and what they have taken my money for.

In the UK at least it's almost certainly not a contract at that point, but thats by the by.

On the basis of this problem I dont think anyone is an immoral scumbag. And for someone who genuinely doesnt know the rules then returning the delivery would be an entirely valid response. But if you do know the 1 per household rule and place the order with the intention of returning it if a poly isn't included then I think thats a bit disappointing. Phone up, complain, try and get your extra but otherwise it just feels like you're playing a game knowing theres no risk on your part and sod TLG.

That saddens me because we've recently seen the biggest and probably most requested change to [email protected], free delivery. And when one or two game the system, especially to excess, we all likely loose out.

Tevans333

LegoFanTexas said:

Hardrada said:

When I check out with my cart and they take my money for it, that's a contract. If it's at odds with their terms and conditions they can refuse the sale and I'm fine with that. What I'm absolutely not fine with is them sending out a modified / incomplete order without asking me whether I still need it and being called an exploiter, etc. by judgemental individuals if I want to return the order at the company's cost for not getting exactly what I ordered and what they have taken my money for.

^ This, right here, is the long and short of it.

If TLG doesn't want to fulfill the order as it stood at the time of checkout, they have the option to cancel the order, or contact the customer and give them the option.

What they don't have the option of doing is removing parts of the order and shipping other parts without notice.

Consumer protection laws state that the merchant must either complete the order wholy or refund the full amount of the portion of the order not completed. In this case, if you did not receive the promo you would receive a refund of $0.00 as that is what the price of the camper is listed at on the checkout screen.

Now weather TLG should do this from a customer service standpoint is another discussion althogether. But there is nothing illegal about it.

Hardrada

cheshirecat said:

In the UK at least it's almost certainly not a contract at that point, but thats by the by.

On the basis of this problem I dont think anyone is an immoral scumbag. And for someone who genuinely doesnt know the rules then returning the delivery would be an entirely valid response. But if you do know the 1 per household rule and place the order with the intention of returning it if a poly isn't included then I think thats a bit disappointing. Phone up, complain, try and get your extra but otherwise it just feels like you're playing a game knowing theres no risk on your part and sod TLG.

That saddens me because we've recently seen the biggest and probably most requested change to [email protected], free delivery. And when one or two game the system, especially to excess, we all likely loose out.

Simple solution: When you take my money for X, don't send out X-Y without asking me first whether it's okay. After all I never gave them permission to send only X-Y by buying X. I don't want to make TLG ship items back and forth for nothing, I'd be perfectly fine with cancelling the order even before it was packed.

I think the right thing to do is to ask the customer on what he wants if his submitted order can't be fulfilled exactly as he wants because of availability issues or terms and conditions conflicts. I as a BL seller would expect to get a rightful negative if I just sent an incomplete order out and refunded the removed items without communication with the buyer on what he wants.

Tevans333

cheshirecat said:

Hardrada said:

princedraven said:

Man oh man, this is not about morals, there are TERMS and CONDITIONS for the offer. TLG have just enforced THEIR terms and conditions. Accept it.

When I check out with my cart and they take my money for it, that's a contract. If it's at odds with their terms and conditions they can refuse the sale and I'm fine with that. What I'm absolutely not fine with is them sending out a modified / incomplete order without asking me whether I still need it and being called an exploiter, etc. by judgemental individuals if I want to return the order at the company's cost for not getting exactly what I ordered and what they have taken my money for.

On the basis of this problem I dont think anyone is an immoral scumbag. And for someone who genuinely doesnt know the rules then returning the delivery would be an entirely valid response. But if you do know the 1 per household rule and place the order with the intention of returning it if a poly isn't included then I think thats a bit disappointing. Phone up, complain, try and get your extra but otherwise it just feels like you're playing a game knowing theres no risk on your part and sod TLG.

That saddens me because we've recently seen the biggest and probably most requested change to [email protected], free delivery. And when one or two game the system, especially to excess, we all likely loose out.

