Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.comAmazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

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

1246711

Comments

  • SirKevbagsSirKevbags Fairy Land Member Posts: 4,030
    @Legoboy Regardless of laws please do not attempt to take your car to 130 mph. Its usually loaded with sets, even the roof box and it will be close to an environmental disaster is you spill bricks everywhere. Especially mine ;-)
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    @cheshirecat Of course I'm also more sympathetic to those who run into this unknowingly but the fault still lies with TLG. It's just totally bonkers that a small print somewhere overrides what's in your cart at checkout. It's an unacceptable 'malfunction' of their store.

    The local roads enable me to drive at 130mph, so I'll the police officer it's the engineer's fault when I get pulled over. "I shouldn't be able to drive at 130mph."
    And the worst analogy of the week award goes to...

    (Speed limits are clearly posted everywhere and you have to learn about them to get the driving licence. On [email protected]'s site you can check out without ever seeing the page where the fine print is located at.)
    juggles7
  • JawascrumpJawascrump Member Posts: 112
    edited September 2013
    I have two orders marked as shipped, both containing the VW, I will update on how I get on in the VW Camper lottery!
    It does seem unfair I could go into a bricks and mortar store on two separate days and definitely get the polybag.

    On a slight O/T tangent, will this apply to next months freebies too?
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    edited September 2013
    ^Nobody knows (perhaps not even LEGO?) but we've had two people say that LEGO employees have told them that the VW poly is a special case, others have said they didn't always get a galaxy squad poly last month and the 1 per household limit has been included but seemingly not enforced for a long time.

    I have 4 orders shipped and 1 in process. The one in process went to CS for a while and the VW poly was cancelled, it says so online, but I didn't receive any communication about it. So far I've only received 1 shipping email (although the other three are trackable) and it says the vw poly is included. Who knows what I will get. I placed an order at the start of the month which did (ofcourse) come with the free poly.
  • maquesmaques HungaryMember Posts: 96
    edited September 2013

    I have two orders marked as shipped, both containing the VW, I will update on how I get on in the VW Camper lottery!

    If those marked as shipped, you likely get it (CS monkey was eating banana).

    It does seem unfair I could go into a bricks and mortar store on two separate days and definitely get the polybag.

    Even more unfair, if you don't have a BM LEGO store in your country...

    On a slight O/T tangent, will this apply to next months freebies too?

    Next month lottery will be likely similarly random, however I guess T1 is more popular than others (like the GS freebie), and many "timed" their order to get it.
  • mrhippomrhippo Member Posts: 2
    hi
    when i saw the vw coming out i decided i wanted 1 so did my grandkids so i placed 3 seperate orders over the £50 and i got a vw in every pack no problem here
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    edited September 2013
    Just so everyone can see what we are talking about:
    1. The restriction is not visible in your cart.
    2. It is not there on the product page of the mini Camper (which you can reach by one click from your cart).
    3. The system allows you to check out with it and lets you pay for your order even if you are not eligible according to the fine print.
    4. The restriction is mentioned only at one single place on [email protected] Towards the end of the small print located conveniently detached from the promo ad by recommendations of other sets. (See picture.)

    Definitely a "The restriction was available to read in the basement" situation. But it's your fault for trusting TLG that you'll get what's in your cart at checkout.:p What has this world gotten to! People expecting to get what they purchased. The horrors!
    maquespaul_mertonChang405
  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,834
    edited September 2013
    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    @cheshirecat Of course I'm also more sympathetic to those who run into this unknowingly but the fault still lies with TLG. It's just totally bonkers that a small print somewhere overrides what's in your cart at checkout. It's an unacceptable 'malfunction' of their store.

    The local roads enable me to drive at 130mph, so I'll the police officer it's the engineer's fault when I get pulled over. "I shouldn't be able to drive at 130mph."
    And the worst analogy of the week award goes to...
    Not me.
    Hardrada said:

    (Speed limits are clearly posted everywhere and you have to learn about them to get the driving licence. On [email protected]'s site you can check out without ever seeing the page where the fine print is located at.)

    With a banner clearly stating the rules ie. road signs stating the maximum speed, I fail to see the difference. It's right there in the Terms and Conditions. You know about it, yoe read it. Hell, you've highlighted it above! Don't be upset when you get caught out.
    princedraven
  • jdylakjdylak Member Posts: 281
    Hardrada said:

    It's like the world has gone insane! When did people lose the understanding that they have to have responsibility for their own actions!?!?!

    Yes, and that applies to TLG as well. Their online store isn't working properly, and it's their responsibility. It's like the world has gone insane! Instead of owning up to it they are manually removing already purchased items.

