MSE News: Wahanda ditches 'free manicure' deal

taxiphil · 6 June 2013 at 11:14PM

I wonder how Wahanda can say with so much confidence that 30% of orders were fraudulent. This seems an incredibly bold assertion. What do they actually mean by fraudulent? Do they mean 30% of people were setting up multiple e-mail addresses? If so, were they tracking IP addresses?

Hotels4U did a similar thing with their £50 off promotion on Christmas Day 2011. The demand was understandably high as it was a generous offer, so they pulled it for everyone (including existing loyal customers like myself), citing "fraud".

The ASA was not impressed and upheld the complaints against them, stating that Hotels4U didn't make a reasonable estimate of demand, and could have taken steps to put measures in place to prevent duplicate bookings:

"We considered that a number of duplicate or fraudulent bookings did not justify Hotels4u ending the promotion early".

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2012/4/Hotels4u,-d-,com-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_183904.aspx

Notably, Hotels4U said they only "flagged up" orders as being "potentially fraudulent" but never provided the ASA with any hard evidence of fraud.

I do wonder whether the word "fraud" is being thrown around a bit too casually, and perhaps not entirely accurately, by marketing people who are trying to divert attention from the simple fact that they didn't anticipate demand or do their sums properly.

JuicyJesus · 6 June 2013 at 11:14PM

Exile_geordie wrote: »

Its the something for nothing culture that this country has though.

If I could ask those who have said they will avoid this company, have you ever or were you ever going to use the company before the discount was advertised? Would you have carried on using them if the offer was valid sitll and then ran out?

If no then what you moaning for? Yeah its nice to get something for free but at what cost to the company itself if you were never going to use them again anyway?

Happy to maybe bankrupt a company and force people on the dole are you? Thats nice.

Exactly. It's just amazing, the entitlement of it. They think they're just entitled to get free stuff, and then MSE get to evade any responsibility for their delivering the message of "FREE STUFF FOR EVERYONE" on a massively popular mailing list for people who want free stuff, and complain when businesses are unable to fulfil the requests of thousands of freel*aders as if it's some form of scandal. What did they honestly think would happen?

EDIT: Apparently the term "freel*aders" is censored. Hilarious. Way to prove my point...

Taxiphil wrote:

The ASA was not impressed and upheld the complaints against them, stating that Hotels4U didn't make a reasonable estimate of demand, and could have taken steps to put measures in place to prevent duplicate bookings:

But this is different. The only people making the assertion that this offer was ever "free manicure without any strings" was MSE, based apparently on some emails nobody else can see.

It really, really wouldn't surprise me if MSE just c*cked up and are trying to blame the supplier.

Exile_geordie · 6 June 2013 at 11:20PM

taxiphil wrote: »

I wonder how Wahanda can say with so much confidence that 30% of orders were fraudulent. This seems an incredibly bold assertion. What do they actually mean by fraudulent? Do they mean 30% of people were setting up multiple e-mail addresses? If so, were they tracking IP addresses?

.

Its pretty easy to do though. Then again some people are probably that stupid they were using the same home address on 3 or 4 applications.

Funny how shops and that dont have to sell you something at all at a price and MSE,from what I have seen, doesnt kick up a sticnk about it but as soon as a freebie comes with added terms they get the hump about it and their minions follow.

Im not sure how many cities Stylist is published in but its mainly read then discarded so they know that the sample of people who would sign up would be very small and accounted for that. By MSE sending out an email to millions of people they have, in effect,caused the offer to now come with strings as far as I can read into it. So maybe they should take a bit of the blame too?

Doubt it though.

mileslondoner · 7 June 2013 at 12:17AM

* It is Wahanda that approached MSE.

* It is Wahanda that created terms and conditions of this offer.

* It is Wahanda that is responsible to ensure the offer cannot be easily used in a fraudulent manner.

* It is Wahanda that is responsible for identifying fraudulent transactions and dealing with them accordingly.

...so how come it all became gray suddenly ? Why are we having this discussion ?

Credit-Crunched · 7 June 2013 at 12:31AM

I have to disagree with MSE on this one, the company in question clearly thought that a bit of extra advertising would help to generate some extra business.

However, it was not ready for the at time, greed, that seems to emanate from this website.

This web site has habitually exposed loop holes in deals, offers etc without a thought for the end result. One foray of greedy, self indulgent, all for free is enough to cripple a small business.

