HELP: Capital One Potentially Reversing Refund After Kickstarter Scam - Botnono Project

Grumpy_chap

It is fantastic news that, in little under 14 hours on the Sunday of a Bank Holiday weekend, the OP has been able to resolve their issue with the input from this forum.  Massive kudos to all who contributed to that success.

I, however, am wholly unsure as to whether (or why) Consumer Rights apply to an investment on Kickstarter. 
As I understand it, Kickstarter is a platform whereby an individual can invest in a product, the product may be successfully developed and reach market, the return on investment is to receive one of the products at what is, presumably, below the future market price for the product that will need to be paid by non-investors.  The "investor" does not get shares in the business and does not get dividends - the whole return is the early (below market price) product.
Putting my money into a Kickstarter project is a gamble, not a purchase.

sheramber

dataworf said:

eskbanker said:

dataworf said:

eskbanker said:

dataworf said:
Sorry but your comparison doesn't hold up. The fact that some browsers are American has no bearing on international law.

Unfortunately, you're not in any position to try to educate others in international law if you're still under the impression that UK consumer legislation applies to a transaction under US legal jurisdiction, while failing to provide any support for your assertions!

As already stated.

- Kickstarter undeniably directs activates to the UK. They have a UK presence, price in GBP, and actively market to UK consumers. This is the hook that brings the US-based platform and any non-UK creator under the jurisdiction of UK consumer law.

Where's your support for this assertion?  Case law, etc, not just some fools on Reddit or the like....

To reiterate, the context here is that you knowingly and willingly signed up to an agreement which includes in its 'governing law' section:

We’re located in New York, and any disputes with us have to be handled in New York under New York State law.

Does this help?

2.41pm today uodate

UPDATE: Sunday, 2025-08-24 - Thanks for all the fantastic advice everyone! I've now got all the information I need and will be closing this matter. I won't be monitoring this thread for further replies. Thanks again!

You didn’t stay away for long. 

dataworf

born_again said:

dataworf said:

Does this help?

So is The project creator Melyu CHEN based in the UK?

All that page says is they cater for UK creators. Nothing more, nothing less. No legal standing statements.

In any event. You made a investment in a person/company to create a product. Like many investments & products they fail & investors lose money. That is the core fact of investments, they can go up or they can go down 👍
Sad fact of life.

If you are saying it is fraud. Then you need to take it forward with the authorities in the country where they reside. 

By permitting this fraudulent campaign to continue, Kickstarter has not only facilitated the scam but also breached its own terms and profoundly failed its community.

The creator of this fraudulent campaign is still listed on Kickstarter as being based in Denver, Colorado and as of today (2025-08-24), remains active on their site/ platform.

While Kickstarter says that it is not a store and does not guarantee rewards, it does claim to enforce rules against fraud, misrepresentation, and other violations. Yet, despite hundreds of backer warnings through comments and clear evidence of misconduct, no action has been taken. In fact the campaign’s webpage still includes an active “Order Now!” button, allowing further exploitation of unsuspecting users.

I've already written this in my initial post - The sheer imbalance of Kickstarts effort:

• Protecting Users (Zero Effort): Despite hundreds of reports and clear evidence of fraud, Kickstarter did nothing. No project suspension, no warnings, no investigation, no notices or warnings to it's users.

• Retrieving Funds (Maximum Effort): The second their revenue is threatened by a chargeback, their legal team springs into action to defend it. It shows they have the resources to act - but only when their money is on the line.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/description

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/creator

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/comments

Ergates

@dataworf We can simply this argument to get the point across.

If, as you believe, the US company Kickstarter are subject to UK consumer law.  What do you imagine will happen If they simply refuse to comply with them?

Would a UK court issue a fine?  What would happen if the US company refuses to pay?

Would UK police officers get on a plane, travel to New York and start arresting people?

eskbanker

dataworf said:

By permitting this fraudulent campaign to continue, Kickstarter has not only facilitated the scam but also breached its own terms and profoundly failed its community.