    What if I'm Average Joe just shopping around at [email protected] two times a month and I see the promo poly turn up in my cart both times? There is no mention when you click on the cart of the household limit. You can check out with your cart and pay for your order without ever visiting the page where the restriction is mentioned in small print. (Not to mention that a good chunk of customers don't read the small print even if they see it.)

    A certain Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy quote about the plans having been available in the basement for viewing would fit here nicely.
    Then who's fault is it? The company that states the terms whether you qualify for the item? Or the people that don't bother to read small print even if they see it?

  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    edited September 2013
    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    @cheshirecat Of course I'm also more sympathetic to those who run into this unknowingly but the fault still lies with TLG. It's just totally bonkers that a small print somewhere overrides what's in your cart at checkout. It's an unacceptable 'malfunction' of their store.

    The local roads enable me to drive at 130mph, so I'll the police officer it's the engineer's fault when I get pulled over. "I shouldn't be able to drive at 130mph."
    And the worst analogy of the week award goes to...
    Not me.
    Hardrada said:

    (Speed limits are clearly posted everywhere and you have to learn about them to get the driving licence. On [email protected]'s site you can check out without ever seeing the page where the fine print is located at.)

    With a banner clearly stating the rules ie. road signs stating the maximum speed, I fail to see the difference.
    Now that's an outright lie, sorry. The banner doesn't state the rules. You have to click on it and read the fine print at the bottom of the promo page. You can check out with a mini Camper without ever visiting the promo page.

    I guess you read the several pages long terms and services of every store and the small prints of every promotion just in case even if it's only for a low value trinket. Seems a lot more justifiable on a company's part to expect this from one's customers than actually fixing one's store, no?
  • maquesmaques HungaryMember Posts: 96
    edited September 2013
    Legoboy said:

    Then who's fault is it? The company that states the terms whether you qualify for the item? Or the people that don't bother to read small print even if they see it?

    Read Hardrada's post at 1:15. That summarizes it.
  • jdylakjdylak Member Posts: 281
    "People don't get what they purchased". What was purchased that was taken away?
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    ^^ posting the time doesn't work, as the time is localised to you. For me, and for Legoboy, its 12:15 ;)

    The fact remains that in your case now, you do know about the terms of the offer. So you have no leg to stand on.
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    edited September 2013
    jdylak said:

    Hardrada said:

    It's like the world has gone insane! When did people lose the understanding that they have to have responsibility for their own actions!?!?!

    Yes, and that applies to TLG as well. Their online store isn't working properly, and it's their responsibility. It's like the world has gone insane! Instead of owning up to it they are manually removing already purchased items.

    What if I'm Average Joe just shopping around at [email protected] two times a month and I see the promo poly turn up in my cart both times? There is no mention when you click on the cart of the household limit. You can check out with your cart and pay for your order without ever visiting the page where the restriction is mentioned in small print. (Not to mention that a good chunk of customers don't read the small print even if they see it.)

    A certain Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy quote about the plans having been available in the basement for viewing would fit here nicely.
    Then who's fault is it? The company that states the terms whether you qualify for the item? Or the people that don't bother to read small print even if they see it?


    My main point was that you can check out with the mini Camper without ever having to visit the page which mentions the restriction. Now it's my fault if I don't open the promo ad and scroll down to the bottom of it? Is it really an unreasonable expectation to think that if the item turns up in my cart automatically then I'm eligible for it?

    Also is it really reasonable to expect people to search for, locate and then read lines and lines of small print and terms of service every time they purchase an inexpensive item? And on top is it reasonable to expect customers to go check on an item which got added to their order not even by themselves but automatically? Most customers' time is worth more than that.
  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,834
    maques said:

    Legoboy said:

    Then who's fault is it? The company that states the terms whether you qualify for the item? Or the people that don't bother to read small print even if they see it?

    Read Hardrada's post at 1:15. That summarizes it.
    Mate, you've mis-quoted. I didn't say that. :-)

  • jdylakjdylak Member Posts: 281
    maques said:

    Legoboy said:

    Then who's fault is it? The company that states the terms whether you qualify for the item? Or the people that don't bother to read small print even if they see it?

    Read Hardrada's post at 1:15. That summarizes it.
    That doesn't answer what I highlighted. He says "Not to mention that a good chunk of customers don't read the small print even if they see it." If they see it and decide not to read the terms even if they are right there. "Well, yeah, I knew there was some fine print to this deal, but I didn't want to read it. Oh, and where is my free set?"

    If it wasn't admitted that some people just don't bother reading something before they buy, I can understand. But if someone see something admitingly and still complains "it's not fair", you don't have much to stand on.

