Moved to Forum: Original Link
Noticed this deal while browsing Staticice, not sure if it's a run-out deal or an error, but these cards are still $700+ from other stores. I personally didn't order it as I don't like some of way CPL conduct their business around refunds and warranty so I don't know if they'll honour this price or not.
what risk is involved?
Risk of getting your dreams smashed! Otherwise nothing..
http://www.productreview.com.au/p/computer-parts-land.html
refunds up to 4 weeks or longer sometimes.
What risk is that? Getting a refund? For a rep you really have a negative attitude
The risk is CPL are notorious for refusing refunds
Other Ozbargain members might be happy to try and claim this bargain, but CPL can be a bit dodgy.
Dunno why you get down-voted for stating a truth. Sick of people in general trying to swindle businesses, because they make an honest mistake. It's a price error.
Judging from people's issues with CPL refusing refunds I say swindle away.
I get sick of people down-voting for absolutely no reason. If OzBargain intends to keep them anonymous then they should (at the very least) force these people to put in a reason for the down-vote (e.g. Down-Voter believes opposite). Almost every smart bargain hunter knows about CPL and their dodgy behaviour.
I did not know that. I only ever buy my PC parts from MSY, Amazon and Ebay.
Don't you have to leave a comment to neg? And then it has a big read minus next to your comment?
@tendollar:
My bad, the line was meant to say that every smart bargain hunter with CPL experience know about their dodgy behaviour :)
@astrodude:
To neg a Deal the person should leave a comment otherwise the OP can petition Admin to remove the neg, though I can't remember specifics there is a FAQ on it somewhere.
But it's simple to neg someone's post; just hit that "-" button and it's done, totally anonymous and easy to abuse. Instead of making voting anonymous, the "-" button should be removed on individual posts.
Anyone in Melbourne want to try and do pickup?
Just make sure you take a screenshot of everything when ordering to prove they sold you a 980, in case they correct it, to 780 or something, and try to say that's what you bought…
Under their terms and conditions it says they have the right to cancel the transaction before its delivered (in the this, as long as you haven't picked up its not considered as "delivered"?) if it is due to undiscovered pricing error. I was about to confirm my order but cancelled instead after I saw that.
Under Australian consumer law if the money has left your bank account they must honour the price. Can a company write a disclaimer like this which nullifies the consumer law?
Proof?
Edit: seen link below. Reading.
The link is below.
A seller can’t attempt to correct the error or claw back any money after they have processed your sale and accepted payment, as the transaction (and the contract) is deemed complete at this point.
https://www.lawanswers.com.au/blog/australian-consumer-law-r…
Can you point to the actual legal clauses? Not being offensive, but if I showed a retailer "some website" they'd laugh in my face. Rightfully so. Without the exact legal clauses you've got nothing against them.
@justtoreply: I'm seriously not going to waste my time looking for the exact clauses. If you want to do it yourself be my guest.
Happy to. Gave it a go at finding the right document.. the index looked very very wrong though.
https://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2015C00019
Help point me to the right document at least?
I believe this type of advertising is called "Baiting", and I believe it says under the ACCC web site that it's illegal.
"Under Australian consumer law if the money has left your bank account they must honour the price."
They could offer a full refund instead.
"Can a company write a disclaimer like this which nullifies the consumer law?"
A company cannot disregard Australian law. That said, anyone who's ever had to go through court would know why we don't call it a "Justice System".
@geo365: But at what point is the payment deemed to have been accepted? Where is it defined as having "left your bank account"?
Now that is interesting. I guess how to prove that it was baiting. I'm not that overly familiar with CPL to know whether this is a regular occurrence. Court on something like this is always going to be a waste of time, fully agree. But it's always good to know the shady companies.
@Ebany: Note that in the example provided by Geo's link; it specifically mentions it is a transaction taking place at the register.
Does the same apply to online transactions? I doubt it.
Why don't you help me get my Quilton fortress from woolworths because they accepted my payment? They'd probably laugh you out the door.
@geo365:
It's only "suspected" baiting unless (or until) it can be proved, this is why the ACCC relies on people filing complaints. If only 1 of every 10,000 people effected by these scams file a complaint then ACCC can't do a great deal, but if 1 of every 2 did ……
Just look at Steam refunds, that's come about because people have consistently filed complaints.
Companies rely on the fact that most people are lazy fools, and they make a lot of money because they're correct.
@geo365: Refer to above comment. The scenario mentioned in your link specifically mentions that it is a transaction taking place at the register, whereby the seller has the opportunity to correct the mistake.
So yes, you need to show us the exact clause so we can ascertain whether or not it applies to online transactions.