The creator of this fraudulent campaign is still listed on Kickstarter as being based in Denver, Colorado and as of today (2025-08-24), remains active on their site/ platform.

While Kickstarter says that it is not a store and does not guarantee rewards, it does claim to enforce rules against fraud, misrepresentation, and other violations. Yet, despite hundreds of backer warnings through comments and clear evidence of misconduct, no action has been taken. In fact the campaign’s webpage still includes an active “Order Now!” button, allowing further exploitation of unsuspecting users.

I've already written this in my initial post - The sheer imbalance of Kickstarts effort:

• Protecting Users (Zero Effort): Despite hundreds of reports and clear evidence of fraud, Kickstarter did nothing. No project suspension, no warnings, no investigation, no notices or warnings to it's users.

• Retrieving Funds (Maximum Effort): The second their revenue is threatened by a chargeback, their legal team springs into action to defend it. It shows they have the resources to act - but only when their money is on the line.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/description

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/creator

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/comments

So, if you're convinced that you have a strong enough case in terms of contractual liability then take some action against them.

In court.

In New York.

dataworf

Ergates said:

@dataworf We can simply this argument to get the point across.

If, as you believe, the US company Kickstarter are subject to UK consumer law.  What do you imagine will happen If they simply refuse to comply with them?

Would a UK court issue a fine?  What would happen if the US company refuses to pay?

Would UK police officers get on a plane, travel to New York and start arresting people?

lol. The bank will. Failing that, FOS.

A_Geordie

Although the OP may or may not be coming back, I just want to highlight a number of members have incorrectly stated that the CRA doesn't apply because Kickstarter is not a UK company, and that is inherently wrong - the OP is actually correct (to an extent).

I've mentioned this a few times in various other threads but I'll repeat it again here: 

Prior to Brexit, the UK was bound by the Brussels I (Recast) Regulation and has a specific carve out about jurisdiction which allowed consumers in cross-border disputes to sue or be sued in their home country. Rome I Regulation incorporated similar legal provisions but with respect to choice of law i.e. a consumer will not be deprived of their consumer rights that are applicable in their home country even if the choice of law says otherwise in the contract.

Post-Brexit, the UK retained the Rome Regulation for choice of law (Article 6), and the jurisdiction provisions in the Brussels Regulation were incorporated into The Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1972 (Section 15B).

Article 6 of the Rome Regulation says: 

... a contract concluded by a natural person for a purpose which can be regarded as being outside his trade or profession (the consumer) with another person acting in the exercise of his trade or profession (the professional) shall be governed by the law of the country where the consumer has his habitual residence, provided that the professional:

(a) pursues his commercial or professional activities in the country where the consumer has his habitual residence, or

(b) by any means, directs such activities to that country or to several countries including that country

Whilst Kickstarter is a platform operating and based out of the US, that does not mean the OP's contract is subject to US or some other country law. Kickstarter makes it perfectly clear in their Q&A section for creators that: 

Kickstarter is open to backers all over the world. Nearly anyone, from anywhere, can support a project as long as they have a major debit or credit card and a Kickstarter account.

It would seem that since the website is directing or pursuing its activities to anyone in the world, this would meet the criteria that notwithstanding the Kickstarter terms, the contract between the OP and the creator would be subject to English law and the OP has the right to sue in the creator in this country* and thus, the CRA implied terms would indeed apply. 

* There continues to be confusion between governing law and the right to enforce the terms of the CRA against someone based outside the UK. They are two distinct issues and you can still sue in this country someone irrespective of your chances of enforcing any judgment. There may be good reasons why you would want to obtain a judgment against the other party but decide not to enforce it immediately.

I think there may be some legs in pursuing Capital One based on the reversal of the chargeback and/or not pursuing the chargeback process to VISA/Mastercard on the basis that Kickstarter is the merchant of record for the payment. Whilst they are a platform and do not actually guarantee projects, this project was clearly a fraudulent one and Kickstarter acted as the agent for that fraudster.