  • maquesmaques HungaryMember Posts: 96
    Legoboy said:

    Mate, you've mis-quoted. I didn't say that. :-)

    Erm, apologies... :-)
    (fine print said it wasn't you who said, but it was so fine print, noone would see it... :-)

    Legoboy
  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,834
    edited September 2013
    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    @cheshirecat Of course I'm also more sympathetic to those who run into this unknowingly but the fault still lies with TLG. It's just totally bonkers that a small print somewhere overrides what's in your cart at checkout. It's an unacceptable 'malfunction' of their store.

    The local roads enable me to drive at 130mph, so I'll the police officer it's the engineer's fault when I get pulled over. "I shouldn't be able to drive at 130mph."
    And the worst analogy of the week award goes to...
    Not me.
    Hardrada said:

    (Speed limits are clearly posted everywhere and you have to learn about them to get the driving licence. On [email protected]'s site you can check out without ever seeing the page where the fine print is located at.)

    With a banner clearly stating the rules ie. road signs stating the maximum speed, I fail to see the difference.
    Now that's an outright lie, sorry. The banner doesn't state the rules. You have to click on it and read the fine print at the bottom of the promo page. You can check out with a mini Camper without ever visiting the promo page.

    I guess you read the several pages long terms and services of every store and the small prints of every promotion just in case even if it's only for a low value trinket. Seems a lot more justifiable on a company's part to expect this from one's customers than actually fixing one's store, no?
    It's not a lie. The banner has an asterix and invites those that might want to 'learn more' about the offer to click "Learn more." No need to sieve through the other [email protected] - it's right there having learnt more!!

    I don't agree that the campervan should be added to your cart on the second purchase, it shouldn't, but having made the purchaser aware what the score is in terms of 'One per household', the purchaser shouldn't feel particularly hard done by when it's not included in their delivered box. it can be disappointed and even disgruntled by way that TLG can't get their website together to avoid the 'bug', but it can't be angry in not receiving something they were told was outside the T&Cs.
  • maquesmaques HungaryMember Posts: 96
    edited September 2013
    jdylak said:

    But if someone see something admitingly and still complains "it's not fair", you don't have much to stand on.

    Still valid that LEGO should fix this in case they'd really care. At least to offload CS monkeys.

    OTOH, like I said, I received all mines, and this goes back to years, I never had problems with multiple orders.

    And it is funny, ~2 years ago, their system was more buggy, I reported like a dozen of bugs. One was that the price limit was not "14000" HUF (~USD 62), but 1400 (USD ~6.2). Got some Shadow ARF Troopers with plain keychain orders - and didn't even know it wasn't intended like that...

    It was 1400 at the main banner, at the "details" and at the checkout system.
    Fixing it all 3 places took 3 different reports. Plus the 4th one when next months newsletter came out with still the "1400". Now which value would have been the correct one by then? When fine print still said 1400 but only showed in cart over 14000?

    Fine print is for the weaks...
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    jdylak said:

    maques said:

    Legoboy said:

    Then who's fault is it? The company that states the terms whether you qualify for the item? Or the people that don't bother to read small print even if they see it?

    Read Hardrada's post at 1:15. That summarizes it.
    That doesn't answer what I highlighted. He says "Not to mention that a good chunk of customers don't read the small print even if they see it." If they see it and decide not to read the terms even if they are right there. "Well, yeah, I knew there was some fine print to this deal, but I didn't want to read it. Oh, and where is my free set?"

    If it wasn't admitted that some people just don't bother reading something before they buy, I can understand. But if someone see something admitingly and still complains "it's not fair", you don't have much to stand on.
    That wasn't the main point. It was just a small addendum that it might be worth making your store intuitive to use for the masses. Don't expect people to read the fine print and settle for your store working to the contrary of your terms because it might be confusing and upsetting for your customers. Most people will expect to get what was added to their order automatically by the store because they expect it to work correctly.

    Also I think most would expect the store mechanism plainly in sight to override the small print and not the other way around. Even if I saw the fine print but didn't know about the cancelled items from other buyers I'd expect that the item having been added to my order automatically has precedent over a restriction hidden in the fine print. I'd first think that "maybe they have enough so decided to ease on the restriction" instead of thinking "their coders can't do their job and this is a fluke and I'm not entitled to this set even when they have put it in my cart automatically themselves". Especially after a long track record of TLG not adhering to their fine print. (Getting May 4th promos without purchasing SW year after year, etc.)

