>From the screenshot, it's visible that he paid $3,499 on the order, and the user said he received the invoice from the company. However, upon checking his email, he found that Corsair cancelled his order without listing any reason.>When the user tried to place the order again, the website showed him a new price tag of $4,299, which is a staggering $800 price hike. Good. Fuck 'em.
At least they were nice enough to RMA my RAM without asking for anything excessive.
dont caregot my shitgo buy a spiderman triple action web blaster
>>729881957Who deserves to be fucked? Corsair or the buyer?
>>729881957isn't doing that illegal?
>>729882191no if they refund him
>>729882191If you can do something and get away with it it's legal.
>company named after pirates
>>729882191Psh, I found out it's legal to write that into a contract for buying a house.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4_q6x2yR60Between shit like this and "you can't sue us, only arbitrate" corporations have me by the balls.
>>729881957>800 burger bucks is 'staggering'stop being a poor
>>729882493>it's legal to write that into a contract for buying a housei mean yeah you can write it but that doesn't means it'll holdin that case the family won the case and got their house backcontracts don't override law
>>729882191this shit happens all the time when people buy gpus. remember the RTX launches? lots of peoples newegg and amazon orders were cancelled only to get relisted later for scalper prices.
>>729882191illegal if they do it to a massive corporation, because the massive corporation can rape them in court until they're worth 1 dollar. 100% legal to do to you, because you can't afford to fight them legally.
>>729882976yeah figured
>>729882268They had a contract, they need to perform the contract. They agreed to be contractually bound to supply the goods at the first price. He now has $800 in actionable damages because of the failure of Corsair to perform the contract they were bound to.
>>729881957What a Kike thing to do.
>>729883520>They had a contract, they need to perform the contractOr what?
>>729881957>>From the screenshot, it's visible that he paid $3,499 on the ordeIt's honestly invisible
>>729882021You won't be laughing if your motherboard decides to blow up and break all your parts for no reason one day :)
>>729882268you need a proper reason to cancel an order"I forgot to increase the price" is not a proper reason
>>729883520I'm pretty sure their contract explicitly states that the company can cancel any order legally without giving any reason whatsoever.
>>729882976They have small claims courts for such matters where you can inexpensively self-represent (provided you take the day off work). If Corsair don't turn up they get a default judgement against them. It's not hard to use and win.
>>729883741They need to pay damages for failure to perform the contract, which in this case is at least $800.
>>729884058>They need to pay damageslolenforce it
>>729883883LMAO, if they never sent you anything they can do whatever they want. If they return your money to you then no transaction took place, that can be for literally any reason up to and including "you placed your order without taking a bath and I don't want to do business with someone who stinks."
>>729883889Legislation and the hundreds of years of accumulated precendants of contract law take precedence over unenforceable terms contract like "void at will". The purpose of a contract is agree to be bound to perform the terms of the contract, otherwise it is just an invitation-to-treat (an invitation to consider, like peering at goods in a shop window) or an unacceptable offer.
>>729884103Half a day at a small claims court.
>$4,299what was that, 16GB of DDR5?
>>729884270No. They agreed to a contract. The contact is not an offer, or a "maybe" or a vague "we'll think about it". It's an agreement to be bound to perform the promise you are agreeing to. The contract is not voided by handing the money or goods or whatever was promised back: the promise and agreement to be bound to perform the promise remains.
>>729883794I will since my warranty says the store I bought my components from is required to not only replace my valid parts for free but also upgrade them.
>>729883883just call it pricing error, return money and call it a day.it would be different thing if the customer already got the product or asked for more money while refusing returning what was already paid
>>729884773You can't void a contact for the "error" of not being able to perform the supply of goods you agreed to supply at a profit. That's your problem for agreeing to supply the goods at that price, you are contractually bound now to perform what you agreed to perform at the price you agreed to perform it for.
>>729883794>literally never happened to my PCGrasping straws, Consolecuck?
>>729884773Though luck, you made a mistake and you will pay for it, no refunds.
>>729885360>you made a mistake and you will pay for itNope. Accountability is for poor people.
>>729881957It's because of all the idiots who keep paying these absurd prices that they keep getting away with it. God I hate being stuck on this planet full of these morons!
