Mystery boxes

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

A_Geordie said:Yes, either on the basis of faulty goods under the Consumer Rights Act or unfair commercial practices under the Digital Markets ....... On the face of it, I don't think there's anything that could be relied on as an unfair commercial practice under the DMCCA, unless the consumer can show that they have been misled in some way, such as the way prizes have been assigned/distributed or this 'lottery' fails to give the consumer a fair chance to win and the % of chance for each potential prize doesn't tally up

Don't know if a company running a lottery but not complying with the Gambling Act would stretch to a prohibited practice? 

A_Geordie said:

I did check whether Anker/Fantasia Trading LLC had a gambling licence too. The answer is no and except for that, the mystery box seems to be above board in all other respects.

Worth a possible note, a local society recently ran a lottery, they didn't need to register with the Gambling Commission but did need to register with the local authority. 

I wasn't that involved so don't know if the LA inform the GC who then keep a record. 

Grumpy_chap

While it would be good to understand the actual rules around the mystery box purchases and whether they constitute purchases or lottery and what the rules are about returning the box, I don't think this forum is going to get to a definitive answer.  

I think the pragmatic way to deal is to consider this in the following way:

• Box cost £20
• Item A value £30
• Item B value £36
• Item C value £90
• Item D value £110
• Item E value £150

So, consider:

1. Would I want any / all of the items A to E if received?
2. Is the claimed value of the lowest cost item A a fair price?  (i.e. it could not be obtained cheaper anyhow online.)
3. If the answers are "yes" and "yes" then nothing to lose buying the £20 box.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Grumpy_chap said:

While it would be good to understand the actual rules around the mystery box purchases and whether they constitute purchases or lottery and what the rules are about returning the box, I don't think this forum is going to get to a definitive answer.  

I think the pragmatic way to deal is to consider this in the following way:

• Box cost £20
• Item A value £30
• Item B value £36
• Item C value £90
• Item D value £110
• Item E value £150

So, consider:

1. Would I want any / all of the items A to E if received?
2. Is the claimed value of the lowest cost item A a fair price?  (i.e. it could not be obtained cheaper anyhow online.)
3. If the answers are "yes" and "yes" then nothing to lose buying the £20 box.

What I would say, should anyone be considering buying such a box in this instance, the values given on the Mystery Box page appear to be RRP,  Anker sell on Amazon and camelcamelcamel suggests typically their prices go up and down in a regular pattern from RRP to not much more than the "ticket" price of the mystery box (at least with the cheapest box I didn't check everything) so should you end up with the lowest vale product you've probably paid around the going rate, so it really is a gamble as to whether you are lucky enough to get a higher price item if your main focus is getting a really good deal.  

born_again

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

A_Geordie said:

That said, the term that the OP referred to was in relation to the mystery box goods. From what I can see, the T&Cs don't suggest you can't return the purchased item. 

Part 1: Mystery Boxes

1. Each mystery box contains random items worth equal to or greater than the purchase price.

2. Contents cannot be chosen, returned, or exchanged after purchase.

3. Mystery boxes are not eligible for other promotions, including member discounts or Early Bird Credit offers.

Are you suggesting the wording is lax enough to be exploited to the consumer's favour or?  

4. All contents are randomly assigned and cannot be selected or exchanged based on preference. We do not accept returns or exchanges due to dissatisfaction with the item or unmet expectations. Returns are only permitted in the case of verified quality issues.

Faulty goods are covered.
In the next section.

It seems the T/C are written in such a way that you simply can not return because you did not get the item you wanted..
Which TBH with something like this is fair.

eskbanker

born_again said:
It seems the T/C are written in such a way that you simply can not return because you did not get the item you wanted..

Which TBH with something like this is fair.

Not if it purports to deny your statutory rights!

MyRealNameToo

eskbanker said:

born_again said:
It seems the T/C are written in such a way that you simply can not return because you did not get the item you wanted..

Which TBH with something like this is fair.

Not if it purports to deny your statutory rights!

It can be fair even if it goes against your statutory rights. Just because something is fair doesnt mean it's legal just in the same way being unfair normally isnt illegal either. There is a poor correlation between fairness and legislation. 

eskbanker

MyRealNameToo said:

eskbanker said:

born_again said:
It seems the T/C are written in such a way that you simply can not return because you did not get the item you wanted..

Which TBH with something like this is fair.

Not if it purports to deny your statutory rights!

It can be fair even if it goes against your statutory rights. Just because something is fair doesnt mean it's legal just in the same way being unfair normally isnt illegal either. There is a poor correlation between fairness and legislation. 

Regardless of semantic distinctions, I think it would be difficult to argue that an apparent attempt by this company to deny customers their statutory rights is actually fair!

MyRealNameToo

eskbanker said:

MyRealNameToo said:

eskbanker said:

born_again said:
It seems the T/C are written in such a way that you simply can not return because you did not get the item you wanted..

Which TBH with something like this is fair.

Not if it purports to deny your statutory rights!

It can be fair even if it goes against your statutory rights. Just because something is fair doesnt mean it's legal just in the same way being unfair normally isnt illegal either. There is a poor correlation between fairness and legislation. 

Regardless of semantic distinctions, I think it would be difficult to argue that an apparent attempt by this company to deny customers their statutory rights is actually fair!

I'm happy to argue as such, UK consumer statutory rights are frequently excessive and go well beyond fairness. 

I struggle to believe that anyone thinks it would only be fair to have a lucky dip if you can get a full refund if you weren't happy with your lucky dip item when the firm has been very clear what all the possible items are, that allocation is random and there are no returns etc. 

eskbanker

MyRealNameToo said:

eskbanker said:

MyRealNameToo said:

eskbanker said:

born_again said:
It seems the T/C are written in such a way that you simply can not return because you did not get the item you wanted..

Which TBH with something like this is fair.

Not if it purports to deny your statutory rights!

It can be fair even if it goes against your statutory rights. Just because something is fair doesnt mean it's legal just in the same way being unfair normally isnt illegal either. There is a poor correlation between fairness and legislation. 

Regardless of semantic distinctions, I think it would be difficult to argue that an apparent attempt by this company to deny customers their statutory rights is actually fair!

I'm happy to argue as such, UK consumer statutory rights are frequently excessive and go well beyond fairness. 

I struggle to believe that anyone thinks it would only be fair to have a lucky dip if you can get a full refund if you weren't happy with your lucky dip item when the firm has been very clear what all the possible items are, that allocation is random and there are no returns etc. 

My point is really that if they want the benefits of using an online lucky dip model to shift their unwanted stock then they should recognise that this brings responsibilities that they can't just choose to opt out of, so the mere act of trying to do so is unfair IMHO.

born_again

eskbanker said:

born_again said:
It seems the T/C are written in such a way that you simply can not return because you did not get the item you wanted..

Which TBH with something like this is fair.

Not if it purports to deny your statutory rights!

The only people who would want to send it back for change of mind would be the people who looking out for making a fast buck by selling items on.

They have not tried to hide anything. It is all up front & clear.