Should customers be able to sue over flawed non-returnable items?

[Jucon]

Poll Question...
"When a refund is not allowed, customers should be able to sue for a refund over faulty, flawed, misleading or failed products ________________."


I recently came across this news article about a woman suing over the movie "Drive" claiming the trailer was misleading and the movie was antisemitic.

'Drive' trailer misleading, claims woman in lawsuit | PopWatch | EW.com

Among Ms. Deming’s complaints listed in the lawsuit filed Sept. 27:
– Drive was promoted as very similar to Fast and Furious, when in actuality, it wasn’t.
– “Drive bore very little similarity to a chase, or race action film, for reasons including but not limited to Drive having very little driving in the motion picture.” (emphasis mine)
– “Extreme gratuitous defamatory dehumanizing racism directed against members of the Jewish faith.”

I can't tell you how many times I've been infuriated over faulty, flawed, misleading, or an overall failure of a product in which cases I find myself unable to get a refund. Movies, music, video games, gaming systems, computers, cell phones, cars, food,... in most cases you will be unable to get a refund. So how is capitalism supposed to work right when the service provider or product seller already has your money? Yes, if a band makes a poor CD they probably wont have another hit record, if a movie flops it wont have a sequel, and if a resturaunt makes bad food they wont be open long... but for me, I've already lost out and have been "tricked" out of my money.

Case in point, the movie "2012". I thought it looked amazing in the trailer, with tons of intense action and a plot that fed off the fears of an apocalyptic event... when in the end I found it had a poor plot, corny action stunts and mediocre acting. After sitting through the entire movie hoping it would get better, there was no way I was going to get a refund... so should I be able to sue for a refund?

(Before MP3s), should I have I been able to sue for a refund after buying a CD with only one good song?

Should I be able to sue for a refund over a poor quality video game? (I've learned to rent before buying)

Should I be able to sue for a refund over a flawed car, cell phone, gaming system, or other electronic device after realizing it's flaw after the return period?


One can argue the customer has options to be a smart buyer, but in some cases a "demo" period for a product can still cost the customer money. And for me personally I have had many cases where I didn't realize a flaw until after the return date. Though I'm hesitant to allow individual customers to sue over their "displeasure" with a product, I'd consider class action lawsuits. Producers should be held accountable for making bad products, but there needs to be a system in place to avoid abuse by the customers as well.



Any thoughts?

 

[Jetboogieman]

There are no words in any language that has ever existed in humanities short time on this planet, nor any sound that any animal even extinct could make, that could even begin to describe how utterly crazy, pathetic and mind blowingly idiotic this lawsuit is.

 

[lpast]

NO I disagree...When you buy a Game CD it says if its opened you cant return it....its buyer beware...go read reviews find someone that has the game..same applies to anything that says if you buy it no returns...
IF companies took back opened games...everyone would be playing them for free....for example...

 

[Jetboogieman]

On another note, this would also effectively destroy Red Bull if it succeeded

And also Cialas, as Cialas could be miscronstrued by their advertisements as a smiling aid, or anti-depressant. (which a good lawyer could actually argue it is) :lol:

 

[Jucon]

NO I disagree...When you buy a Game CD it says if its opened you cant return it....its buyer beware...go read reviews find someone that has the game..same applies to anything that says if you buy it no returns...
IF companies took back opened games...everyone would be playing them for free....for example...

I agree. What do you think about the gaming system?

I've known many people who's Xbox 360s and PS3s have broken down only after a few years. Xbox 360 even has a "ring of death" system in place, as if Microsoft knew the problems would arise. I'm curious where the cut off is between unpreventable failure and planned failure...

 

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

This might work if the there was also a hefty penalty against attorneys for bringing a frivolous lawsuits. However, this is the US - a place where you get the best consumer 'justice' money can buy. There is no way attorneys would ever let such a measure get passed and there is no way that US marketing firms would ever allow it either.

I believe a better plan would be for all such suits brought for disappointment with products or misleading advertising to be class action and require a minimum number of petitioners. This would keep many frivolous suits out of the courts, give consumers recourse and (to a limited extent) force marketers to be somewhat truthful in marketing products. It also might get those darn infomercials off the airwaves :mrgreen:

 

[Jetboogieman]

I agree. What do you think about the gaming system?

I've known many people who's Xbox 360s and PS3s have broken down only after a few years. Xbox 360 even has a "ring of death" system in place, as if Microsoft knew the problems would arise. I'm curious where the cut off is between unpreventable failure and planned failure...

Well to be fair microsoft were pretty good about it, with my ex girlfriends Xbox and my brothers, we were able to send them back after the Red Ring of Death and got them back good as new never to break again :shrug:

 

[Slartibartfast]

I just went to a furniture store over the weekend. This particular furniture store is a chain store, but is the outlet branch for it, selling bits and pieces from other stores that did not sell for whatever reason or perhaps the product is scratch and dent. There are signs all over this store stating "all sales as is and are final" in big bold red lettering. In this case, if I bought some furniture that turned out to be flawed in some way that I did not expect, its on me.