This is exactly what my issue is. And it apparently rubbed some people the wrong way. If you KNOW you may not receive it because you already received one, don't play games at TLG's expense.

cheshirecat

^^ That happens all the time on bricklink. The other day some pieces were missing and without asking they refunded the amount for those four pieces. Had I asked for a full refund and free delivery back id have no doubt had a fight, been blacklisted and subject to a lot of bo

Hardrada

Tevans333 said:

Consumer protection laws state that the merchant must either complete the order wholy or refund the full amount of the portion of the order not completed. In this case, if you did not receive the promo you would receive a refund of $0.00 as that is what the price of the camper is listed at on the checkout screen.

Yet if you did this as a BL or eBay seller you'd be swamped with negative feedback and rightly so, as the value of the freebie is not zero and not receiving it influences what you get for your money.

maques

One could call up LEGO CS and ask how it should work, but I guess they would either just repeat the fine print, or give some random answer.

I might make an 3rd order, and if the T1 would be removed later on, I'd "phone up and complain", not mainly to get another free T1, but to get CS and upstream notified to man up and fix their method of freebie add/remove monkeybusiness.

In general, even if they would "enforcing one per household" before checkout, one who would want more (two sons or one to open-one to "file"), could easily arrange it (by ordering to different addresses or ask a relative/friend/colleague).
So then they would comply the one per household fine print. Would everyone be happy then? Not much, this "method" would not be good neither for LEGO, nor for the customer, so that is sort of a lose-lose situation...

cheshirecat

Trying to get this thread to a better place, there are more posts with polys included in orders than not.

Looking at my parcel weights it looks like I'll get some extras tomorrow (but who knows) if so I'll have a few spare I can send to those bricksetters who may have fallen foul.

Hardrada

cheshirecat said:

^^ That happens all the time on bricklink. The other day some pieces were missing and without asking they refunded the amount for those four pieces. Had I asked for a full refund and free delivery back id have no doubt had a fight, been blacklisted and subject to a lot of bo

I think that's bad customer service. A good seller would have asked what kind of compensation you would have been happy with. (Refund, sending the missing parts, coupon, whatever.)

But anyhow the correct analogy is when the BL seller notices before sending the order out that some parts of it he can't fulfill. I think in that situation it would be an extremely dickish move to simply send out the incomplete order knowingly without asking first. Maybe the most important parts are missing and you are sending out the filler...

cheshirecat

If lego had just run out would,you be equally upset?

Xefan

princedraven said:

I guess it's probably just bitterness that they turned down your business proposal.

So I guess we're no longer discussing based on the merits of people's personal viewpoints and the discussion has descended to the point where it's more about personal vendetta's from past arguments?

If so then I guess I'm out. It's pointless, it's petty, and it's really really childish.

Tevans333

Hardrada said:

Tevans333 said:

Consumer protection laws state that the merchant must either complete the order wholy or refund the full amount of the portion of the order not completed. In this case, if you did not receive the promo you would receive a refund of $0.00 as that is what the price of the camper is listed at on the checkout screen.

Yet if you did this as a BL or eBay seller you'd be swamped with negative feedback and rightly so, as the value of the freebie is not zero and not receiving it influences what you get for your money.

Certainly nothing illegal about it, but as I stated, it's a customer service issue and that is an entirely different conversation. TLG has made several CS mistakes lately, which is why we are seeing so many of these types of threads on the forum right now.

maques

cheshirecat said:

If lego had just run out would,you be equally upset?

Stock can also be managed by webshops above 1.0
But let's say they can't do it because they can't afford to upgrade their webshop, then I would expect a "Hello, we can't ship the order like that [OK/Cancel]", then I could go on with "cancel" and order next month with that time's promo.
Or if they'd care for my order, then could offer something else to "satisfy" me. I'm sure we could work out something...

graphite

cheshirecat said:

If lego had just run out would,you be equally upset?

