SonyStyle.ca: the Retailer that lost a customer over an alarm clock

[tofugrunt]

Hi all,

I guess this is the best forum to share my experiences, so here I go... (sorry, it's a bit of a rant, but maybe it'll be entertaining as well...)

Often I really wonder whether retailers really care about their customers or not. Or whether the fact that just a single customer who has had a bad experience is insignificant. We see this all the time with large retailers not honouring their policies when convenient or just plain lying to customers in other situations. Granted that they have ever right to refuse, but in that situation, I suggest they update their policy language or remove the policy altogether (e.g. price matching -- since they find every reason not to honour it in the first place) and stop fooling the customers.

But alas, they think we're sheep and they think we're insignificant and that we'd only tell a handful of people. However, I'm not about to let their wishful thinking get in the way of telling this story. :D They can live in their own delusions if they want.

This is a story about http://images.redflagdeals.com/rfdimages/storelogos/sonystyle68x34.gif.

http://www.sonystyle.ca/common/images/products/ICFC763_md.jpg (http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/ProductDetailDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=172005)During the week of Aug. 7-11, 2006 I placed an order for Sony's ICFC763 (http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/ProductDetailDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&productId=172005) Alarm clock because they had a promotion for $49.99. In terms of alarm clocks, $100 was quite a hefty cost and $50 was much more reasonable -- although not a steal by any amount.

Anyhow, I made the order with my dad's account (because I didn't want to create yet another account) but paid w/ my credit card. Aside from the first name, all the details are the same between my dad's account and my billing information. The following week was uneventful in terms of the order and I was sent on a major firefighting mission so I never had time to follow up on this order. After all, there was no indication anything was wrong. And really, it's just a stupid alarm clock.

Here's the timeline of what happens next... with an explaination of why it was a problem later.

Aug. 7 - 11 (Ordered clock) Sometime this week, probably towards the end of it.
M. Aug. 14 - Phantom email that I never received got sent by SonyStyle.ca
M. Aug. 21 - SonyStyle calls my house and leaves a message; my first indication anything was wrong.
T. Aug. 22 - SonyStyle cancels my order.
T. Aug. 22 - I call the SonyStyle CSR who repeats a stupid policy and doesn't do anything for me.
T. Aug. 22 - I get an email informing me that my order is cancelled.
T. Aug. 22 - I send a complain email stating how their policy is bad and that I don't want the clock anymore except if it's free.
W. Aug. 23 - SonyStyle sends me an email restating their stupid policy and that my clock is being sent to me.
W. Aug. 23 - I respond to SonyStyle telling them not to send it unless it's free and making pointed remarks at the language in their email.
R. Aug. 24 - Since SonyStyle did not respond, I resend another e-mail cc'ing more emails including another one of mine.
R./F. Aug. 24/25 - I receive the clock (can't remember exactly which day now).
S. Aug. 26 - My credit card get's charged for it.
M. Aug. 28 - I still haven't gotten any response from SonyStyle. I will call/email them again today.

When I received the phone message at home, it was my first indication that anything was wrong with the order. I had never received the original email (indicated by the CSR's 1st email response). The voice message also made no indications that the order was to be cancelled the next day. Plus since they were only open 9 am to 8 pm EST, it made it impossible to call after 5 pm PST (when I got home and got the message) on the first day. It wasn't like they were going to get a call from me the next day before lunch because -- like most people -- we have to work during the day.

Talking to the CSR was useless. He was unwilling or unable to do anything for me. He couldn't reopen my order, he couldn't open a new order and honour the price and he wasn't handing the phone over to someone who could make that happen. He only offered to "inform" his supervisor of the problem later. Plus, he spent the majority of the time repeating the Sony Style policies of "verifying" a user before sending out the item.

Their "verification" consists of making sure the "account" name and the "credit card" name match... :confused:

Okay, now tell me if that makes sense at all. First of all, shouldn't they be more worried about whether the Credit Card information is correct? Secondly, in an account where you can change the name at ANY time, does this make any sense at all? Thirdly, there were no differences in address, phone number or anything else except the 1st name, why was this even a problem? And lastly, if this "policy" had such a strict requirement, why didn't the checkout process include some information about it? Either restrict what type of name you can put in for the credit card or indicate in BIG BOLD font how they're going to be a pain in the @$$ if you entered anything remotely differently even if that's how it is with you and your credit cards (e.g. if your legal name was something other than your "given" name...).

