Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck33079
I completely understand where you're coming from on this. I think this is why people are having issues getting their refunds. I absolutely think GTM is having liquidity issues due to people backing out, sunk costs for R&D and equipment.
However, I completely disagree that charging a customer a fee to exit the group buy is in any shape, way or form acceptable. They made numerous references to being ready to ship in August or so. It's almost 2014. There's got to be a point where the fee doesn't apply. The contract is two-way. If the customer is in breach for backing out, GTM may also be in breach for not providing a product in a timely manner. Maybe the contract doesn't have a set date in it. I'm sure when the contract was written, they had no idea that in December nobody would have their kits.That doesn't mean that the contract can exist in perpetuity. At some point the customer must be able to get out at no charge if there is no reasonable expectation of having the other end of the contract fulfilled in a reasonable time frame.
|
I agree to some extent Chuck. They definitely could wave a 'restocking fee' (lol at the irony in this term) in order to save face and not have people giving negative feedback. Many businesses would, others don't, thats GTM's choice. It looks like Mike made some effort to help out by a) not charging the full 25% and b) offering to put the $ towards other parts.
If the poster (forgot the username, sorry) could post more detail and explain why he didn't just get exactly $475 worth of parts, then it would be easier to comment. Not knowing more detail it seems weird to right off the $475 instead of at least getting something out of it? Again, not attacking poster, just need more detail.
The initial reason that he had 'restocking fee' written into the contract is because he was using the 'layaway' setup to try to save some money. Correct me if I am wrong but no one who paid up front has been charged this fee, correct?