Valve May End Up Paying a $3 Million Fine for Failing to Offer Refunds in Australia

[major_chaos]

Incorrect. Valve actually had a refund policy.

Since when? When I couldn't get Morrowind to work on any of the PCs in my house I tried contacting support for a refend and was told point-blank "under no circumstance do we offer refunds". Now that was 2009 so I don't know if a refund policy was quietly added a some point between then and the big 2015 refund system, but if it was I never heard so much as a whisper about it.

OT: Good, thats what they get for thinking they can just ignore consumer protections. Now can we dispense with this silly idea that Valve is some kind of wonderful all-loving uncompromisingly consumer friendly company?

 

[MonsterCrit]

Incorrect. Valve actually had a refund policy. The only change in 2015 was that is be came a mostly automated policy. Secondly the case is less about refunds and more that valve misrepresented the issue of refunds to Aussies. Essentially Valve lead some customers to believe they had no right to a refund and no ability to refund when they actually did.

Pretty sure I remember reading an ACCC article about customers actively being snubbed by Support enough though the games they were trying to return were flat-out broken. The issue is more serious than a misleading FAQ on the Support page.

And even then, it's still considered a serious offense to actively lie about a consumer's rights, whether it's to their face or in a general FAQ.

In the terms of those games, the courts agreed with Valve. Being told you do not qualify does not mean you are being snubbed. Just means you don't meet the criteria.

 

[MonsterCrit]

Incorrect. Valve actually had a refund policy.

Since when? When I couldn't get Morrowind to work on any of the PCs in my house I tried contacting support for a refend and was told point-blank "under no circumstance do we offer refunds". Now that was 2009 so I don't know if a refund policy was quietly added a some point between then and the big 2015 refund system, but if it was I never heard so much as a whisper about it.

Oh they always had. The criteria were just secret andone of them wasn't. I bought a game my hardware can't run.

Example:

* Refunding within 24 hours of purchase.
* Misrepresentation of game on Store Page
* Inaccurate system specs on Store Page
* Replicable game breaking error.

Keyword is replicable. What they would do is essentially try the game on their test systems and see if they encountered the same error. If they did, Refund, if they didn't, the problem was clearly specific tto your hardware and therefore, your problem.

All they basically did in 2015 was develop an easily automated criteria that would allow them to accomplish the same effect. Hence 2 hours of play time and 2 weeks from purchase. 2 Hours is enough time to figure if there are errors. and 2 weeks is enough time to notice a purchasing error.

The move has more or less reduced Valve's operating expenses.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

3 million? How will valve ever survive such a harsh slap on the wrist.... wich was done with a plushy... by a 6 year old...

That's what I was thinking. Isn't $3 million Australian like $5000 US? (ba dum tish)

 

[MercurySteam]

Just in time for the Lunar and chriustmas sales. Sucks to be you Australia .

Are you implying that due to the ACCC suing Valve that somehow it means we won't get access to any sales as a result? Cause I'd love to know how that works.

3 million? How will valve ever survive such a harsh slap on the wrist.... wich was done with a plushy... by a 6 year old...

You can joke about it if you like but just as Hello Games is being investigated by an international organisation (ASA), Valve too should take it seriously. If you want to sell products in another country then you have to abide by their laws. Failing to do so can net you a hefty fine as seen here and if they don't pay up then they could lose out on a country of over 23 million. Of course I doubt it'll come to that, they'll probably make some kind of deal.

That's what I was thinking. Isn't $3 million Australian like $5000 US? (ba dum tish)

Man, sometimes it really feels like it but the dollar was at parity during the mining boom, now I'd say that 3 million AUD is closer to 2.2 million USD. Though most of these lawsuits are in USD anyway.

 

[Jandau]

So, they're charging them chump change? I mean, 3 million? For Valve? That's like fining the average citizen a dollar and hoping it'll make him change his ways...

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Incorrect. Valve actually had a refund policy. The only change in 2015 was that is be came a mostly automated policy. Secondly the case is less about refunds and more that valve misrepresented the issue of refunds to Aussies. Essentially Valve lead some customers to believe they had no right to a refund and no ability to refund when they actually did.

Pretty sure I remember reading an ACCC article about customers actively being snubbed by Support enough though the games they were trying to return were flat-out broken. The issue is more serious than a misleading FAQ on the Support page.

