Home English (UK) Ideas, Suggestions & Feedback

We need new Moderators!


ModeratorWe are always on the lookout for talented people to join the team. That means you! If you think you could help us organise and inform the community while entertaining everyone then apply. We need people to help out on the forum, behind the scenes with announcements, on Discord and on our other Social Media channels.


If this is something you think might be of interest to you, HERE

Why GGE has to refund me and others for the Nutcracker scam

Online shoppers covered by the standard protections under the Consumer Rights Act, their purchases are also protected by the Consumer Contracts Regulations, which relate specifically to online purchases. This makes it easier to get a refund if items don't live up to their online promise.

http://www.hendersonchambers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/The-Consumer-Rights-Act-2015-Noel-Dilworth-Alerter-September-3rd-2015.pdf

And the UN states

All enterprises should obey the relevant laws and regulations of the countries in which they do business. They should also conform to the appropriate provisions of international standards for consumer protection to which the competent authorities of the country in question have agreed. (Hereinafter references to international standards in the guidelines should be viewed in the context of this paragraph.)

so UK consumer protection laws apply http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/consumption_en.pdf


The virtual item Nutcracker was wrong labelled https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/344516/statement-nutcracker-commander
And GGE unlawfully claimed we are not entitled for compensation, those of us who paid and played to earn this commander. This is against the law, we quite literally are legally entitled to a compensation, I think it’s only fair that those of us who earnt the commander during the time it wasn’t labelled correctly should receive a compensation in the way of rubies (The amount we purchased to get boosters etc) which for me would be 53,000, or another 9 piece LPTE set of equal value whilst retaining the wanq Nutcracker Set as per our legal entitlement.
https://prnt.sc/hj5red

See Ss.20 and ss.24, we legally have the right to a repair that we agree upon. And see ss.25 we have the right to REJECT any poor replacement or repair. 
Post edited by UltimateJhon (GB1) on
WAR PLAYER
«1

Comments

  • Manatee (US1)Manatee (US1) Posts: 2,711
    Mine will not be a popular reply.  There are a lot of problems with this, two of them being:

    1. It's a UK law.
    2. While it does protect against faulty digital content, you have to be careful to understand what that means.  You'd have to show that the tangible purchase itself was flawed.  You bought rubies.  Were they flawed?  You in turn used those rubies along with the bonus gifts that came with them (tools, skips, etc.) to position yourself to obtain this commander among other things.

    When online commerce is standard and applies to things not directly purchased, and extends to quality of gameplay, then you might start having a case.

    In short, this commander was not an online purchase.  The rubies were (with tools, bonuses, skips etc offered as bonuses)

    I realize you and most others are upset, and that this is yet another nail in GGE's coffin.  But what happened is not against the law..  You are not legally entitled to compensation, though I agree it would be nice for them to rectify this.
    manateesharkjpeg


    Manatee @ usa 1
    My ideal method of suicide: climbing Ultimo's ego and jumping to his IQ
  • UltimateJhon (GB1)UltimateJhon (GB1) Posts: 642
    edited 05.12.2017
    Mine will not be a popular reply.  There are a lot of problems with this, two of them being:

    1. It's a UK law.
    2. While it does protect against faulty digital content, you have to be careful to understand what that means.  You'd have to show that the tangible purchase itself was flawed.  You bought rubies.  Were they flawed?  You in turn used those rubies along with the bonus gifts that came with them (tools, skips, etc.) to position yourself to obtain this commander among other things.

    When online commerce is standard and applies to things not directly purchased, and extends to quality of gameplay, then you might start having a case.

    In short, this commander was not an online purchase.  The rubies were (with tools, bonuses, skips etc offered as bonuses)

    I realize you and most others are upset, and that this is yet another nail in GGE's coffin.  But what happened is not against the law..  You are not legally entitled to compensation, though I agree it would be nice for them to rectify this.
    1. http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/UN-Guidelines-on-Consumer-Protection.aspx We have Global trade rights, it’s not just the UK who has them, wtf? I just linked the most specific one to reference 
    http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/consumption_en.pdf

    2. I didn’t buy rubies solely, I bought a booster for the Set which in itself was flawed as the promised products were mislabelled and that is misrepresentation. The commander was a product obtained through an online purchase. https://prnt.sc/hj5red
    Post edited by UltimateJhon (GB1) on
    WAR PLAYER
  • Defectus (US1)Defectus (US1) US1 Posts: 1,199
    1. http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/UN-Guidelines-on-Consumer-Protection.aspx We have Global trade rights, it’s not just the UK who has them, wtf? I just linked the most specific one to reference 

