Free beauty products on Amazon

daytona0

Do you know what would be funny?

If they ended up charging you all the full price because you weren't entitled to use those vouchers. Not sure if that is legal, but they can certainly give you a load of hassle to deal with :rotfl:

I will not be partaking in this 'offer' because I am not entitled to use such a code.

buzzyzoe

daytona0 wrote: »

Do you know what would be funny?

If they ended up charging you all the full price because you weren't entitled to use those vouchers. Not sure if that is legal, but they can certainly give you a load of hassle to deal with :rotfl:

I will not be partaking in this 'offer' because I am not entitled to use such a code.

Don't know if I see how that's funny, but regardless and unfortunately for them, that's not how the law works.

All that will happen is that everyone will be refunded and they will never sell again on Amazon and probably go bankrupt as a company.

stephenliverpool1

Totally agree. I think this company is in a lot trouble.

BritChick51

daytona0 wrote: »

I will not be partaking in this 'offer' because I am not entitled to use such a code.

The codes were clearly advertised on each page of Amazon where the items were available for sale. They were not codes that had been issued to one individual and then shared.

Anyone who placed an order with Amazon, whilst the codes were displayed on the Amazon pages, were fully entitled to use the advertised codes to receive the discount.

There seems to be an attitude that those who ordered were somehow in the wrong.

If you went into a retail store and picked up a product that went through the checkout at a massive discount, would you say 'hang on, I think you have undercharged me?' I think not!

People hang out on this site to find out about offers from others and that is all that has happened here. An offer has been spotted and shared. Any fault lies with the seller and/or Amazon.

blackburn_jon

stephenliverpool1 wrote: »

I see Jon has logged off so perhaps he has found an error with his order.

I hate to say it but...get a grip. I logged off because I have a life to live. No errors with my order I am fully literate. Your compassion humbles me.

stephenliverpool1

blackburn_jon wrote: »

I hate to say it but...get a grip. I logged off because I have a life to live. No errors with my order I am fully literate. Your compassion humbles me.

Glad to hear it ! In which case, please let everyone know how your complaint with Amazon progresses ?

daytona0

BritChick51 wrote: »

There seems to be an attitude that those who ordered were somehow in the wrong.

If you went into a retail store and picked up a product that went through the checkout at a massive discount, would you say 'hang on, I think you have undercharged me?' I think not!

I don't think you're in the wrong for trying (especially if, as the other user said, it was advertised on the website)...

... but it is clearly a mistake that they've made. People are on the borderline of being wrong, because they are talking about taking advantage of an error (possibly genuine) in order to benefit financially. Aka chancers. I just find it comical the lengths which otherwise 'morally upstanding' people will go to try and argue that they are entitled to a free item when a mistake has clearly been made (and the amount of effort they put into it to try and get freebies which they probably don't even need)! That is in contrast to the genuine offers on this site..

With your retail example it is more likely that the shop staff would query the final cost, as the Amazon seller has done here (before acceptance of the contract). That being said, I personally have been known to query the charging amount in such a manner in the past (although may also fall foul to being a 'chancer' as well - your example, however, just highlights how dishonest allegedly 'morally good' people can be!).

buzzyzoe

daytona0 wrote: »

I don't think you're in the wrong for trying (especially if, as the other user said, it was advertised on the website)...

... but it is clearly a mistake that they've made. People are on the borderline of being wrong, because they are talking about taking advantage of an error (possibly genuine) in order to benefit financially. Aka chancers. I just find it comical the lengths which otherwise 'morally upstanding' people will go to try and argue that they are entitled to a free item when a mistake has clearly been made (and the amount of effort they put into it to try and get freebies which they probably don't even need)! That is in contrast to the genuine offers on this site..

With your retail example it is more likely that the shop staff would query the final cost, as the Amazon seller has done here (before acceptance of the contract). That being said, I personally have been known to query the charging amount in such a manner in the past (although may also fall foul to being a 'chancer' as well - your example, however, just highlights how dishonest allegedly 'morally good' people can be!).

The bit that people are arguing about is that the company are threatening to charge everyone for the products ordered if they don't cancel the orders (which incidentally you cannot do) when the company could cancel the orders themselves but won't because it will look bad on them.

I don't think anyone is arguing that they should send the free products if it was a genuine mistake on their part, just that we should not be charged for products that we wouldn't have ordered at full price.

In this instance, I don't think that makes the company very morally correct.

glentoran99

daytona0 wrote: »

Do you know what would be funny?

If they ended up charging you all the full price because you weren't entitled to use those vouchers. Not sure if that is legal, but they can certainly give you a load of hassle to deal with :rotfl:

I will not be partaking in this 'offer' because I am not entitled to use such a code.

How can you not be entitled when it was advertised on the sale page of the product? and they would have difficulty charging when they don't have any card details

glentoran99

buzzyzoe wrote: »

The bit that people are arguing about is that the company are threatening to charge everyone for the products ordered if they don't cancel the orders (which incidentally you cannot do) when the company could cancel the orders themselves but won't because it will look bad on them.

I don't think anyone is arguing that they should send the free products if it was a genuine mistake on their part, just that we should not be charged for products that we wouldn't have ordered at full price.

In this instance, I don't think that makes the company very morally correct.

but they arent