If they ran out, shipped an order without it, and weren't planning on sending the poly when they got some in? Yes I think everyone would be just as upset. As you can see throughout the thread most people plan their orders for the freebies or bonus VIP. Why order now and get nothing extra when you can get something next month.

princedraven

Another element of the T&C's is 'while stocks last' so if you only got one because of this element of the T&C's is that acceptable?

Hardrada

cheshirecat said:

If lego had just run out would,you be equally upset?

I know that they also send out the order incomplete if a set was sold out without asking whether you still need the stuff even if they can only partially fulfil it. And many other companies do the same. I think it's a bad business practice which is unfair to buyers.

If I had an order with a set that I really want and some filler sets (to reach free shipping or promo thresholds) then I'd be upset if they only sent me the filler because of running out of the important set without asking me whether I still need the partial order. That's capitalizing on a sale they wouldn't have gotten and are not entitled to in my opinion. Luckily it only happened to me the other way around once, they ran out of one of the filler sets I bought.

Coyotelily

Whilst I appreciate everyone's comments on my original post I understand that it was my fault for not reading the t&c's which if I had have done I probably wouldn't have placed my second order but waited until I got to a store. What is done is done and I have now learnt my lesson, however I really feel that this thread has become quite abusive and as a managing director of my own business I see almost everyone's points for and against the restrictions, practices etc but please stop being rude, aggressive, and indignant with each other, we are a community here to help each other with a common interest- lets keep it light guys please !

graphite

cheshirecat said:

^^ That happens all the time on bricklink. The other day some pieces were missing and without asking they refunded the amount for those four pieces. Had I asked for a full refund and free delivery back id have no doubt had a fight, been blacklisted and subject to a lot of bo

Personally, when anything is different when I pack an order (part variant is wrong, missing parts, wrong quantity) I email the person, tell them what was wrong, what I can offer and give them the option of cancelling if they'd rather not have the incomplete order. Not all BL sellers are the same just like not everyone here has the same morals or business mentality.

If someone blacklists you from their store because they didn't follow their end of the "contract" that is entered when you order on BL and you complained about it, then at least you'll never have to deal with them again.

I've blacklisted a few people, mostly NPB or shady cancel requests because I don't need the business and don't want those people doing it again. "I didn't mean to order those" isn't an excuse for something like a 100 part 20+ lot order. You can't accidentally click checkout, select a payment method, and hit submit. Unless you're a moron.

Brickarmor

Even BL requires a seller to send an Item Removal Request if an item is absent. That gives the buyer the chance to cancel the entire order if the item was paramount.

princedraven

Xefan said:

princedraven said:

I guess it's probably just bitterness that they turned down your business proposal.

So I guess we're no longer discussing based on the merits of people's personal viewpoints and the discussion has descended to the point where it's more about personal vendetta's from past arguments?

If so then I guess I'm out. It's pointless, it's petty, and it's really really childish.

It's like a recurring nightmare to this site:
Someone has an issue with something.
'Certain individuals' pile in and criticise TLG'S on everything form their website, business sense, prices, T&C's. you name it.
No one takes any responsibility for their actions.

So tedious and boring.

I remember when Brickset was so much more that thIs.

LostInTranslation

Coyotelily said:

Whilst I appreciate everyone's comments on my original post I understand that it was my fault for not reading the t&c's which if I had have done I probably wouldn't have placed my second order but waited until I got to a store. What is done is done and I have now learnt my lesson, however I really feel that this thread has become quite abusive and as a managing director of my own business I see almost everyone's points for and against the restrictions, practices etc but please stop being rude, aggressive, and indignant with each other, we are a community here to help each other with a common interest- lets keep it light guys please !

Agree wholeheartedly @coyotelily !

mressin

Two things:

0. The rule of ravens and princes says that if it is clear from your words that you dislike somebody, and you keep making it clear publicly, you are probably being rude.
The Felines Palatines of Chester corollary adds that if others join in to your tune, you are probably bullying.

1. Isn't it a question of equality? If nobody ever received a second promotion poly, there'd be less of a discussion. But since some do, the others can be frustrated about it. (And since some will always find a way to game the system, I suspect TLG is trying to pull a sysiphos and a phyrrus all in one.)