    2. I didn’t buy rubies solely, I bought a booster for the Set which in itself was flawed as the promised products were mislabelled and that is misrepresentation. The commander was a product obtained through an online purchase. 
    A booster for the set? Are you referring to a points booster or a glory/samurai booster? And if so, that is not directly related to the set. What that guarantees is that you get more tokens/glory per attack. Even if you are talking about a season points booster (which I didn't think existed to buy, but then again I don't buy very often), you're only buying more points per attack, not the equipment directly. If you are referring to technicus, you still directly buy the maxed set...
    TheBlueIcicle    US1

    I don't play this game anymore.
  • Mine will not be a popular reply.  There are a lot of problems with this, two of them being:

    1. It's a UK law.
    2. While it does protect against faulty digital content, you have to be careful to understand what that means.  You'd have to show that the tangible purchase itself was flawed.  You bought rubies.  Were they flawed?  You in turn used those rubies along with the bonus gifts that came with them (tools, skips, etc.) to position yourself to obtain this commander among other things.

    When online commerce is standard and applies to things not directly purchased, and extends to quality of gameplay, then you might start having a case.

    In short, this commander was not an online purchase.  The rubies were (with tools, bonuses, skips etc offered as bonuses)

    I realize you and most others are upset, and that this is yet another nail in GGE's coffin.  But what happened is not against the law..  You are not legally entitled to compensation, though I agree it would be nice for them to rectify this.
    1. http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/UN-Guidelines-on-Consumer-Protection.aspx We have Global trade rights, it’s not just the UK who has them, wtf? I just linked the most specific one to reference 

    2. I didn’t buy rubies solely, I bought a booster for the Set which in itself was flawed as the promised products were mislabelled and that is misrepresentation. The commander was a product obtained through an online purchase. 
    You bought a booster to boost your points. The purchase did as described. This is an equivalent argument to those arguing that cost of rubies for wishing wells should be reimbursed. The fact remains you did not directly purchase the set (as in you did not pay money to receive the set in a direct purcahse) and therefor are not entitled to a refund. IF you had spent money to directly purchase the equipment, and the equipment was falsely advertised then you would have an argument.
  • Mine will not be a popular reply.  There are a lot of problems with this, two of them being:

    1. It's a UK law.
    2. While it does protect against faulty digital content, you have to be careful to understand what that means.  You'd have to show that the tangible purchase itself was flawed.  You bought rubies.  Were they flawed?  You in turn used those rubies along with the bonus gifts that came with them (tools, skips, etc.) to position yourself to obtain this commander among other things.

    When online commerce is standard and applies to things not directly purchased, and extends to quality of gameplay, then you might start having a case.

    In short, this commander was not an online purchase.  The rubies were (with tools, bonuses, skips etc offered as bonuses)

    I realize you and most others are upset, and that this is yet another nail in GGE's coffin.  But what happened is not against the law..  You are not legally entitled to compensation, though I agree it would be nice for them to rectify this.
    1. http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/UN-Guidelines-on-Consumer-Protection.aspx We have Global trade rights, it’s not just the UK who has them, wtf? I just linked the most specific one to reference 

    2. I didn’t buy rubies solely, I bought a booster for the Set which in itself was flawed as the promised products were mislabelled and that is misrepresentation. The commander was a product obtained through an online purchase. 
    You bought a booster to boost your points. The purchase did as described. This is an equivalent argument to those arguing that cost of rubies for wishing wells should be reimbursed. The fact remains you did not directly purchase the set (as in you did not pay money to receive the set in a direct purcahse) and therefor are not entitled to a refund. IF you had spent money to directly purchase the equipment, and the equipment was falsely advertised then you would have an argument.
    The rewards don’t work, I didn’t get what I paid to get? I see your side but how is paying to get a set and the set not working anything but a scam.
    WAR PLAYER
  • Defectus (US1)Defectus (US1) US1 Posts: 1,199
    edited 04.12.2017
    The rewards don’t work, I didn’t get what I paid to get? I see your side but how is paying to get a set and the set not working anything but a scam.
     You got exactly what you paid to get: a points booster.
    TheBlueIcicle    US1

    I don't play this game anymore.
  • OxO (AU1)OxO (AU1) AU1 Posts: 962
    The rewards don’t work, I didn’t get what I paid to get? I see your side but how is paying to get a set and the set not working anything but a scam.
     You got exactly what you paid to get: a points booster.
    A points booster to reach an end goal - the nutcracker set.
  • Taggart (US1)Taggart (US1) US1 Posts: 548
    OxO (AU1) said:
    The rewards don’t work, I didn’t get what I paid to get? I see your side but how is paying to get a set and the set not working anything but a scam.
     You got exactly what you paid to get: a points booster.
    A points booster to reach an end goal - the nutcracker set.
    Do note that while you might have the nutcracker set as an end goal, there are much more other rewards, so technically, GGS could just go ahead and say that you bought that points booster for other rewards, so they don't have to compensate you anything.