    It's only the combination of having read the fine print and knowing from this forum that the items were cancelled in some cases that I should reasonably expect the purchased items to be removed from my order without warning.
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    @cheshirecat Of course I'm also more sympathetic to those who run into this unknowingly but the fault still lies with TLG. It's just totally bonkers that a small print somewhere overrides what's in your cart at checkout. It's an unacceptable 'malfunction' of their store.

    The local roads enable me to drive at 130mph, so I'll the police officer it's the engineer's fault when I get pulled over. "I shouldn't be able to drive at 130mph."
    And the worst analogy of the week award goes to...
    Not me.
    Hardrada said:

    (Speed limits are clearly posted everywhere and you have to learn about them to get the driving licence. On [email protected]'s site you can check out without ever seeing the page where the fine print is located at.)

    With a banner clearly stating the rules ie. road signs stating the maximum speed, I fail to see the difference.
    Now that's an outright lie, sorry. The banner doesn't state the rules. You have to click on it and read the fine print at the bottom of the promo page. You can check out with a mini Camper without ever visiting the promo page.

    I guess you read the several pages long terms and services of every store and the small prints of every promotion just in case even if it's only for a low value trinket. Seems a lot more justifiable on a company's part to expect this from one's customers than actually fixing one's store, no?
    It's not a lie. The banner has an asterix and invites those that might want to 'learn more' about the offer to click "Learn more." No need to sieve through the other [email protected] - it's right there having learnt more!!

    I don't agree that the campervan should be added to your cart on the second purchase, it shouldn't, but having made the purchaser aware what the score is in terms of 'One per household', the purchaser shouldn't feel particularly hard done by when it's not included in their delivered box. it can be disappointed and even disgruntled by way that TLG can't get their website together to avoid the 'bug', but it can't be angry in not receiving something they were told was outside the T&Cs.
    It's not the banner that states the restrictions but the page that can be accessed by clicking on a banner. (If I state again that your original statement was untrue will you reward me with another abuse flag? I can also fling it around but what's the point?) And as far as I know it's not mandatory to read that page before checking out. If they can't fix their store then they should have that info on the checkout page so people have to read the restriction before paying for their order.

    ...maybe with an apology that reads:
    "We apologise in case our system mistakenly added this item to your cart. You might not be eligible for it even if you can check out with it." :p
  • Tevans333Tevans333 Member Posts: 152
    maques said:

    If it's my cart at checkout, I expect to get it. If their order system don't honour their fine prints, why shall I.

    I will let you know how it works out.

    The problem I have with people like you is that you KNOW it's an error and you are trying to exploit it. Businesses are run by people, people make mistakes. TLG made a mistake in their system and need to fix it. What's the big deal? Why is everyone up in arms trying to stick it to 'em?
  • maquesmaques HungaryMember Posts: 96
    Tevans333 said:

    The problem I have with people like you is that you KNOW it's an error and you are trying to exploit it. Businesses are run by people, people make mistakes. TLG made a mistake in their system and need to fix it. What's the big deal? Why is everyone up in arms trying to stick it to 'em?

    I'm helping LEGO to be aware of this problem and fix it ASAP.
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    Tevans333 said:

    maques said:

    If it's my cart at checkout, I expect to get it. If their order system don't honour their fine prints, why shall I.

    I will let you know how it works out.

    The problem I have with people like you is that you KNOW it's an error and you are trying to exploit it. Businesses are run by people, people make mistakes. TLG made a mistake in their system and need to fix it. What's the big deal? Why is everyone up in arms trying to stick it to 'em?
    Devil's advocate: How do we know that it's an error? Because someone on a forum said so?

    Were the May 4th promos without the need to purchase SW also errors that we exploited or was that intended on TLG's part? (Heck in the US they even sent the promos with the free Chima set as well that didn't even meet the purchase value criteria either.) How should we ever know?

    Did you ever exploit the 'error' with the May 4th promos by the way?
  • CoyotelilyCoyotelily God's Own County, UKMember Posts: 660
    oooooooooooooooo i wish i hadn't started this now !
    maquesLostInTranslation
  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,834
    edited September 2013
    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    Legoboy said:

    Hardrada said:

    @cheshirecat Of course I'm also more sympathetic to those who run into this unknowingly but the fault still lies with TLG. It's just totally bonkers that a small print somewhere overrides what's in your cart at checkout. It's an unacceptable 'malfunction' of their store.

    The local roads enable me to drive at 130mph, so I'll the police officer it's the engineer's fault when I get pulled over. "I shouldn't be able to drive at 130mph."
    And the worst analogy of the week award goes to...
    Not me.
    Hardrada said:

    (Speed limits are clearly posted everywhere and you have to learn about them to get the driving licence. On [email protected]'s site you can check out without ever seeing the page where the fine print is located at.)

