Steam Refunds - A How To Guide

[4d]

Wow, that's staggering. Thanks for updating me. But what about EULAs being largely worthless as per EU law? Surely one can't legally waive away one's right to protection under the law?

Unfortunately, Steam have in fact updated their EULA to comply with DSR in the UK but also deny a refund. They do this by categorising their product as a service and getting you to accept (by checkbox) waiving your right to a seven day cooling off for a service. Basically, they inform you the contract is complete the moment the item is in your inventory.

So they manage to have a EULA that is compliant with our law and also prevents a mandatory refund under DSR service elements. From the OFT:

"Different rules apply to services where the consumer agrees
that the service starts before the usual cancellation period
expires. These are:
• where you have supplied the required durable information
before the service starts and the consumer agrees to the
service starting before the end of the usual cancellation
period, their cancellation rights will end when performance
of the service starts"

That said, I did try it on using DSR and they did capitulate, but were keen to point out they did not have to refund but had done it as a goodwill gesture.

Additionally, it's not yet been ruled upon in the UK that digital downloads are indeed a service anyway, they might not be, although they are clearly not tangible goods. However, there is a new bill being scrutinised that aims to end the ambiguity and add de facto protection.

If you're in the UK you don't need to bother with any of this. Familiarise yourself with Distance Selling Regulations, then point them out to Steam and demand a refund. They cannot legally say no if you are a UK customer - and they know this. I believe the rest of the EU has something similar as per a new EU-wide rule, but it's not so unambiguously stated.

[squicker]

Well, yes EULAs are largely worthless under EU law and mainly for the reason you say, you can't sign away your rights in a EULA. ACCEPT in this case where the law expressly allows it for a service, but not for 'goods'\tangibles. I think the reason this is allowed for a service is perhaps for things like BT connecting a phone line, or a new gas main being plumbed to your house, the suppliers would be well out of pocket if you turned around on day 6 and said, "cancel under DSR".

I was as surprised as you about this but Steam specifically define this, if you go check the EULA now you will see it in CAPS about EU law and the service starting as soon as the item in your inventory yada, 'please tick here'. etc.

But in this case, the EULA is compatible with the law IMO (I am not a lawyer of course), because the law allows for some form of 'durable' - the EULA - to present this information to you.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/busine ... oft913.pdf

As I say, I did get a refund but Steam specifically stated in their view they did not have to do that, it was a gesture. So they clearly did not want it to be seen as a precedent.

Edited to add the Steam EULA section which to me is the durable removing your right to cancel the service, as allowed by the DSR service section I posted up:

"IF YOU ARE AN EU SUBSCRIBER YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO WITHDRAW FROM A PURCHASE TRANSACTION FOR DIGITAL CONTENT WITHOUT CHARGE AND WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASON UNTIL DELIVERY OF SUCH CONTENT HAS STARTED OR PERFORMANCE OF THE SERVICE HAS COMMENCED. YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO WITHDRAW FROM A TRANSACTION OR OBTAIN A REFUND ONCE DELIVERY OF THE CONTENT HAS STARTED OR THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SERVICE HAS COMMENCED, AT WHICH POINT YOUR TRANSACTION IS FINAL. "

So it seems, that this section of the DSR then applies correctly:

"• where you have supplied the required durable information
before the service starts and the consumer agrees to the
service starting before the end of the usual cancellation
period, their cancellation rights will end when performance
of the service starts"

Wow, that's staggering. Thanks for updating me. But what about EULAs being largely worthless as per EU law? Surely one can't legally waive away one's right to protection under the law?

Unfortunately, Steam have in fact updated their EULA to comply with DSR in the UK but also deny a refund. They do this by categorising their product as a service and getting you to accept (by checkbox) waiving your right to a seven day cooling off for a service. Basically, they inform you the contract is complete the moment the item is in your inventory.

So they manage to have a EULA that is compliant with our law and also prevents a mandatory refund under DSR service elements. From the OFT:

"Different rules apply to services where the consumer agrees
that the service starts before the usual cancellation period
expires. These are:
• where you have supplied the required durable information
before the service starts and the consumer agrees to the
service starting before the end of the usual cancellation
period, their cancellation rights will end when performance
of the service starts"

That said, I did try it on using DSR and they did capitulate, but were keen to point out they did not have to refund but had done it as a goodwill gesture.