2. From all I know, agreeing to a business transaction (e.g. a sale) is a contract. Once a company takes the money, there are comparatively few exceptions to get out of it. Remember those discussions about erroneous pricing and stock keeping, leading to unfulfilled orders?
If a sale was not a contract, well, then, the buyer is not bound by the T&Cs, right? And wouldn't be liable to pay. Right?

Please skip 3. unless you accept that a sale is a contract.

3. So we have a contract which is in itself contradictory: the T&Cs say one thing (no second poly), the invoice sheet says another (we'll deliver a second poly). When a contract is ambiguous, issues are resolved to the advantage of the party who did not draft the contract. Which would be the buyer.

4. Concilliatory Star Wars quote: "There is no conflict."

Grogall

Wow, I can't believe this forum is showing so much hatred!? It's only LEGO. It can't be that hard getting these things of Bricklink, So why all these mean comments?

Now back to our sponsored program!

Observer

If it's in the fine print then those are the rules. If a person chose not to read them that's their fault if they are disappointed when they place orders expecting more and not observing the rules beforehand.

Hardrada

Grogall said:

It can't be that hard getting these things of Bricklink,

That's partly/mostly because the 1 per household rule is only arbitrarily enforced.:)

prevere

This kind of reminds me of the VIP red chrome Valentine's keychain fiasco.

Brickarmor

I think everybody's a little (!) more on edge now than usual: 41999 + No More Discounts + Camper imbroglio = STRESS! Did I miss anything?

brickedin

Am i alone in hoping that @sirkevbags will fly in and bring some feel good factor to this forum. Save us hairy fairy!

LostInTranslation

@brickedin - just go and read the entire raffle thread, it'll make you feel better and put a big smile on your face!

brickedin

On my way!! While i'm at it i'm off to choose something as a prize for the next raffle.

SirKevbags

To the rescue! One of the girls wasn't feeling so great. Same goes for the photographer but you get the idea :-)

BrickDancer

prevere said:

This kind of reminds me of the VIP red chrome Valentine's keychain fiasco.

Lots of bad things have happened since the VIP Valentine's fiasco. I almost want to say that was the first salvo of bad trends all around. Prior to that, it was only the internal "Resellers Doodad War" that stirred the pot here. But since then, TLG has done a few things that rub me the wrong way. And yes my B&M and [email protected] orders have declined greatly since as a result of it. But then again I'm just a single replaceable customer so no biggie and its my loss right?

jdylak

Earlier question: is it ok to be mad if they ran out? Nope. Also stated "while supplies last".

maques

jdylak said:

Earlier question: is it ok to be mad if they ran out? Nope. Also stated "while supplies last".

Question slightly modified: "Shall I be notified if stock runs out - before shipping and allowing me to decide to go on or cancel?"

TheLoneTensor

maques said:

jdylak said:

Earlier question: is it ok to be mad if they ran out? Nope. Also stated "while supplies last".

Question slightly modified: "Shall I be notified if stock runs out - before shipping and allowing me to decide to go on or cancel?"

Based on pattern recognition, which can easily be confused with mystical precognition, my Magic 8 Ball's sources say "no."

This happened with me with one of the 2011 xmas sets. I called up, they said sorry and gave me a couple polybags from their drawer of goodies.

cheshirecat

I've never experienced another retailer do that with promo items. only yesterday in fact what should have been two pyrex dishes was swapped without warning for a sodastream? Good or bad deal im not sure, probably bad as they didnt include the gas canister. we also didnt want a sodastream where as according to my wife you cant have too many pyrex dishes.

Phonebooth

maques said:

jdylak said:

Earlier question: is it ok to be mad if they ran out? Nope. Also stated "while supplies last".

Question slightly modified: "Shall I be notified if stock runs out - before shipping and allowing me to decide to go on or cancel?"

Question modified slightly again: Should I be angry that my (first qualifying) order failed to yield a promo because stock ran out (quicker because some scammed the system).