    With a banner clearly stating the rules ie. road signs stating the maximum speed, I fail to see the difference.
    Now that's an outright lie, sorry. The banner doesn't state the rules. You have to click on it and read the fine print at the bottom of the promo page. You can check out with a mini Camper without ever visiting the promo page.

    I guess you read the several pages long terms and services of every store and the small prints of every promotion just in case even if it's only for a low value trinket. Seems a lot more justifiable on a company's part to expect this from one's customers than actually fixing one's store, no?
    It's not a lie. The banner has an asterix and invites those that might want to 'learn more' about the offer to click "Learn more." No need to sieve through the other [email protected] - it's right there having learnt more!!

    I don't agree that the campervan should be added to your cart on the second purchase, it shouldn't, but having made the purchaser aware what the score is in terms of 'One per household', the purchaser shouldn't feel particularly hard done by when it's not included in their delivered box. it can be disappointed and even disgruntled by way that TLG can't get their website together to avoid the 'bug', but it can't be angry in not receiving something they were told was outside the T&Cs.
    It's not the banner that states the restrictions but the page that can be accessed by clicking on a banner. (If I state again that your original statement was untrue will you reward me with another abuse flag? I can also fling it around but what's the point?) And as far as I know it's not mandatory to read that page before checking out. If they can't fix their store then they should have that info on the checkout page so people have to read the restriction before paying for their order.

    ...maybe with an apology that reads:
    "We apologise in case our system mistakenly added this item to your cart. You might not be eligible for it even if you can check out with it." :p
    @Hardrada - you are welcome to explain what you like to me and am grateful for it to some degree, but I don't accept someone being defamatory towards me when it is not justified and completely uncalled for. I am pleased to see that you have since removed your abuse tag towards my non-derogatory response left in retaliation. Thank you.

    The banner refers you to 'learn more'. The same banner doesn't advertise the fact there is a minimum spend attached to the conditions of the offer, yet it is duly accepted. Why? Because it's there on the next page you refer to and subsequently, underneath that is the small print.

    You are right, the website is shit and furthermore TLG suck for not correcting it and allowing you to subsequently make multiple purchases with the free poly in your cart, IT'S WRONG, but I fail to see how anybody can be angry about something they knowingly carried out or were told was against the T&Cs. If they didn't know, they should have read the promo properly - the same page that made the offer in the first place stating the 'minimum spend' and 'one per household'.

    If the minimum spend is accepted, so should the 'one per household'.
    cheshirecatprincedravenYellowcastle
  • Tevans333Tevans333 Member Posts: 152
    Hardrada said:

    Tevans333 said:

    maques said:

    If it's my cart at checkout, I expect to get it. If their order system don't honour their fine prints, why shall I.

    I will let you know how it works out.

    The problem I have with people like you is that you KNOW it's an error and you are trying to exploit it. Businesses are run by people, people make mistakes. TLG made a mistake in their system and need to fix it. What's the big deal? Why is everyone up in arms trying to stick it to 'em?
    Devil's advocate: How do we know that it's an error? Because someone on a forum said so?

    Were the May 4th promos without the need to purchase SW also errors that we exploited or was that intended on TLG's part? (Heck in the US they even sent the promos with the free Chima set as well that didn't even meet the purchase value criteria either.) How should we ever know?

    Did you ever exploit the 'error' with the May 4th promos by the way?
    Because what was received did not equal what was advertised as the offer. Although we were all very happy at the time, I'm sure TLG saw what happened and were equally unhappy. As a result they are trying to fix their issues. Albeit, they are going about it the wrong way IMHO.

    TLG is at fault for their systems inadequacies and if it is in the cart at checkout you should get it. But, if someone that is a part of this thread is being honest with themselves, then they know this is an error and are trying to game TLG.

    TLG is still trying to figure out how to be a retailer in some regards. There will be growing pains for both themselves and us consumers. The last thing either of us needs is a small group getting upset that they are trying to find a way to ship what they advertise (ie. 1 per household).

    I don't like that they aren't shipping the promo when it was in the cart, they should honor those orders, but why exploit the error?
  • maquesmaques HungaryMember Posts: 96
    Legoboy said:

    If the minimum spend is accepted, so should the 'one per household'.

    If the minimum spend (to get free shipping+freebie) is enforced/coded into the system, so should be the "one per household"...

  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,834
    maques said:

    Legoboy said:

    If the minimum spend is accepted, so should the 'one per household'.

    If the minimum spend (to get free shipping+freebie) is enforced/coded into the system, so should be the "one per household"...

