To paraphrase the Batteroo Terms and Conditions:
We do not give refunds just because Batteroo sleeves don't meet the claims we made for them
Apart from showing a contempt for their customers, they must surely be skating on thin ice from a consumer protection/ legal standpoint.
Since they don't provide a comprehensive list of products for which the sleeves fit and bring a performance benefit to, they are effectively transferring all the risk onto the purchaser. It is not good enough to say
Don’t worry, for every compartment where the Batteroo Boost does not fit, there will be others where it will fit fine.
because most purchasers will have a particular device in mind. I.e. Batteroo are selling something which they acknowledge is potentially useless and then pulling the shutters down when the customer returns.
I think it reasonable that retailers are not obliged to offer refunds if the customer purchases an incompatible product, as long as the retailer provided an accurate specification and did not misrepresent the product i.e. it was correctly sold but the purchaser made the mistake. However, with Batteroo, it is impossible for the purchaser to assess the compatibility of the sleeves until after purchase so, in their case, I find it hard to believe that they are not legally obliged to offer refunds.
It is not good enough to say Don’t worry, for every compartment where the Batteroo Boost does not fit, there will be others where it will fit fine.
because most purchasers will have a particular device in mind. I.e. Batteroo are selling something which they acknowledge is potentially useless and then pulling the shutters down when the customer returns.
I wonder why they write this now on their website? Maybe 99% of all customers already sent it back?
Apart from showing a contempt for their customers, they must surely be skating on thin ice from a consumer protection/ legal standpoint.
Since they don't provide a comprehensive list of products for which the sleeves fit and bring a performance benefit to, they are effectively transferring all the risk onto the purchaser.
Awww.... How quaint!
Once again here we apparently have someone posting from outside North America where the diktat is US-driven
caveat emptor, seemingly with the entire force of government squarely behind the commercial, corporate strategy of repealing or simply ignoring any kind of consumer protection (or really any other kind of) regulation that might possibly stifle the profit taking... Including pressure for all "
good" neighbors to follow suit!
I don't think some of you folks in other parts of the world have even begun to realize just how deep this systemic wankery goes. It is absolutely breathtaking to behold up close!! Even from outside the US proper, the stench is ghastly...
This Batteroo-style hypocrisy is the norm in these circles.
I first learned of the
Batteriser from a
newsveritzement "story" on
MY LOCAL NEWS!! FFS!!This kind of outright duplicity has to stop!!
I think the EEVBlog could be considered complicit in Batteroo's guarantee sidestep.
Batteroo could point the finger here and claim the potential shortcomings have been well documented - and that if customers had performed any sort of "due diligence" before purchase, they would have come across this information.
That's crap, I know, but I wouldn't put it past them - even though that would be perhaps the most hypocritical act I could imagine.
On the hypothesis that those mouths will say whatever the highest bidder wants them to... I suppose if anyone really wants to and has the $$, they could have a bit of fun with making anti-Batteroo posts show up on those exact same sites.
Anything even remotely critical or negative in any way will just be deleted...
No, you misunderstand. I meant that these spam-bloggers will write an article about anything if you pay them enough.
I'm fairly sure that in a few jurisdictions it's illegal to not allow refunds and only replacements on a faulty product. But seeing that their T&Cs seem to be cut & pasted from a few different sources and have not been proof read, wouldn't surprise me if they had no idea about this.
It's fairly obvious that they just grabbed some random text and did a search and replace for the company name, as it's usually around the name where the typos are:
http://imgur.com/a/5cbWO
Latest fodder for the autoresponder ...
Unless I've suddenly gotten confused (wouldn't be a surprise), several deleted complaints have reappeared on the IGG site. I wonder if someone complained to IGG who then cancelled the deletes.
Fun fun fun.
and
More comments and more problems with the sleeves
Even if it's not shorted, I bet all sorts of switching feedbacks and stuffs are causing issue. And then we have the current consumption which is ginormous no doubt. Finally a product that "works"!
Been wondering if any product out there can make the batterpoo combust into a nice firework... Though I doubt he's going to trust them anymore, test a piss-poor cheap (well not really) scam sleeve and lose your many many order of magnitude more expensive gadget! No one in their sane mind would do that (well... save for a certain distributor somewhere in Aussie
)
I have a funny feeling that IGG might have given them a rap on the knuckles for the 'automated' responses they were putting out, as it seems ol' Bob is actually _reading_ the comments and responding to them. Unsurprisingly neither of the tracking numbers he's provided actually work though:
LB504115617SE
LB504149125SE
Funny stuff on the parcel to Belgium :
- VAT, customs, fees were €36,
- it was returned to sender because the street was missing from the address.
Oh, you sweet summer child, that's another one of Bob's genuine mistakes.
They appear to have used Direct Link out of Sweden - isn't that the shipping used by Dave (unintentionally) for his rulers, which caused significant delays?
They appear to have used Direct Link out of Sweden - isn't that the shipping used by Dave (unintentionally) for his rulers, which caused significant delays?
Yep, same one.
They are notoriously bad.
They appear to have used Direct Link out of Sweden - isn't that the shipping used by Dave (unintentionally) for his rulers, which caused significant delays?
Yep, same one.
They are notoriously bad.
Fits in perfectly with the subject matter then
Yet their part of the deal, transferring it to Belgium, only took a week. And during the Christmas rush if I may add (14/12->21/12).
Another comment for the record
New Video upload from batteroo
Nice company. No money to hire someone to answer the support eMails or for a decent refund policy, but no problem to produce new videos.
New Video upload from batteroo
It is just a copy of one they posted a week ago (and bought 50k views for).
I just noticed Frankie was a guest speaker at Santa Clara University's School of Engineering "Lunch with an Entrepreneur" last month.
His current venture is a device that has the potential to extend the life of disposable batteries by up to 8x their normal range. As an upstart in this $15 billion market, his company has been the target of online smear campaigns and industrial espionage, but Roohhparvar relishes the challenges, knowing they reap great rewards. “Even in the darkest moments,” he said, “I know that once I get around the problem, I’ll get a lot of experience from it.
Better he had spoken at the school of psychology "Lunch with a con man" or "Delusion and me" events.
Wonder if any of the students attending there are members of this forum. I don't want to dox anybody, but it would be kind of awkward for Rooh if he got asked some pointy questions.
Amusing for us, though.