Having held the monies on behalf of the fraudster using their own nominated bank instead of the creator's own bank, Kickstrater was part of the contractual transaction and therefore the chargeback against Kickstarter's bank for goods/services not received is a valid one. If Kickstarter had an issue with that, then they shouldn't be acting as an agent to hold creator project funds. Couldn't possibly say how successful an argument would be since this appears to be a novel issue. Depending on how much was pledged, it may be worth a shot, even on the off chance that Capital One may want to settle rather than go to court. 

dataworf

eskbanker said:

dataworf said:

By permitting this fraudulent campaign to continue, Kickstarter has not only facilitated the scam but also breached its own terms and profoundly failed its community.

The creator of this fraudulent campaign is still listed on Kickstarter as being based in Denver, Colorado and as of today (2025-08-24), remains active on their site/ platform.

While Kickstarter says that it is not a store and does not guarantee rewards, it does claim to enforce rules against fraud, misrepresentation, and other violations. Yet, despite hundreds of backer warnings through comments and clear evidence of misconduct, no action has been taken. In fact the campaign’s webpage still includes an active “Order Now!” button, allowing further exploitation of unsuspecting users.

I've already written this in my initial post - The sheer imbalance of Kickstarts effort:

• Protecting Users (Zero Effort): Despite hundreds of reports and clear evidence of fraud, Kickstarter did nothing. No project suspension, no warnings, no investigation, no notices or warnings to it's users.

• Retrieving Funds (Maximum Effort): The second their revenue is threatened by a chargeback, their legal team springs into action to defend it. It shows they have the resources to act - but only when their money is on the line.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/description

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/creator

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/botnono/botnono-worlds-smartest-chat-gpt-companion-robot/comments

So, if you're convinced that you have a strong enough case in terms of contractual liability then take some action against them.

In court.

In New York.

Why would I - or anyone in my position - want to go to court? That is for the bank to do if needed. All I want is fairness. That’s why I posted on this UK forum seeking support. I didn’t expect responses from Americans here, but I appreciate them nonetheless. In a fair system, the platform would intervene when there’s obvious fraud rather than hiding behind fine print.

Beyond my consumer rights, I haven’t even looked in detail yet, but it seems Kickstarter may be violating several laws in the UK and even in their home country. At the end of the day, I just want my money back. I shouldn’t have to be stuck in this situation, waiting for an outcome that should never have happened in the first place.

A_Geordie

Beyond my consumer rights, I haven’t even looked in detail yet, but it seems Kickstarter may be violating several laws in the UK and even in their home country.

I suspect you're barking up the wrong tree with this one. Kickstarter operate on the same basis as eBay, Amazon, Booking.com and other similar sites in that they are a platform provider acting as the middleman that allows two sides to meet together and agree a contract. You and Kickstarter have no contractual relations regarding the project set up by the creator and is solely between yourself and the creator.

You're not sounding anymore convincing when you're suggesting that they may be breaking several laws in the US (without actually mentioning what laws they're breaking) unless you've suddenly become an overnight expert on US federal and New York state law.

Realistically, if you want a refund you more than likely pursue your card provider through the chargeback method or if there is a way to get a refund on the basis of a scam/fraud, although what I am not exactly sure on is whether such a refund can occur when the oney paid goes through an intermediary - would have to consult the policy/guidance by the Payment Systems Regulator to confirm. 

Ergates

dataworf said:

Ergates said:

@dataworf We can simply this argument to get the point across.

If, as you believe, the US company Kickstarter are subject to UK consumer law.  What do you imagine will happen If they simply refuse to comply with them?

Would a UK court issue a fine?  What would happen if the US company refuses to pay?

Would UK police officers get on a plane, travel to New York and start arresting people?

lol. The bank will. Failing that, FOS.

How will a UK bank enforce anything against a US company?   What do you imagine they can do?

Likewise, the FOS - a UK regulatory body.   What can they do against a US company?

Complain loudly?  Write some letters?