    I completely agree with you.
    Legoboy said:

    You are right, the website is shit and furthermore TLG suck for not correcting it and allowing you to subsequently make multiple purchases with the free poly in your cart, IT'S WRONG.......

  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    Tevans333 said:


    I don't like that they aren't shipping the promo when it was in the cart, they should honor those orders, but why exploit the error?

    You haven't answered my question though whether you ever exploited the May 4th 'error'. It's a known error by your definition* that has been around for years and I haven't seen a single begrudging comment directed at people who bought PAB or some other stuff other than SW to get the promo.



    *As it was always mentioned in the fine print that you have to purchase SW to qualify. (And then never enforced.)
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    OK

    1 Should someone who knows the T&C, knows that there is a limit of 1 be upset when their package arrives without a poly, even though it shows in the order?

    2 Should someone who has seen the free poly banner, not shopped on [email protected] before, then ordered a BTTF delorian be upset when their package arrives without a poly?
  • mountebankmountebank Member Posts: 1,237
    This thread is fantastic.
    rocao
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439
    Legoboy said:


    The banner refers you to 'learn more'. The same banner doesn't advertise the fact there is a minimum spend attached to the conditions of the offer, yet it is duly accepted. Why? Because it's there on the next page you refer to and subsequently, underneath that is the small print.

    On the contrary I think it's mostly because you are not falsely given it when you don't qualify because of the minimum spend restriction. So in that regard the store works in accordance of their rules. If you could check out with the polybag without reaching the minimum spend limit and especially after a long track record of TLG not adhering to this restriction of theirs either I think we'd have almost the same situation with regards to that as well, and it wouldn't be duly accepted either when they suddenly started enforcing this rule without fixing the store mechanism itself.

    My stance on this is: Don't put something into your buyer's cart he's not entitled to. If you are putting it there, then it's your fault and you should own up to it. If the buyer had to manually add the promo item and had to go through the page where the restriction is mentioned then a big part of the blame would lie with him even if the site wasn't working correctly and allowed it.
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439

    OK

    1 Should someone who knows the T&C, knows that there is a limit of 1 be upset when their package arrives without a poly, even though it shows in the order?

    2 Should someone who has seen the free poly banner, not shopped on S[email protected] before, then ordered a BTTF delorian be upset when their package arrives without a poly?

    3 And what about the AFOL that was conditioned by TLG over the years to ignore the fine print if it contradicts how their store works? I'm absolutely honest when I'm saying that even if I had read the fine print it wouldn't have crossed my mind that I might not get more than one - had I not read this thread.

    During my first May 4th promotion I included some SW key chains to surely qualify for the promo even though the store mechanism would have given me the gift otherwise as well. Then I learned that it's not needed even though it's in the fine print and I can safely go with what's in my cart at checkout. And I don't remember moralizing posts urging others to not exploit this loophole. And when I learned that this 'loophole' returns every year I began to think/believe that it's not even a loophole at all but how it's intended to work because otherwise TLG would have surely fixed it over the years.
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149
    Arguments about Terms & Conditions are pretty stupid. If you're in the UK then the chances are your broadband T&Cs for example states you can't use it for business or commercial purposes yet tons of people work from home or send the odd work e-mail from home and so forth. Some will also have clauses about not being allowed to use the connection for copyright infringement yet I'd wager most people have watched a YouTube or whatever video with a backing soundtrack that's been used illegally. Others will have clauses about not being allowed to be offensive or abusive yet I suspect most people have done so at some point.

    I'd wager there's not a person on this earth that's lived to the letter of every T&C's they've agreed to so it's perhaps the most dishonest argument there is to fall back to and claim that if the T&C's say so then that's all there is to it. Besides, many court cases have established that T&Cs can't overrule more prominent content contradicting them elsewhere which is really the fundamental problem here.

    If the text stating you'll get a camper is more prominent than the T&Cs then that text ultimately overrules the T&Cs and that is the case because you view the text for the camper automatically as part of the shopping basket but for the T&Cs you have to go out your way.

    Or long story short, if the T&Cs contradict something else more prominent, they're not worth the paper (screen) they're printed on. In the UK this is ultimately why the banks got screwed for mis-selling PPI - it doesn't matter that it was all explained in the small print, the fact that the sales reps were lying, misinforming or just not informing people was enough to put them in the wrong because contrary to the argument being put forward above, the T&Cs don't get an automatic override of everything else that's been printed or said.
    paul_mertonroxioLegoFanTexasYellowcastle
  • paul_mertonpaul_merton UKMember Posts: 2,967
    ^ Spot on
    LegoFanTexas
  • Tevans333Tevans333 Member Posts: 152
    Hardrada said:

    Tevans333 said:


    I don't like that they aren't shipping the promo when it was in the cart, they should honor those orders, but why exploit the error?