So normally, after I hung up you'd expect that writing "a formal complaint" would largely be ignored like all other retailers. I wrote an email to customersupport@sonystyle.ca indicating that it's a formal complaint and for them not to send it unless it was going to be free because I was no longer interested in buying the clock.

Evidently, they also don't read. Not only did they send it to me and charge me, they also insulted me.

Here's a snippet of the response:

Please be advised that our main form of communication is through e-mail. An e-mail was sent to you on August 14th, stating the name you provided on your Sony Style order did not match that of the cardholder's. We requested that you contact us either by e-mail or by phone within 5 business days to provide us with correct information. Our Sony Style representative conducted a courtesy call in order to provide you with information regarding the status of your order. Your failure to contact us within the 5 business days resulted in cancellation of your order. As an added courtesy, we usually wait an extra business day before we cancel any order, which we did in your case.
Courtesy call? Oh pulleezzz...! They make it sound like it's my own damn fault that I didn't receive their SINGLE email and that they really didn't need to call me or email me about the cancellation. It's a "courtesy" call/email. So now it's the customer's fault, because SonyStyle's email server was down during the hours it sent me a message. :mad: Oh yeah, and it's my failure too.

If you take a look at another pair of large retailers we love (and hate), they at least send you an email and a voice message on the very first day stating that 2 more emails will be sent over the next 5 business days before it gets cancelled. It's clearly stated. And they're available after 5 pm PST. In fact the last time I had to call them, it was probably 11 pm PST. No problem. Acceptable customer service there.

And conveniently, after that single email, they have failed to respond to any of my follow-up ones which re-iterate the fact that they should not send it if it's not free because it'll just cause me more work to return it -- plus it will make me more upset. I even resent it the next day as "courtesy", as they put it, and cc'ed the original customersupport email (instead of just the responding CSR) as well as one of my other emails just to see if there was a problem with outgoing mail with my provider. I received it on my other account already. Still no response.

So after sending me through this whole ordeal where I provide them valuable hints at how to improve their customer experience, they still want to charge me for a clock I'm not interested in anymore and send it to me to create a hassle. Am I wrong to be mad? :mad:

So I ask you, am I expecting too much? Or did SonyStyle really screw up here? Is it wrong for me to expect that level of customer service? In your opinion, for wasting so much of my time, should SonyStyle have done something about it? For crying out loud, this is the THIRD week into the order and I still haven't gotten this problem resolved. Would you buy from SonyStyle yourself if this was the sort of treatment you were subjected to? Should I buy from SonyStyle again in the future? Is this an acceptable response by SonyStyle?

I promised them in the second email that I'd post something up online and send them the link. Certainly I can't go back on my words right? It'll make me look bad and I wouldn't want that. :D

So please, post some responses. Let me know that you agree with me and that you'd take the same position under these circumstances. Post your opinions and definitely let us in on other Customer Service problems you've had. It'll be a chance to express your opinions -- maybe even someone from SonyStyle will read it (but it's doubtful since we know they can't read already...).

Certainly, this is the worst customer experience I've had. Oh yeah, and it was my first SonyStyle purchase as well. >:(

[gilboman]

you are expecting way too much, actually not even that. YOU ARE BEING UNREASONABLE.... sonystyle did nothing wrong.

[quicksilver7]

Their email back to you was not insulting. Its a common policy with many retailors.

[Dark]

you are expecting way too much, actually not even that. YOU ARE BEING UNREASONABLE.... sonystyle did nothing wrong.
I don't see how. The guy sent them NUMEROUS emails stating that he doesn't want the clock anymore unless free... Do they bother to READ? I won't be buying from that company anytime soon :mad:

[mbg]

I don't see how. The guy sent them NUMEROUS emails stating that he doesn't want the clock anymore unless free... Do they bother to READ? I won't be buying from that company anytime soon :mad:

You can't expect minimum-wage workers to be able to read. They probably only have a high school diploma, or an undergraduate degree.

[warpdrive]

To say you don't want the clock unless it was free is a stupid request.

Either you want it or not. Sony is not going to send you a free clock radio because you don't like their fraud policy.

[akito925]

Sony overerly priced.