However, if I go to walmart and I buy a video game disk out of the normal shelf and this disk happens to be scratched when I open the packaging, either walmart or the video game maker need to be responsible. The reason is that I had no reasonable way of knowing before hand that there will be an issue while in the former example, I was well warned.

In terms of a movie and its preview, I guess it depends on whether the preview was misleading or not.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Wow - people being able to sue because they didn't like a movie? How pathetic. Hey - I couldn't sue for having to show crappy movies in my theaters It's not THAT much money - get over it people.

 

[Gipper]

Buyer's remorse is not a legitimate factor of litigation. Bitch can go fist herself.

 

[Your Star]

So just because you think something is ****ty means you should be entitled to a refund? That makes no sense, seriously, just stop being a whiny baby.

 

[d0gbreath]

I just finished eating a "Jimmy Dean" sausage, egg, and cheese biscuit. Only this particular biscuit did not have any egg (came in a box of 8).

Damn right I'm going to sue. Jimmy Dean will no longer be in business when I'm finished with them.

 

[Gipper]

I bet if you wrote them about that though, they'd send you a coupon. Not exactly a refund, but places usually will compensate you for your loss.

Once I had a box of Frosted Flakes from the grocery store that, when you open the bag inside, it was Corn Flakes. One long call to Kellogg's and coupons for two boxes of my choice of cereal were mailed a couple weeks later.

 

[Zyphlin]

No, just no. If perhaps there is a legitimate actual defect...the movie is one 2 hour long strobe light show that it never indicated in any traliers and because of it you get a seizure...MAYBE. A video game actually has child porn in it that it didn't advertise causing you get to get arrested...perhaps. But "Hmm, I didn't like it and it didn't live up to the expectations I created myself based on the little information about it I chose to consume"? No, that's not a good reason.

Don't want to engage in something that is a buyer beware situation? Then wait for a little bit of time for others to do it, read reviews, do a bit of consumer research, then make your decision.

 

[jamesrage]

Any thoughts?

Because you didn't like the movie, game, cd or what ever else? Then the answer is no. Now if you bought a cd,game or movie and the disc was cracked and the store would not refund your money or replace then sure you should be able to sue. Although it might be hard to prove that the disc was cracked when you bought it. If you bought a game, took it home and installed and the game is telling you need something hardware higher than what the hardware specs on the packaging says you need to be able to play it then you should be able to sue the manufacture of that game.

 

[molten_dragon]

In some cases, I think suing a company for a defective product that they won't fix or replace is a legitimate response. I'd be more likely to say so if physical goods were involved I think.

This particular lawsuit is just stupid though. Movie trailers are not necessarily meant to give you a crystal clear picture of what the movie is about. Many times they are obscure or misleading, and it's intended. Any rational person knows this.

 

[MaggieD]

Poll Question...
"When a refund is not allowed, customers should be able to sue for a refund over faulty, flawed, misleading or failed products ________________."


I recently came across this news article about a woman suing over the movie "Drive" claiming the trailer was misleading and the movie was antisemitic.

'Drive' trailer misleading, claims woman in lawsuit | PopWatch | EW.com

I can't tell you how many times I've been infuriated over faulty, flawed, misleading, or an overall failure of a product in which cases I find myself unable to get a refund. Movies, music, video games, gaming systems, computers, cell phones, cars, food,... in most cases you will be unable to get a refund. So how is capitalism supposed to work right when the service provider or product seller already has your money? Yes, if a band makes a poor CD they probably wont have another hit record, if a movie flops it wont have a sequel, and if a resturaunt makes bad food they wont be open long... but for me, I've already lost out and have been "tricked" out of my money.

Case in point, the movie "2012". I thought it looked amazing in the trailer, with tons of intense action and a plot that fed off the fears of an apocalyptic event... when in the end I found it had a poor plot, corny action stunts and mediocre acting. After sitting through the entire movie hoping it would get better, there was no way I was going to get a refund... so should I be able to sue for a refund?

(Before MP3s), should I have I been able to sue for a refund after buying a CD with only one good song?

Should I be able to sue for a refund over a poor quality video game? (I've learned to rent before buying)

Should I be able to sue for a refund over a flawed car, cell phone, gaming system, or other electronic device after realizing it's flaw after the return period?

One can argue the customer has options to be a smart buyer, but in some cases a "demo" period for a product can still cost the customer money. And for me personally I have had many cases where I didn't realize a flaw until after the return date. Though I'm hesitant to allow individual customers to sue over their "displeasure" with a product, I'd consider class action lawsuits. Producers should be held accountable for making bad products, but there needs to be a system in place to avoid abuse by the customers as well.

Any thoughts?

We have consumer protection in that goods must be merchantible -- that they have an implied warranty to do what they say they're going to do -- but this applies only to real property. The law says that when you buy "as-is," however, it carries no protection. There is no implied warranty on intellectual property as "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder."

If you buy a lawnmower from Sears, there's an implied warranty that it will cut grass. If it won't, the company must, by law, refund your money. When you buy a video game, a CD...things like that...even if it is damaged out of the box, it has, in effect, been sold to you "as is,"as evidenced by their clearly stated policy of no refunds/exchanges.