    ^ reached at level 18.
    Taggart @ US1. Level 50 Count Palatine, the Shieldcrusher, 120k MP, proud denier of buying rubies, proud member of Excalibur Echo, proud forum community member.
    Taggart @ Int3

    I'm the Sandravlc from ye olde days. Been here since 2014...
    Frenemy of Graycat since 2015


  • CBee (US1)CBee (US1) US1 Posts: 211
    I dont care about the rubies,  i just want my 25 million coins back for teching up the useless piece of crap that i was led to believe would work on khan camp.
    CBee @ usa1


  • UltimateJhon (GB1)UltimateJhon (GB1) Posts: 642
    edited 05.12.2017
    1. http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/UN-Guidelines-on-Consumer-Protection.aspx We have Global trade rights, it’s not just the UK who has them, wtf? I just linked the most specific one to reference 

    2. I didn’t buy rubies solely, I bought a booster for the Set which in itself was flawed as the promised products were mislabelled and that is misrepresentation. The commander was a product obtained through an online purchase. 
    Sorry UltimateJohn, neither of your links accomplish what you want them to :(  I'm not sure if you actually read the UN guidelines you linked, but I did.  They do nothing for you here.  Sections 63, 64, and 65 might if we were talking about direct electronic purchases, but we're not.

    You purchased rubies.  With those rubies you got a little side bonus of booster and stuff, but the purchase was rubies... just look at the transaction page the next time you make a purchase.

    It's true, you did not directly buy the boosters the others are mentioning above, those were just in-game bonuses / freebies intended to sweeten the pot to entice  you to make that transaction of rubies.  Did you get those rubies, the right amount of them, and do they work as intended?

    I am NOT saying this is fair for us.  I'm just saying that from a legal perspective  you're going to have to come up with something else.  Or if you're to the point of frustration, you can cease spending hard earned currency on a game such as this.
    Actually you are wrong and here’s why.

    first off, in the PayPal payment log it specifically says ‘And bonuses’ and often lists them, I had this argument with ggs before and they agreed I was right. 

    https://prnt.sc/hj5red

    You buy buy what the offer says, and that’s included in the PayPal receipt. So you need to look at the transaction page lol... 

    And the UN guidance specifically states

    All enterprises should obey the relevant laws and regulations of the countries in which they do business. They should also conform to the appropriate provisions of international standards for consumer protection to which the competent authorities of the country in question have agreed. (Hereinafter references to international standards in the guidelines should be viewed in the context of this paragraph.)

    http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/consumption_en.pdf Section 7, actually read it this time..

    So thats why I linked the UK one, please read what I link 


    WAR PLAYER
  • 1. http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/UN-Guidelines-on-Consumer-Protection.aspx We have Global trade rights, it’s not just the UK who has them, wtf? I just linked the most specific one to reference 

    2. I didn’t buy rubies solely, I bought a booster for the Set which in itself was flawed as the promised products were mislabelled and that is misrepresentation. The commander was a product obtained through an online purchase. 
    Sorry UltimateJohn, neither of your links accomplish what you want them to :(  I'm not sure if you actually read the UN guidelines you linked, but I did.  They do nothing for you here.  Sections 63, 64, and 65 might if we were talking about direct electronic purchases, but we're not.

    You purchased rubies.  With those rubies you got a little side bonus of booster and stuff, but the purchase was rubies... just look at the transaction page the next time you make a purchase.

    It's true, you did not directly buy the boosters the others are mentioning above, those were just in-game bonuses / freebies intended to sweeten the pot to entice  you to make that transaction of rubies.  Did you get those rubies, the right amount of them, and do they work as intended?

    I am NOT saying this is fair for us.  I'm just saying that from a legal perspective  you're going to have to come up with something else.  Or if you're to the point of frustration, you can cease spending hard earned currency on a game such as this.
    Actually you are wrong and here’s why.

    first off, in the PayPal payment log it specifically says ‘And bonuses’ and often lists them, I had this argument with ggs before and they agreed I was right. 

    https://prnt.sc/hj5red

    You buy buy what the offer says, and that’s included in the PayPal receipt. So you need to look at the transaction page lol... 

    And the UN guidance specifically states

    All enterprises should obey the relevant laws and regulations of the countries in which they do business. They should also conform to the appropriate provisions of international standards for consumer protection to which the competent authorities of the country in question have agreed. (Hereinafter references to international standards in the guidelines should be viewed in the context of this paragraph.)

    http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/consumption_en.pdf Section 7, actually read it this time..