>>729885510Anemic and limp-wristed third-world thinking. All Anglosohere countries have robust contract law and accessible small claims court to resolve consumer contract disputes, not to mention governmental regulatory departments that may also step in and assist. Don't project your dysfunction and low-agency apathy onto serious countries.
>>729885830Blah blah, recently some jew diddled American kids and was allowed to fuck off to pedosrael.You try doing the same.
>>729885552Who? Big data centres outbidding consumers and fighting with eachother to secure supply? The price increases are demand driven by big AI companies, not consumers.
>>729885830Third-world thinking is just finding the person responsible and hacking them to death with a machete. That's definitively American thinking, and "first-world country" in its original definition just meant political alignment with the US.
>>729884589Paying someone binds them into a fiduciary obligation to deliver what you paid for but if they return your money then that responsibility is also absolved as part of the negated transaction.
>>729885934I'm sure inserting an incoherent Epstein rant into your statement of claim will bolster your case if you had the courage get off your arse, put down the bottle of vodka, and actually participate in centuries old institutions that were built up to ensure the confidence and flourishing of American and Anglosphere business. Your apathy and cowardice are not shared by the functioning world.
>>729886212>EpsteinHehehe, oh sweaty summer childe.
>>729882021AND SHARK FIN FLIPPERS FOR TORPEDO POWER
>c*rsairthere's zero excuse to ever buy anything from this garbage company after they patent trolled the original steam controller
>>729884664>warranty Lol. Yeah i am sure they are not going to say you broke it.
Yeah, that's hyperinflation for you.In Germany, you'd order a coffee and the price would have doubled or even tripled before the server even returned.
>>729886394Same guys replaced my monitor for a better one after the old started going black (we don't like black).
>>729882872Maybe they had a happy outcome but the attorney they consulted said the clause itself holds water and is something that can be initiated at the discretion of the builder. If it appears in another contract then signing the document makes it binding. The unequal terms you're signing into are by design and supported by law.
>>729886374This. Fuck Corsair. Worst gaming component company by far. Shit products, shit designs, shitty business practices. I hate that I have a 10 year old PSU from them in my PC, I want to replace it, but I can't justify it when it still works.
>>729882021Same. Waitfags in shambles.
>>729884382this is a lawlet assumption unless you point out the law/ruling that says a retailer can't cancel an order at will, or the clause in the contract that binds them to deliver an order once placed. they don't care about your feelings btw.
>>729886025No. The promise to perform remains. That is what a contract is: the promise you agree to be bound to perform. Handing the money or goods back does not void a contract. If you fail to perform the terms you need to pay the damages that your failure to perform have caused the other party. It may be something as simple as the $800 cost to this consumer, or some enormity of causing a business to fail well beyond the value of the actual contract.
>>729885959No, it's third-world learned helplessness where you don't have a reliable and accessible court system to resolve disputes, so you accept being trodden on, go back to your vodka bottle, and rant about being a small bug helpless to the world arranged against you. Meanwhile, in a real country, where people have agency and don't accept being trodden on, you have robust contract law, accessible small claims courts that fairly adjudicate consumer disputes, where you file a statement of claim and recover your damages.
>>729881957There's something wrong with my money again!
>>729886534Courts can rule contract clauses unenforceable. Did the company try to enforce the contract term before a court? If not, then it is very suggestive they did not think the contract term was enforceable.
>>729881957>Richfags getting what they fucking deserveYou realize the company is much richer than this one individual, right
I feel like these companies are going to end up pricing themselves out of the consumer market entirely
>>729882976Not quite.If they are doing it to a massive company, they are likely buying bulk. So it's likely hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars difference, which makes litigation worth while and because it's a business; there is very clear claim for economic damage being done if it's a critical component for their standard business operations.For a standard consumer, the cost of litigation isn't worth how much you'll get back in return. Assuming you get a full refund, your best bet is to make it known that it's a business that doesn't honour it's contracts.
>>729881957PC fats getting fucked over makes me horny. I love this. Feels good being a console user. My PS5 + Switch 2 is an elite combo
>>729886613It's very basic contact law principles, it's what the definition of a contract is: to agree to be bound to perform, not a vague offer or a "maybe" or a "I might do that, I might not". Your country may have a small introduction to contract law cribnote book for law student where you can read the opening chapter to understand the basics principles and definitions.
>>729886607I don't remember this scene...