Additionally, it's not yet been ruled upon in the UK that digital downloads are indeed a service anyway, they might not be, although they are clearly not tangible goods. However, there is a new bill being scrutinised that aims to end the ambiguity and add de facto protection.

If you're in the UK you don't need to bother with any of this. Familiarise yourself with Distance Selling Regulations, then point them out to Steam and demand a refund. They cannot legally say no if you are a UK customer - and they know this. I believe the rest of the EU has something similar as per a new EU-wide rule, but it's not so unambiguously stated.

[dzhedzho]

If you are in EU and you never played the game, you should be able to "quite easily" convince them to give you a refund, as there is a law which compels them to, there isn't even a need to prove anything. (though most people obviously did play the game)

This is actually true of most non-US countries although Steam has only officially acknowledged the EU (presumably because that's the only place they've been sued over it so far?)

I'm in Canada and while there's no official ack from Steam, our laws say that a good (including a digital good) must be "Fit For Purpose" and "Conform To Contract" which essentially means... well, I'll just copy/paste this bit:

They must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality – in other words, not inherently faulty at the time of sale. It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible when goods do not conform to contract. A consumer is then able to request a repair or replacement.

If the goods are faulty, incorrectly described or not fit for purpose, then you are entitled to your money back – provided that you act quickly. You don’t have to accept a credit note.

As I said, most countries have a law along these lines and while I never like to make legal threats and try to be very low-key and polite when I feel I must, having the big stick is an important part of walking softly.

I think in the EU is more in line, you can return "any" unopened good in 2 weeks, or something of the type. The good does not need to be unfit, because you won't actually know if it is without opening it (that is different case) So basically, I can pick up a retail dvd of the game, and as long as I haven't opened it, I can return it.

I got Just Cause 2 refunded by steam really easy as the game wouldn't run on optimus system (like at all), and few other "vintage" games (which will remain unnamed) because they wouldn't run on win 8. The more known the problem is the easier you get refund.

And in case you didn't know you can really easy cancel your pre-orders, before the game is released...

Now on the other hand I never asked for refund for any of the disappointing games I bought, as it is all my fault I did not have the patience to wait for a review.

Though i must say that Origin is much more lenient than steam. If a title you pre-purchased really flops, they might even give you a discount on the next thing you buy...

[dzhedzho]

Wow, that's staggering. Thanks for updating me. But what about EULAs being largely worthless as per EU law? Surely one can't legally waive away one's right to protection under the law?

Unfortunately, Steam have in fact updated their EULA to comply with DSR in the UK but also deny a refund. They do this by categorising their product as a service and getting you to accept (by checkbox) waiving your right to a seven day cooling off for a service. Basically, they inform you the contract is complete the moment the item is in your inventory.

So they manage to have a EULA that is compliant with our law and also prevents a mandatory refund under DSR service elements. From the OFT:

"Different rules apply to services where the consumer agrees
that the service starts before the usual cancellation period
expires. These are:
• where you have supplied the required durable information
before the service starts and the consumer agrees to the
service starting before the end of the usual cancellation
period, their cancellation rights will end when performance
of the service starts"

That said, I did try it on using DSR and they did capitulate, but were keen to point out they did not have to refund but had done it as a goodwill gesture.

Additionally, it's not yet been ruled upon in the UK that digital downloads are indeed a service anyway, they might not be, although they are clearly not tangible goods. However, there is a new bill being scrutinised that aims to end the ambiguity and add de facto protection.

If you're in the UK you don't need to bother with any of this. Familiarise yourself with Distance Selling Regulations, then point them out to Steam and demand a refund. They cannot legally say no if you are a UK customer - and they know this. I believe the rest of the EU has something similar as per a new EU-wide rule, but it's not so unambiguously stated.

Yes you can't waive your right, any contract or clause which breaches the law is simply void. Otherwise every employer would ask to sign you a contract where you waive your rights.
And pretty sure selling something online will never pass a service in EU. You know why? Because services often have lower VAT, and the bureaucrats want their money as much as Steam does. And last time I checked, the higher VAT was charged...
Anyway even if it did " their cancellation rights will end when performance
of the service starts" - basically means first time you play the game...

