Iomega 1TB External HDD £19.95

Chroma

mindware wrote: »

They HAVNT taken your money, it's just how the banks display it to you! Read my posts from before!



Again, I posted a clause on there payment - They havnt taken payment, they have simply pre-authed it.

It seems there terms and conditions are sufficiant to protect them, how they represent themselves regarding this issue is a matter of there own. If they act like idiots then its only there own reputation to suffer.

The same could be said for high street retailers, if it was a high street retailer and the transaction took place over switch/solo then there would be no real transfer of funds.
Does this make it legal for them to demand a product back?

And then theres the fact that the money is just sitting in the till, its not actualy been transacted till it hits the company coffers and makes its way back into a bank.

Either way i look at it im down £25 and just because apple hasnt said "hey Johnny take that money from the till and put it in the bank down the road" makes no difference to me, its still not available to me and therefore generating no interest in my account.

ankles4242

Maybe making a post about the situation on this forum might get some much needed legal advice.

http://www.swarb.co.uk/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=17

mindware

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Mindware. PLEASE realize that they HAVE taken money from anyone who has paid via debit card.

Avaliable balance on my account currently is £1478.00 My balance is currently £1478.00. My statement currently states £1478.00

Just to clarify one more time:

A PRE-AUTH DOES NOT transfer funds to apple. It reserves the funds in your bank for transfer later. Debit cards just display it as a completed transaction due to the way they work - but in actual fact NO transfer would have taken place unless apple COMPLETE the Pre-Auth. After a 3-day response timeout period, the Pre-Auth is invalid and the BANK credits the money back to you, not Apple.

Blame your bank for the way they work, I do agree its slightly confusing for those who arnt aware.

Its just one of the underlying technicalities related to electronic payment systems.

splodger_2

Then why have Apple just told me a refund from them will be going through asap?

Stormrider

In cases like this, a bank statement, as a legal document, is often used as proof of mistakes and things. Therefore, if it says on someone's statement that apple took money, it means they took money. It really is as simple as that.

Pre auth's or earmarked money does NOT appear on statements until they actually TAKE the money - it just lowers your available balance.

Stormrider

As for the so called 'lawer' on here: You are talking rubbish. Apple's terms & conditions cannot exempt them from the law.

Graham_Devon

Right, Apple have won.

Word back from the lawyer....

They won when they changed the orders, hence the change!!! Very cunning!!

Because we did not have confirmation and they did not send this, under the distance selling act even though they have taken payment, even though they have broken their own T&C's, without confirmation, either by e-mail or phone / post, the customer is screwed.

The change of description means that if something did happen, they would lose £1 worth of labels to each customer and not a £199.95 hard drive.

The reason for this is because the law has not been changed and it is very vague. So if a customer was canny enough to find a loophole in the distance selling regulations which states that they have accepted the order (via confirmation) by taking the money, or by having the order still showing (hence change of order), they would have been required by law to fulfill the orders.

So any loophole which is now found, all they owe us is a pack of labels.

VERY canny Apple, and gotta admit, very good!!! Disgusting, but very good! The one and only thing that could be used as evidence is the records of our orders for confirmation. They are labels. They can not be screenshots or saved pages. Only the actual orders on screen or on headed paper from the company.

So take it to court, all you will be entitled to, is labels.

Least we know why the change!! Apple has royally screwed us!

ianonline

Chroma wrote: »

i had no idea untill i read this thread that 1TB was greater in value to 1GB.
I was merely looking for a cheap good value hard drive within my budget and this one cropped up.

What do you mean by "cropped up"? - are you saying you were browsing the Apple site and saw this "offer" without actually seeing it posted elsewhere as a mis-price?:rolleyes:

If you really thought you were buying a 1GB drive then you should be thankful that you've had your order cancelled as you'd be paying over the odds. :eek:

There are loads of offers for 1Gb flash drives under a tenner, including this one from PC World for £7.99:
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/product/seo/424844

So I'd say put it behind you and be happy that you've saved yourself around £17 by not buying from Apple.

Ian :cool:

mindware

splodger wrote: »

Then why have Apple just told me a refund from them will be going through asap?

It takes time for the deffered payment to appear as a credit, if apple do not complete the transaction. They probebly told you this to save themselves explaining the actual process.

Pre auth's or earmarked money does NOT appear on statements until they actually TAKE the money

With credit card's, Yes, with debit card's, no

Stormrider

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Right, Apple have won.

Word back from the lawyer....

They won when they changed the orders, hence the change!!! Very cunning!!

Because we did not have confirmation and they did not send this, under the distance selling act even though they have taken payment, even though they have broken their own T&C's, without confirmation, either by e-mail or phone / post, the customer is screwed.

The change of description means that if something did happen, they would lose £1 worth of labels to each customer and not a £199.95 hard drive.

The reason for this is because the law has not been changed and it is very vague. So if a customer was canny enough to find a loophole in the distance selling regulations which states that they have accepted the order (via confirmation) by taking the money, or by having the order still showing (hence change of order), they would have been required by law to fulfill the orders.

So any loophole which is now found, all they owe us is a pack of labels.

VERY canny Apple, and gotta admit, very good!!! Disgusting, but very good! The one and only thing that could be used as evidence is the records of our orders for confirmation. They are labels. They can not be screenshots or saved pages. Only the actual orders on screen or on headed paper from the company.

So take it to court, all you will be entitled to, is labels.

Least we know why the change!! Apple has royally screwed us!

That can't be right... that means any company could get away with anything by doing the same thing!