@Dan_: Jesus calm down. Why don't you not be so lazy and take a look yourself. I provided a link which created a bit of a discussion on whether there is a law on this or not. I don't have to back up anything here. Why don't you take the initiative and do some research yourself? Atleast Ebany could do that and provided some more useful info.
@Dan_:
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.
If the money has left your person (or bank/visa) then it has gone (or is in transit) to someone else, hence you have paid. If you have paid then you can demand a refund under the conditions mentioned on the ACCC website.
@geo365: I think it's time you take the lead and start a class action on behalf of OzBargain members against Woolworths for wrongfully withholding our Quiltons.
@Dan_:
"But I didn't say you couldn't get a refund."
Must have got my posts mixed up. I read;
"But at what point is the payment deemed to have been accepted? Where is it defined as having "left your bank account"?"
And
"Does the same apply to online transactions? I doubt it."
As I said previously, I'm not exactly sure what you are/were asking/suggesting, and it's still a little foggy, so I'll tap out of this conversation. I will say that the information provided on the ACCC website is extremely clear, it's a valuable resource for every Australian - it saddens me that their FB page gets so few likes/follows.
@justtoreply:
Volume 3
Chapter 4—Offences 233
Part 4‑1—Offences relating to unfair practices 233
Division 1—False or misleading representations etc. 233
151…………………… False or misleading representations about goods or services 233
152…………………… False or misleading representations about sale etc. of land 235
153…………………… Misleading conduct relating to employment……………….. 236
154…………………… Offering rebates, gifts, prizes etc……………………………… 236
155…………………… Misleading conduct as to the nature etc. of goods……….. 238
156…………………… Misleading conduct as to the nature etc. of services…….. 238
157…………………… Bait advertising……………………………………………………… 238
158…………………… Wrongly accepting payment…………………………………….. 240
159…………………… Misleading representations about certain business activities 242
160…………………… Application of provisions of this Division to information providers 243
That's a fair bit of discussion.
I was genuinely interested in looking it up as it's an issue that, if law rules in our favour with online transactions, is very relevant to all of us. Ozbargainers especially.
@justtoreply:
I understand. I've spent years dealing with ACCC as I hate these companies who try to take advantage of people by making everything so time consuming and difficult. I believe the ACCC does a fantastic job considering how often they have their hands tied behind their back, certainly their biggest issue is people who never speak up or discontinue their pursuit of fairness.
Currently the ACCC facebook page only has 26K followers which is (arguably) an infinitesimally small part of the Australian population. Imagine the positive changes we could make to business and banking practices if they had 2.6M
is the GTX970
Pricing error. I just called to save myself the bother of rejection.
Yep I did the same. If it's too good to be true… it usually is.
$735 on page now… seems more like it.
I'm pretty sure that's only relevant when they've physically taken your money "at the register", as the link states.
Here are some excepts from the T&Cs from cpl:
"Any order placed by you in the manner described in this site is an offer by you to purchase a particular product or service for the price…"
"… CPL is not responsible for any error and reserves the right to accept or reject your offer for any reason …"
Ergo the transaction on the site was merely an "offer" to purchase the gpu at said price, and cpl can accept or decline the offer at their discretion.
This article may also have some more info relevant to this discussion. Unfortunately I've no idea what constitutes the vendor "accept[ing] the offer unequivocally".
I used to be a big customer of CPL. I bought a monitor about a year ago from them but returned it to the manufacturer as there was a problem. Manufacturer gave me a full refund, but CPL have taken 4 weeks now to organise a refund, and they've just stopped responding to my refund inquiries.
Doubtful that i'll ever bother to shop with them again.
Manufacturer gave me a full refund, but CPL have taken 4 weeks now to organise a refund, and they've just stopped responding to my refund inquiries.
So the manufacturer told CPL to give you a refund, and they just haven't? (the way you wrote it sounds like you're trying to get 2 refunds).
Doesn't sound that way to me.
Asus offered me a full refund but it had to be completed through the retailer I purchased from. In other words, Asus told them to refund the money but they've been dragging their feet and avoiding the payment.
The curse is real…
@Arcticfox:
I haven't even started about my 2x Gigabyte GTX590's! Months of replacing part to find a fault and the very last on the list happens to be the cause, didn't find it because both have failed.
After checking the receipt I 've found one card is 4months past warranty and the other is 9months ….. what to do. They were very expensive dual GPU cards sigh
The manufacturer authorised a refund and emailed and cc'd me into the conversation with CPL.
I've now been without a monitor for 4 weeks and decided yesterday that enough was enough and bought a replacement monitor. When it came time to who I purchased it from, CPL was a very distant last place.
+1 that :)
why don't you just go in store and demand a refund.
Not even worth the risk of trying to attempt and buy this. Definitely a price error