[squicker]

Yes, the statement, "UNTIL DELIVERY OF SUCH CONTENT HAS STARTED OR PERFORMANCE OF THE SERVICE HAS COMMENCED", does strongly imply you have to first run the game to waive your right to service cancellation. I think that you can see even Steam hedge their bets; it's either content OR service, they don't specifically pin their hat on one peg.

And this is the problem, certainly in the UK, it's not cut and dried what it is, but it is definitely not goods. So in the UK a new digital content bill was tabled in June to protect our rights beyond doubt. Until then, I imagine if I were to take Steam to court for a refund under DSR, they would try to argue they offer a service, because that is the category that gives them the most leeway. That is not to say that they would win that argument of course.

VAT or no VAT, doesn't really matter. Tax does not define what something is, tax merely arises out of what something is. For example, I own several businesses, some sell services, we pay 20% VAT, same as everyone else.

And pretty sure selling something online will never pass a service in EU. You know why? Because services often have lower VAT, and the bureaucrats want their money as much as Steam does. And last time I checked, the higher VAT was charged...
Anyway even if it did " their cancellation rights will end when performance
of the service starts" - basically means first time you play the game...

[Artificer]

The trick is usually that while on paper you have all the legal rights, someone actually has to take them to court first to make them obey the law and how many people have the time and money to take a major corporation to court over $50?

[squicker]

The trick is usually that while on paper you have all the legal rights, someone actually has to take them to court first to make them obey the law and how many people have the time and money to take a major corporation to court over $50?

Yes, the law needs to be tested.

So in the UK we'd take Steam to the Small Claims, which is fast, simple and cheap, the fees are capped at a low level, specifically to prevent the scenario you describe, fear of the little man fighting a massive corp. I have done this for smallish cases and it was easy and fruitful.

Also, a lot of people (myself) have legal insurance with either our contents insurance for our houses or with credit cards. I have a premium Amex card and they have sued on my behalf twice. Actually, in both cases as soon as the suppliers realised they were fighting American Express they just pulled out and paid me what I asked for.

So it's not as hard as we might think, but I do agree that something very grey like the Steam EULA and how it relates to UK law would need testing in court.

[Artificer]

This is the reason it's so disappointing that Small Claims decisions carry almost no weight as precedent.

In order to set a precedent for something like this, the case has to be fully tried by a reasonably high court.... and companies deliberately fight to never have to face that challenge.

Do you know of what happened with The War Z? Steam offered refunds to everyone who had bought it, along with some delightful platitudes about how mistakes are made and the developers, who certainly weren't Valve, had done wrong, seems very nice of them.

In reality, the only reason they offered those refunds was to dodge culpability in a class-action suit that had formed over the game. As you know, a refund is always the seller's responsibility and the Steam Subscriber Agreement would certainly have come up in the case..... and they know that in the long run their reasoning will not hold up in courts anywhere. They are an end-point retailer selling a product... and so in order to retain the power their TOS gives them due to remaining uncontested they will do whatever it takes to keep it out of court. I have no doubt they'd have been willing to settle at a heavy loss in that case just to keep a trial from reaching a verdict.

Laws are changing to reflect the modern age, but oh-so-slowly and the big companies really can fight it tooth and nail.

[squicker]

Yes, absolutely agree. The last thing they would want is a precedent set opening the floodgates. Far better to lose the battle and win, or at least defer, the war.

This is the reason it's so disappointing that Small Claims decisions carry almost no weight as precedent.

In order to set a precedent for something like this, the case has to be fully tried by a reasonably high court.... and companies deliberately fight to never have to face that challenge.

Do you know of what happened with The War Z? Steam offered refunds to everyone who had bought it, along with some delightful platitudes about how mistakes are made and the developers, who certainly weren't Valve, had done wrong, seems very nice of them.