    You haven't answered my question though whether you ever exploited the May 4th 'error'. It's a known error by your definition* that has been around for years and I haven't seen a single begrudging comment directed at people who bought PAB or some other stuff other than SW to get the promo.



    *As it was always mentioned in the fine print that you have to purchase SW to qualify. (And then never enforced.)
    By exploit I was referring to forcing TLG to pay return shipping when he placed the order AFTER knowing that they are removing the Polys from multiple orders.

    Yes, it has been an error for years by my definition and by definition in the term error. Their system is unable to provide the deal as outlined by the terms of the offer. Therefore there is an error in the implementation of their system.

    Have I placed multiple orders in the past and received multiple freebies, including May 4th? Absolutely. But again, I never would have asked TLG to refund an entire order and pay return shipping, especially if I placed the order KNOWING they are removing freebies from multiple orders.

    Again, TLG is at fault here. They owe everyone a freebie if it was in your cart at checkout. But why place multiple orders knowing they may remove it and force them to pay return shipping? Not knowing is one thing, knowing is another. That's what I have a problem with. It shows a poor character of the person knowingly making that decision.

    It's sad that so many will sell their morals for a quick $5 on ebay.
  • princedravenprincedraven Essex, UKMember Posts: 3,768
    @Hardrada I am sure loads of people placed an order on May 4th without Star Wars items, but again if they didn't get the freebie they are not entitled to winge, they know the rules.

    @Xefan Arguments about why T&C's are irrelevant are pretty stupid as no one is going to complain to the point of lawyers over a free poly and if they did then TLG can just say "bye bye, no more [email protected] orders for you, your account is banned"
    cheshirecat
  • Tevans333Tevans333 Member Posts: 152

    @Hardrada I am sure loads of people placed an order on May 4th without Star Wars items, but again if they didn't get the freebie they are not entitled to winge, they know the rules.

    @Xefan Arguments about why T&C's are irrelevant are pretty stupid as no one is going to complain to the point of lawyers over a free poly and if they did then TLG can just say "bye bye, no more [email protected] orders for you, your account is banned"

    All that matters is what's in the cart when you hit place order. That is the binding contract between you and the merchant. You agree to pay xx for the items listed. You are entitled to receive the items listed. TLG has no right to remove the promos from shipment after the order is placed.

    The T&C's are simply to outline when you should receive a promo in your cart or when you visit a brand store. Their implementation of promos on [email protected] is inadequate. Simple. Lets move on.
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149
    @princedraven So let me get this straight, people like yourself bring up the argument of the T&Cs but when someone points out that the argument about T&Cs is incorrect then it's suddenly irrelevant?

    Why was the point even brought up in the first place if it's irrelevant? Why are you only complaining about the supposed irrelevance of it now that it's inconvenient for your argument rather than in response to the last few pages of talk of T&Cs?

    An argument has to be on pretty weak grounds if you have to stoop to the level of accepting discussion of something you're now complaining is irrelevant whilst it suits then jumping on it and crying "irrelevant" when it no longer does.
  • princedravenprincedraven Essex, UKMember Posts: 3,768
    Tevans333 said:

    @Hardrada I am sure loads of people placed an order on May 4th without Star Wars items, but again if they didn't get the freebie they are not entitled to winge, they know the rules.

    @Xefan Arguments about why T&C's are irrelevant are pretty stupid as no one is going to complain to the point of lawyers over a free poly and if they did then TLG can just say "bye bye, no more [email protected] orders for you, your account is banned"

    All that matters is what's in the cart when you hit place order. That is the binding contract between you and the merchant. You agree to pay xx for the items listed. You are entitled to receive the items listed. TLG has no right to remove the promos from shipment after the order is placed.

    The T&C's are simply to outline when you should receive a promo in your cart or when you visit a brand store. Their implementation of promos on [email protected] is inadequate. Simple. Lets move on.
    I do not believe this is true, it is not a binding contract between you and the merchant at that point.

    cheshirecat
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    Legoboy said:

    The local roads enable me to drive at 130mph, so I'll the police officer it's the engineer's fault when I get pulled over. "I shouldn't be able to drive at 130mph."

    There are no signs saying you can drive 130mph, so the example doesn't really work.

    There are lots of signs on [email protected] saying "free VW Camper Van polybag with $75 order".
    paul_mertonmaques
  • princedravenprincedraven Essex, UKMember Posts: 3,768
    Xefan said:

    @princedraven So let me get this straight, people like yourself bring up the argument of the T&Cs but when someone points out that the argument about T&Cs is incorrect then it's suddenly irrelevant?