    So thats why I linked the UK one, please read what I link 


    The "+bonus" refers to the bonus that you recieve with your ruby purchase such as double sam tokens or points etc etc. Since the nutcracker equiptment was not part of this "bonus" but instead what you happened to get from an event it is not covered. The questions you have to ask yourself are:

    1. Did I get my rubies?
    2. Did I get my double bonuses?
    3. Did I get any resources that were promised in the purchase?

    If you answered no to any of them, you should clearly state what package you purchased and what was promised in that package.
  • Lol.. I didn't realize so many people were this hard up for an NPC commander.... let alone actually spending money on one. I thought the whole thing was a joke when I read the weapon name.... Nutstabber.... seriously? So, GGE must have had a very short meeting to confirm the name of the seasonal equipment or they asked a handful of teenagers for suggestions.
    Snake Plissken @ usa 1
  • Manatee (US1)Manatee (US1) Posts: 2,711
    edited 05.12.2017
    Actually you are wrong and here’s why.

    first off, in the PayPal payment log it specifically says ‘And bonuses’ and often lists them, I had this argument with ggs before and they agreed I was right. 

    https://prnt.sc/hj5red

    You buy buy what the offer says, and that’s included in the PayPal receipt. So you need to look at the transaction page lol... 

    And the UN guidance specifically states

    All enterprises should obey the relevant laws and regulations of the countries in which they do business. They should also conform to the appropriate provisions of international standards for consumer protection to which the competent authorities of the country in question have agreed. (Hereinafter references to international standards in the guidelines should be viewed in the context of this paragraph.)

    http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/consumption_en.pdf Section 7, actually read it this time..

    So thats why I linked the UK one, please read what I link 


    UltimateJohn, I know you're mad as heck.

    As I remember from my own inquiries with GGS, the bonuses referred to on the actual payment screen are the bonuses listed from there only (i.e. the wood / stone / coin bonuses mentioned in the initial payment window).  It has nothing to do with what's going on in-game... they use in-game stuff simply to make you want to purchase the actual transaction (which is rubies plus a few coin, wood, stone bonus).  Not the in-game bonuses that you see in a chest.  The reason for that distinction stems back to one of the reasons GGS separated the payment transactions from the in-game gifts in the first place (and why it's so difficult to simply refund you when certain glitches happen).  Anyone remember the old days of purchasing VIP for 3, 6, or 12 months etc?   That was under the old way before the transactions were separated between ruby vendoring and in-game perks.

    And what Raggle Fock and I are telling you is you're confusing a purchase with something you intend to do with that purchase.  Rubies are currency, what you do with that currency is up to you.  And in-game bonuses are just extra perks that you get benefit from whether you choose to buy a commander or not.

    I think it's stupid too, that they are not compensating.  But I'm not confusing it with a legal obligation.
    manateesharkjpeg


    Manatee @ usa 1
    My ideal method of suicide: climbing Ultimo's ego and jumping to his IQ
  • Here's another Nutcracker in the Terms of Service.

    http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/
    Snake Plissken @ usa 1
  • Here's another Nutcracker in the Terms of Service.

    http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/
    That site is even laggier than GGE, what is their server a toaster?
    Friedrich IV US1
    The Prodigal Scrub Returns
  • OxO (AU1)OxO (AU1) AU1 Posts: 962
    Here's another Nutcracker in the Terms of Service.

    http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/
    That site is even laggier than GGE, what is their server a toaster?
    Haha you're complimenting them
  • ang1243 (GB1)ang1243 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 3,834


    Support | Community Guidelines | Short Questions | Bugwatch Thread | WebsitePrivate Message

    Check out my website with loads of cool tips about GGE: http://www.ultimategge.co.uk
     




  • Philt123 (GB1)Philt123 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,839
    The big problem you have is in trying to link the actual purchase of Rubies to the things you get in game, GGE and other online game manufacturers, hide behind cleverly worded TOS that specifically state there is no link. the fact they give away in game currency ie ruby for free further muddies the water.   Everyone that has ever played a game such as this knows full well there is a DIRECT link between ruby purchase and game items, and therefore game items have a clear and measurable value.  

    BUT Until a judge at a very senior court, sets a president, preventing companies from hiding behind their TOS Loopholes, to basically exclude themselves from any kind of consumer law.  Then consumers are going to continue to get violated. 

    One day I have no doubt it will be addressed, but prob not for a long time for a start most of the judges that are senior enough to make this happen prob have no clue what an online virtual items is, let alone how it works.
    Philt123 @ en 1

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file