All you have to do is trawl the boards to see

"set up another new e-mail address... ;-) "

this is common practice, and I can foresee no reason why this 30% figure is not entirely unrealistic.

This web site and its greedy minority was responsible for Tesco pulling 'Double the difference' promotion, that used to give a few quid back to you average shopper. Until, a minority on here made it so unfeasible for Tesco to run.

Good deals, not a problem, looking for ways to screw companies and businesses for free, MSE have some respect.

mileslondoner · 7 June 2013 at 8:40AM

I agree that Wahanda wanted "to generate some extra business".

Note however that:

- they could safeguard themselves easily against any alleged fraud by ensuring it is one redemption per household or one redemption per IP address (the issue of multiplying e-mail address to take advantage of more offers would be non-existent then)

- they cannot give any reasonable estimation of the level of an alleged fraud because it is acceptable for several family members or work colleagues in one office to use the same computer (hence same IP address)

- the offer says clearly "one use per account" with no limits set as to how many accounts you can have, how many accounts can be linked to one IP address, one household or if it is acceptable to open an account on someone's behalf (if they are uncomfortable using the net themselves)

There is no exploiting any loopholes going on here. A big and reputable company wanted to have a massive marketing exposure through MSE but failed (1) to anticipate the high level of interest and (2) to create adequate terms and conditions and technical safeguards against potential/alleged fraud.

One might think "oh poor start up business abused by greedy internet users", I say though "don't promise/advertise what you cannot deliver".

tattybonce · 7 June 2013 at 2:31PM

Exile_geordie wrote: »

Its the something for nothing culture that this country has though.

If I could ask those who have said they will avoid this company, have you ever or were you ever going to use the company before the discount was advertised? Would you have carried on using them if the offer was valid sitll and then ran out?

If no then what you moaning for? Yeah its nice to get something for free but at what cost to the company itself if you were never going to use them again anyway?

Happy to maybe bankrupt a company and force people on the dole are you? Thats nice.

I've never heard of them before, nor did I use the "£10 voucher". Now I would not touch them with a barge pole. They have made it quite clear they cannot be trusted.

hm71_2 · 7 June 2013 at 3:16PM

if i'm totally honest, i had not heard of this company before, but my daughter is very fond of a spray tan but we have always used the same lady unfortunately she is away and my dd got invited to a party, i was going to book using the voucher as it would be a great way to try a new place, relatively inexpensively but i still ould have paid over the £10 but now because that age old abuse of system costs others I do get quite annoyed when people go oh i ordered for brother, aunty, uncles dog etc like the redhanky vouchers some people got one for the whole family where as others didnt get one between them.

Charlotte49 · 7 June 2013 at 3:18PM

I think it's a bit unfair of MSE to attack a small business which clearly wasn't expecting so many responses in this way.

I completely agree that Wahanda should have been prepared for lots of people to take up the offer, and should have been more clear in their terms and conditions (e.g. minimum spend, limited number of codes). As someone with parents who own small businesses, and has been involved with the running of them for my whole life, I know that sometimes inexperienced owners can make mistakes like this. Often small businesses don't even think about things like fraud detection because it's not something they've had to deal with before.

Deals get pulled all of the time on here, and T&C's get changed, and MSE never kicks up a fuss about them so I find it very strange that it's happened now. Generally I find people on the Freebies board to be understanding and accept that sometimes things go wrong with freebies, so have low expectations anyway.

I personally don't think that MSE have dealt with this in a very sensitive way. When we haven't read a statement from Wahanda, and Wahanda haven't had a chance to respond to MSE publicly and in their own words, I don't think it's fair for anyone to jump to conclusions.

Quentin · 7 June 2013 at 8:42PM

Charlotte49 wrote: »

.........I personally don't think that MSE have dealt with this in a very sensitive way. When we haven't read a statement from Wahanda, and Wahanda haven't had a chance to respond to MSE publicly and in their own words, I don't think it's fair for anyone to jump to conclusions.

MSE have certainly allowed Wahanda a right of reply, (even though their CEO broke the site rules by not getting permission to post as a Rep), his post remains for all to see.

As far as you are concerned he wasted his time as you haven't bothered to read his "own words"!!

MSE News: Wahanda ditches 'free manicure' deal

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free