>>729882268idk the specifics on interstate/national services/purchases, but once you send an invoice then you're usually on the hook for it unless you can get the other party to agree to the adjustments. if it's an honest mistake most businesses will just eat the cost on personal orders because it's not worth spending time paying employees for hours on end to chase after scraps, and when dealing with other businesses both parties generally want to remain on good terms i.e. if it's a major fuck up the vendor will push for payment on the updated pricing and won't continue services in the future with them if they are not cooperative, and on the smaller side they usually eat the cost to keep the client happy but will explain the error for future dealings.
video games?
>>729887403name one. if you fail again i will call you a nigger.
>>729887006>>729886690>>729886212>>729885830I really want to know what fucking planet you're onBecause in reality this is not a high-minded hypotheticalCurrently, mega retailers such as Newegg, Amazon and Walmart are listing PC components for low prices and then cancelling and refunding people who purchase them. It's so widespread that it's considered a pleasant surprise and a treat if the retailer actually sends you the item you bought at the price you bought it for
>>729887714Anon comes from Planet Juste, where all are equal before the law, which is ironclad and without loopholes. The citizens hold the law up to such a high standard that they'll pursue legal remedies all the way to their supreme court for the smallest of infractions
>>729887176Yes and that's not unprecedentedIBM used to be one of the largest consumer companies in the world, to the extent that the original term for the whole DOS/Windows/x86 ecosystem was "IBM PC"Twenty years ago they made an intentional move to go "Actually FUCK consumers, we're never going to sell shit to an individual pleb again"In the time since then the company has grown 600%Nvidia in particular is positioned to do something similar, individual customers make up such a miniscule portion of their revenue at this point that they would actually gain money by cutting the division entirely
>>729882191Nope. As long as they refund you then they are safe. Happens all the time for actually legitimate reasons. Lets say you buy something but the product goes out of stock. They will often cancel the order and refund you. What they are doing now is unethical and disgustingly anti-consumer, but still legal.
>>729887694Unless it's an obvious error, like a home appliance being sold for $5.99 instead of $599 for example or a mistake in the advertised price, not the actual sale price; then the courts typically rule in favour of upholding the contract, which is formed at point of sale.
>>729888384>Happens all the time for actually legitimate reasonsthat's the point thoughthey don't jave a legotimate reason to do it in this casei get there are cases where cancelling and refunding is valid, but there must be a proper justification for the action, "i was too retarded to list the price to be profitable" is not one of them
>>729887994>>729887176So, who's gonna fill the void? Chinese GPU companies? Vietnamese? Maybe one day Indian consumer GPU makers.
>>729881957I really don't get the hysteria. NO ONE needs more than 32GB DDR5 for gaming, and that's still affordable.>but muh 128GB costs $4kliterally who cares, are you going to run an AI farm too?
>>729887357>5+ year old hardware>elite
>>729889237It's new norm, not void. Chinese companies will gladly accept new prices
>>729886474Just because they did it before doesn't mean they will do it again. Honestly...do you really think companies are going to be customer friendly from this point on?
>>729886374QRD?
>>729888384Refunding does not void a contract. A contract can be voided by the consent of both parties, which is the scenario you are thinking of: both parties agree to void the contract in return for a refund. The refund itself changes nothing without both parties consent to be no longer bound by the contract, the other party can enforce performance of the contract regardless of an attempt to refund.
>>729890850I really don't know how to engage with your delusions
>>729887994IBM spun-off and sold the consumer side of their business to others, Lenovo, rather than simply then off the lights. Nvidea could do the same, a spin-off or sale to someone smaller (most countriesn of the world). Hopefully some big mind there will consider workstations and video gaming the have enough social cache to keep them in it as a niche business.
>>729887714Go to a small claims court. You need to enforce your contact rights, it's not done by a magical fairy or the government, it's a civil matter between two parties, one of whom is you. Generally you will need to make a statement of claim and serve notice. Consult with Americans in your local jurisdiction (State) about the process involved.
>>729891112It's really really basic stuff champ. Don't project your learned helplessness on others, and better, have some self-respect.
>>729887630Yeah the other way to void a contract is to make a new superseding contract, which is common in ongoing business arrangements. But again, both parties have to agree to that: both the voiding of the old and the making of the new. Otherwise the contract still stands and performance is enforceable.