And even then, it's still considered a serious offense to actively lie about a consumer's rights, whether it's to their face or in a general FAQ.

In the terms of those games, the courts agreed with Valve. Being told you do not qualify does not mean you are being snubbed. Just means you don't meet the criteria.

And where does it say that? The entire point of the lawsuit is that the ACCC feels they DID quality for refunds when they were being ignored.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

Their refund policy still violates Australian ACCC laws. You can personally feel it does the job to your hearts content. It still does not meet the standards set by our laws.

Games are different though. Some of them are very short games which can be played within 2-3 hours. If you can just get a refund for it every time, there's nothing stopping someone from just getting their enjoyment out of it and then demanding a refund.

 

[MonsterCrit]

Incorrect. Valve actually had a refund policy. The only change in 2015 was that is be came a mostly automated policy. Secondly the case is less about refunds and more that valve misrepresented the issue of refunds to Aussies. Essentially Valve lead some customers to believe they had no right to a refund and no ability to refund when they actually did.

Pretty sure I remember reading an ACCC article about customers actively being snubbed by Support enough though the games they were trying to return were flat-out broken. The issue is more serious than a misleading FAQ on the Support page.

And even then, it's still considered a serious offense to actively lie about a consumer's rights, whether it's to their face or in a general FAQ.

In the terms of those games, the courts agreed with Valve. Being told you do not qualify does not mean you are being snubbed. Just means you don't meet the criteria.

And where does it say that? The entire point of the lawsuit is that the ACCC feels they DID quality for refunds when they were being ignored.

You need to do a bit more reading. This whole thing is about whether or not Valve willfully misrepresented the right to a request a refund in their SSA. The games however were found to be justifiably rejected for refund. Theproblem is, in simpler terms, Not that valve told people they didn't qualify for a refund, but that they implied they couldn't even ask for one.

 

[MonsterCrit]

Just in time for the Lunar and chriustmas sales. Sucks to be you Australia .

Are you implying that due to the ACCC suing Valve that somehow it means we won't get access to any sales as a result? Cause I'd love to know how that works.

Quite easily. You know how geolocation can pick out where you are based on your IP addy. yeah. that can also be useed to you know, block access to server... like the servers that host the Steam website and client pages. And I'm not just talking for sales. I'm talking period. That's sort of what an injunction means.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Just in time for the Lunar and chriustmas sales. Sucks to be you Australia .

Are you implying that due to the ACCC suing Valve that somehow it means we won't get access to any sales as a result? Cause I'd love to know how that works.

Quite easily. You know how geolocation can pick out where you are based on your IP addy. yeah. that can also be useed to you know, block access to server... like the servers that host the Steam website and client pages. And I'm not just talking for sales. I'm talking period. That's sort of what an injunction means.

A quick Google search says an injunction doesn't have to mean something that drastic. It could, but it could also just mean a warning or a deadline for them to get their act together.

Still, even if I'm wrong, it would be pretty damn ironic to see the company that embraced the Russian market despite all the illegal piracy ditching the Australian market (if not willingly) because of the legal consumer rights. That's just completely backwards.

 

[MonsterCrit]

Just in time for the Lunar and chriustmas sales. Sucks to be you Australia .

Are you implying that due to the ACCC suing Valve that somehow it means we won't get access to any sales as a result? Cause I'd love to know how that works.

Quite easily. You know how geolocation can pick out where you are based on your IP addy. yeah. that can also be useed to you know, block access to server... like the servers that host the Steam website and client pages. And I'm not just talking for sales. I'm talking period. That's sort of what an injunction means.

A quick Google search says an injunction doesn't have to mean something that drastic. It could, but it could also just mean a warning or a deadline for them to get their act together.

Still, even if I'm wrong, it would be pretty damn ironic to see the company that embraced the Russian market despite all the illegal piracy ditching the Australian market (if not willingly) because of the legal consumer rights. That's just completely backwards.

Valve is a business and let's face it, this would not be the first time Australia was considered more trouble than it's worth. Besides Valve knows nothing they do would stop Aussies. it's just that by not officially operating in Australia, they kinda dodge any of those laws. An Aussie buying from steam, would be not unlike an australian traveling to venezuala to buy something. Australian laws wouldn't apply to the retailer and the boyer would likely be subject to extra taxes. See how that works. Aussies get to pay more and have no more protection than they did before the whole thing.

Bravo Aussie Land.