In reality, the only reason they offered those refunds was to dodge culpability in a class-action suit that had formed over the game. As you know, a refund is always the seller's responsibility and the Steam Subscriber Agreement would certainly have come up in the case..... and they know that in the long run their reasoning will not hold up in courts anywhere. They are an end-point retailer selling a product... and so in order to retain the power their TOS gives them due to remaining uncontested they will do whatever it takes to keep it out of court. I have no doubt they'd have been willing to settle at a heavy loss in that case just to keep a trial from reaching a verdict.

Laws are changing to reflect the modern age, but oh-so-slowly and the big companies really can fight it tooth and nail.

[cellsafemode]

Still waiting for any type of response from my steam support post from the 18th.

I got in on the pre-order and i'm Linux so definitely haven't downloaded any part of the game yet, much less played it.

[Dakota-]

I now realized that Gaming communities are the dumbest most entitled whiny little group of diaper wearing trolls on the face of this planet.

If you could be more of a troll, I think it would help your point.

[ncmohr]

I have tried to get a refund since the 16th. Sofar i have been asked to submit a msinfo32 report and alot of other stuff but to no avail, they are simply ignoring my question. Worst Things is that if you deal with EU you have an obligation to refund the Money if an item is bought over the internet and the claim is made within 7 days. But they are ignoring it completely. Guess sending it to the consumer counsel is the only way to stop them for behaving so badly.

Also i am sad that there are no alternative to Steam, if i buy at another site they usually end up sending me to steam at some point anyway.

[=VipeR=]

I got an answer from them today:

Code: Select all

Thank you for contacting Steam Support.

We cannot offer a refund for this transaction.

As with most software products, we do not offer refunds or exchanges for purchases made on our website or through the Steam Client. This includes, but is not limited to, games, Early Access Games, software, gifted or traded purchases, downloadable content, subscriptions, and in-game items/currency.

We will make an exception and refund titles that are still listed as available for Pre-Purchase on our website. The refund request must be received prior to the official release date for the item. You can see when a pre-purchased title is scheduled to officially unlock by viewing the green information bar on its store page.

This only applies to preorders purchased from your account; preordered titles received or sent through the Steam Trading system cannot be refunded. We do not offer refunds for Early Access Games.

Please review Section 3 of the Steam Subscriber Agreement for more information.
http://www.steampowered.com/index.php?area=subscriber_agreement

The fact that they don't even bother to point me to any troubleshooting guide or web page just proves that they know how bad the game is.

[Mauzi!]

As I posted in many other threads already, this here will help getting refunds:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/vi ... -of-Legacy

And this is the relevant quote:

Any fan of space simulations will find the UI in X Rebirth easy to use and much more intuitive, but the 'Trade, Fight, Build, Think' gameplay elements and interaction remain as deep as X game fans have come to expect.

Since none of the above is true to any extent and affects the very core functionality of the product, basically making it useless while Egosoft refused to allow neutral reviews of any type before release, everyone should be entitled to get a refund no matter how much they wish to refuse.

Hope this helps !

@OP: You might want to incorporate this information into the starting post.

[DaddyMonster]

As I posted in many other threads already, this here will help getting refunds:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/vi ... -of-Legacy

And this is the relevant quote:

Any fan of space simulations will find the UI in X Rebirth easy to use and much more intuitive, but the 'Trade, Fight, Build, Think' gameplay elements and interaction remain as deep as X game fans have come to expect.

Since none of the above is true to any extent and affects the very core functionality of the product, basically making it useless while Egosoft refused to allow neutral reviews of any type before release, everyone should be entitled to get a refund no matter how much they wish to refuse.

Hope this helps !

@OP: You might want to incorporate this information into the starting post.

I run a business selling to consumers who very occasionally ask for a refund for one reason or another. Can I just say that's the lamest refund argument I've ever heard and I've heard a few. But, hey, the mods are doing it too so it must be fine.

[omfgjohnnyisback]

I run a business selling to consumers who very occasionally ask for a refund for one reason or another. Can I just say that's the lamest refund argument I've ever heard and I've heard a few. But, hey, the mods are doing it too so it must be fine.

Any real advice you can provide?

[Mauzi!]

I run a business selling to consumers who very occasionally ask for a refund for one reason or another. Can I just say that's the lamest refund argument I've ever heard and I've heard a few. But, hey, the mods are doing it too so it must be fine.