We are the most litigious people on planet earth. "I'm gunna' sue" has become many people's mantra.

 

[HonestJoe]

Poll Question...
"When a refund is not allowed, customers should be able to sue for a refund over faulty, flawed, misleading or failed products ________________."

Your question is flawed (and I demand my money back! ).

There is a fundamental difference between faulty or flawed products, misleading advertising and a product you personally don't like.

For something that is actually faulty (e.g. a book with missing pages) a replacement or refund in clearly in order (and in the UK, a legal requirement). That's generally not going to apply to a film though.

False advertising is different but that's usually a regulatory issue rather than (or at least before) it becomes a legal one. I don't think it's realistic to apply the kind of strict interpretation implied in the article on a film trailer though. It might be a little underhanded to put all the action scenes in the trailer if the movie is mostly drama but I wouldn't want to see anything legally binding on it - if anything it's just impractical.

If you don't like something, that's just tough.

 

[jambalaya]

We seriously cannot clog up the judicial system with such trivality. Life involves some risk. I frankly think you could probaby say that a large majority of movie trailers and advertisements are misleading. We must consider suits like this not worthy of consideration so that we can attend to much more serious matters. Be more careful next time. There are many avenues through which you can check out a movie before you go to see it if you are that scrutinizing. You mean there are people hwo acually take the word of the movie producers and advertisers.

 

[OscarB63]

Case in point, the movie "2012". I thought it looked amazing in the trailer, with tons of intense action and a plot that fed off the fears of an apocalyptic event... when in the end I found it had a poor plot, corny action stunts and mediocre acting. After sitting through the entire movie hoping it would get better, there was no way I was going to get a refund... so should I be able to sue for a refund?

no, the words:

From Roland Emmerich, director of THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW and
INDEPENDENCE DAY

should have been warning enough :shrug: :lamo

 

[winston53660]

Quote Originally Posted by Jucon View Post
Case in point, the movie "2012". I thought it looked amazing in the trailer, with tons of intense action and a plot that fed off the fears of an apocalyptic event... when in the end I found it had a poor plot, corny action stunts and mediocre acting. After sitting through the entire movie hoping it would get better, there was no way I was going to get a refund... so should I be able to sue for a refund?

When I was a kid I worked at a movie theater. Of course our policy was no refunds. Except one time we had this movie that was so f'ing bad we changed our policy for that one movie. If they asked we'd refund the money. I don't think a single person sat through the entire film.

 

[Jucon]

Your question is flawed (and I demand my money back! ).

Sorry, after clicking the thread you voided your right to a refund.
If you had asked for a refund before clicking, you would be eligible for a refund minus any stocking and handling charges.
However, if you found the link broken when you clicked you are entitled to another link to the same thread.

Thank you for using DP.com

Have a great day

 

[DiAnna]

Sure, you should always be able to sue for anything you want to sue someone about... as long as you are willing to accept the consequences, which are substantial legal fees along with court-imposed fines if the judge finds your lawsuit to be frivolous or malicious.

So hire that lawyer, sue away! Tell us how that works out for you. :lol:

 

[OscarB63]

I'd like to see someone spend thousands suing over an $8 movie ticket...because it's the principle of the thing.

 

[American]

Poll Question...
"When a refund is not allowed, customers should be able to sue for a refund over faulty, flawed, misleading or failed products ________________."


I recently came across this news article about a woman suing over the movie "Drive" claiming the trailer was misleading and the movie was antisemitic.

'Drive' trailer misleading, claims woman in lawsuit | PopWatch | EW.com



I can't tell you how many times I've been infuriated over faulty, flawed, misleading, or an overall failure of a product in which cases I find myself unable to get a refund. Movies, music, video games, gaming systems, computers, cell phones, cars, food,... in most cases you will be unable to get a refund. So how is capitalism supposed to work right when the service provider or product seller already has your money? Yes, if a band makes a poor CD they probably wont have another hit record, if a movie flops it wont have a sequel, and if a resturaunt makes bad food they wont be open long... but for me, I've already lost out and have been "tricked" out of my money.

Case in point, the movie "2012". I thought it looked amazing in the trailer, with tons of intense action and a plot that fed off the fears of an apocalyptic event... when in the end I found it had a poor plot, corny action stunts and mediocre acting. After sitting through the entire movie hoping it would get better, there was no way I was going to get a refund... so should I be able to sue for a refund?

(Before MP3s), should I have I been able to sue for a refund after buying a CD with only one good song?

Should I be able to sue for a refund over a poor quality video game? (I've learned to rent before buying)

Should I be able to sue for a refund over a flawed car, cell phone, gaming system, or other electronic device after realizing it's flaw after the return period?


One can argue the customer has options to be a smart buyer, but in some cases a "demo" period for a product can still cost the customer money. And for me personally I have had many cases where I didn't realize a flaw until after the return date. Though I'm hesitant to allow individual customers to sue over their "displeasure" with a product, I'd consider class action lawsuits. Producers should be held accountable for making bad products, but there needs to be a system in place to avoid abuse by the customers as well.



Any thoughts?

You don't sound like a smart consumer.