    Why was the point even brought up in the first place if it's irrelevant? Why are you only complaining about the supposed irrelevance of it now that it's inconvenient for your argument rather than in response to the last few pages of talk of T&Cs?

    An argument has to be on pretty weak grounds if you have to stoop to the level of accepting discussion of something you're now complaining is irrelevant whilst it suits then jumping on it and crying "irrelevant" when it no longer does.

    No, you misunderstand.
    You stated that the T&C's are irrelevant. Firstly I dissagree. But I was saying if they are irrelevant it does not mean anyone is free to get a camper because to prove they are irrelevant (which again I disagree on) would take more than a quick phone call to CS, which 90% of people would not. And if you were really going to kick up that much of a fuss then TLG have the right to just reject your custom.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    edited September 2013
    @Xefan

    Whether the T&C of your broadband are read or not, or if you comply with them 100% of the time, or even if they don't appear to have a problem if you don't isn't the issue. The issue is - if you were watching copyrighted material online when your broadband T&C said you couldn't would you complain if they terminated your account on the basis of those T&C? No, I don' think you would. Would you also say, but hey you let me watch copyrighted material for the last 365 days but didn't stop me, so its not fair now? No, I don't think you would. Would you complain that they let your friend down the road watch copyrighted material and haven't banned him? I doubt you would.

    I think we're all in agreement that LEGO should sort their website out, I suspect even LEGO agree that if ever it got to the point where someone would take the lack of a polybag to court they'd just send you one (and then, as @princedraven said, they'd ban you from [email protected]). The only disagreement is whether people should get more than midly annoyed if a free polybag (that they already have) isn't included in their order, especially if they know before hand that there is a written rule of one per household.
  • princedravenprincedraven Essex, UKMember Posts: 3,768
    @LegoFanTexas is here, so I guess we are back at the old argument.
    If TLG can't stop me from abusing the system then they are fully at fault and I should take no responsibility for abusing the system...
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149
    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.
  • paul_mertonpaul_merton UKMember Posts: 2,967
    The Ts&Cs, even if you did read them, are overridden at the point that the free item is added to the basket and subsequently displayed in the order summary. It's obvious why - this behaviour is more prominent and it's happening at a later moment in time.

    For want of a better speed analogy, it would be like turning into a road that displays a 30mph speed limit sign at its entrance. As you progress along the road, does this mean the 60mph speed limit sign half way along it is not valid?

    Anyway, I don't think it's fair to whinge about people flipping these on eBay - everyone knows a real polybag collector wants two of everything :)
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149

    @Xefan

    Whether the T&C of your broadband are read or not, or if you comply with them 100% of the time, or even if they don't appear to have a problem if you don't isn't the issue. The issue is - if you were watching copyrighted material online when your broadband T&C said you couldn't would you complain if they terminated your account on the basis of those T&C? No, I don' think you would. Would you also say, but hey you let me watch copyrighted material for the last 365 days but didn't stop me, so its not fair now? No, I don't think you would.

    That depends on whether say the sales rep told me I could use it for business and I was kicked off for business use because of the T&Cs but that wasn't my point with that paragraph, my point was merely that those who claim the T&Cs are the be all and end all and that you should read them and abide by them no matter what are living in fantasy land because not a single person ever actually does that, hence why T&Cs don't have the legal standing some people seem to think they do.

    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.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    @LegoFanTexas

    Actually there aren't any on the UK [email protected] site. It doesn't say on the front page in neither the main banner nor the special offers box a value at all just...
    Free Exclusive: Mini VW T1 camper van
    In order to get to the point that a spend value is given you have to be on the same page that it says "One free set per household."

    Oh, any luck thinking of another retailer that combines orders or even better ones placed randomly throughout the month?
  • HardradaHardrada Member Posts: 439

    The only disagreement is whether people should get more than midly annoyed if a free polybag (that they already have) isn't included in their order, especially if they know before hand that there is a written rule of one per household.

    I would get annoyed. Because then I'd take my order elsewhere and get the sets for 20% or so cheaper. At least give me the option to cancel the whole order then.

    @LegoFanTexas is here, so I guess we are back at the old argument.
    If TLG can't stop me from abusing the system then they are fully at fault and I should take no responsibility for abusing the system...

    What? It's not LFT putting the mini camper van in his cart. So now it's abuse if I expect to actually get an item that TLG's system put into my cart automatically or at least to offer me to cancel the order altogether if I don't need it without the freebie?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy Brickset.com

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.