Dunno where you live, but here in Europe you have to deliver what you promise, at least the very core functionality of the product. So, if you don't deliver at least the advertised key features, prepare yourself for a refund orgy. Also noteworthy: It is the customer who defines which of the advertised he considers to be key features for his needs, and not the developer - so you better don't advertise ANYthing that's wrong in Europe.

And since in Germany these rules are probably the most strict ones in all Europe, I am really wondering why Egosoft dared to pull this off.

No offence, but if you consider this lame, I dare to wonder if your business does make promises that don't get delivered as well...

[DaddyMonster]

I run a business selling to consumers who very occasionally ask for a refund for one reason or another. Can I just say that's the lamest refund argument I've ever heard and I've heard a few. But, hey, the mods are doing it too so it must be fine.

Dunno where you live, but here in Europe you have to deliver what you promise, at least the very core functionality of the product. So, if you don't deliver at least the advertised key features, prepare yourself for a refund orgy. Also noteworthy: It is the customer who defines which of the advertised he considers to be key features for his needs, and not the developer - so you better don't advertise ANYthing that's wrong in Europe.

And since in Germany these rules are probably the most strict ones in all Europe, I am really wondering why Egosoft dared to pull this off.

No offence, but if you consider this lame, I dare to wonder if your business does make promises that don't get delivered as well...

Yup, travel industry, trade between European countries. I'm not the service provider though so I get the full gambit of quality. Yeah, on reflection I don't know if it's fair really, I've had a few real chestnuts that probably beat yours:

- Had someone book a hotel and then turn up in a different country at a hotel with a similar name (not the same I note) demanding to be given a room / refund.

- Had a refund demand because it wasn't sunny.

- Another because the description described "big beds" and it was a queen not a king (In fairness, we suspected he was on the large side so that one wasn't actually too bad)

- Had one because the description said "well located" and they wanted to go somewhere out of town.

If you want some more I'll ask around the office. Anyway, this is all fairly OT.

[=VipeR=]

I paid what Steam asked for the game, 50€.

Were my 50€ flawed in any way? Were they not suitable for exchange of goods and services? Did they disappoint in any way? Did I advertise features that my 50€ failed to deliver?

I think NOT.

You can rebate all you want, but if a customer doesn't get the agreed goods or services then the provider should in good faith return the customers money otherwise its just stealing. Sorry for my bluntness but this hole thing is just frustrating, I much rather be playing a good X game instead of all this misery.

[zaslon9]

As I posted in many other threads already, this here will help getting refunds:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/vi ... -of-Legacy

And this is the relevant quote:

Any fan of space simulations will find the UI in X Rebirth easy to use and much more intuitive, but the 'Trade, Fight, Build, Think' gameplay elements and interaction remain as deep as X game fans have come to expect.

Since none of the above is true to any extent and affects the very core functionality of the product, basically making it useless while Egosoft refused to allow neutral reviews of any type before release, everyone should be entitled to get a refund no matter how much they wish to refuse.

Hope this helps !

@OP: You might want to incorporate this information into the starting post.

I run a business selling to consumers who very occasionally ask for a refund for one reason or another. Can I just say that's the lamest refund argument I've ever heard and I've heard a few. But, hey, the mods are doing it too so it must be fine.

I'll have to agree. Simply quoting that from that article is just stupid and won't get you anywhere. If you really want to use that claim (That the game isn't as advertised), you need a objective basis and a method to prove that. You need a legislative method, an accredited body to apply that method and prove your claims. You can't just go and say.. "look here, the UI is more unintuitive, it has less info and doesn't show my Rahanas on screen.. ", that's just a subjective opinion that probably doesn't weigh to much in a court. If you'd have clear proof of your statements (no UI, no ship, no planets, etc) then the level required to make an objective assessment of whether the game is as advertised or not would be much lower and would allow you to sustain those claims on basic logic.Since Egosoft has all elements advertised you can't do that, the problem is in their implementation and you'd need another claim to get a refund.
Or even better... Learn to not invest in something uncertain.


And most important: Learn to accept the consequences of your actions.
It will make you more responsible,capable and efficient and also save you a lot of pain.