[e-man]

I don't get it. Why are you still getting the clock if the order was cancelled? Did you re-place the order?

[akira1971]

Often I really wonder whether retailers really care about their customers or not.
...
Anyhow, I made the order with my dad's account (because I didn't want to create yet another account) but paid w/ my credit card.
...
if this "policy" had such a strict requirement, why didn't the checkout process include some information about it? Either restrict what type of name you can put in for the credit card or indicate in BIG BOLD font how they're going to be a pain in the @$$ if you entered anything remotely differently even if that's how it is with you and your credit cards.

SonyStyle Credit Card policy (http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/StaticView?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&contentpage=CustomerSupport%2FShoppingNOrdering%2F shopping_payment.html%23a1)

Is it safe?
Using only the most up-to-date and innovative technology, we have developed policies to help you fight credit card fraud. Orders placed over Sony Style are manually checked to ensure the data provided with the order matches the credit card account information filed with your financial institution. This helps us verify that another party is not misusing your credit card.
To ensure that your order is processed as efficiently as possible, take a moment to review the following:
...
The cardholder must be the one who places the order. An order cannot be placed on behalf of anyone else.

The policy is there in plain sight if you took your time to read it. Obviously, they do care about their customers by trying to prevent fraud, which you happen to be using someone else's private account to place an order.

Finally, if you had actually bothered to click on the Payment & Shipping policy (http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/StaticView?storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&contentpage=CustomerSupport/AboutSonyStyle/about_tc.html) that was clearly highlighted on the Checkout from your shopping cart, you would've read the following:

Sony reserves the right to refuse an order and/or reverse the payment or pre-authorization of the purchase price, without notice to the customer, if the information provided to Sony by the customer are inconsistent with information verified with the issuing bank or applicable credit agencies, or if Sony’s payment and shipping requirements are otherwise not met.

[gilboman]

this makes me more inclined to buy from sonystyle because they really do care about their customer's accounts and possible fraud activity instead of sending stuff out just because a credit card that can be charged is used

[i6s1]

This is the lamest complaint ever.

I think by the time you retire, you will have a personal boycott of every store on the planet.

[chatbox]

Dude, your complaint is rather lame. I, for one, am very pleased to know that Sony does check their shoppers' credit card information. That's a really good thing for everybody...except you. Due to the fact that you were lazy to open an account in the first place, you now complain about the consequences of your lazyness...WTF did you expect?

And yes, it IS YOUR FAILURE to open an account under your name that caused all of this to happen. It is no one else's fault but yours. Take some responsibility and stop blaming everyone else buy yourself.

[TenzoR]

so i wonder if the OP will send this thread to SonyStyle now ..

[tofugrunt]

Hi all,

There's actually less of an issue with the fact that Sony Style wanted to confirm that the card holder and the account holder were the same person. The issue all lies in their implementation. I haven't had a problem w/ Future Shop or Best Buy or Chapters or Amazon when they did credit card checks.

Sony's policy was "not clearly stated" as you claim. Do you really expect me to click through the entire site? It's not like I was ordering a computer or tv. Really. To tell me it's clearly stated in some small print somewhere in the site is the weak argument. I have already read the shipping policy before I decided to make the order a while back to see what the shipping prices are. It was not information that jumped out to me as important even if it was written down. Sure, if you're looking for those things right now, of course it's obvious. I already pointed out the problem. And if it was such a BIG DEAL, then why wasn't it inline in the checkout process? Also, for some people, their given and legal names are different -- how does this apply to them? They are not making a purchase in someone else's name.

For you critics, have you gone through the Futureshop checkout process? Do you have to click on anything [b]extra to know that (for example) your billing number must match the one used in your credit card? Or does the billing screen provide every detail you need to know to fill out the information? Do think that leads to more or less mistakes by customers?

Then to send out only 1 e-mail as a warning followed up by a "courtesy" call and cancellation was completely unacceptable. Critics citing those "cancellation" policies are being stupid. Every retailers has them. It's to cover their legal butt, but would you buy from them if they just cancel randomly on whims? I think you'd draw the line somewhere.

How would you feel if you ordered a hot deal on SonyStyle (assuming you really wanted it) and you made the minor mistake of not using the same account name -- hey, it was a small order, I didn't have a lot of time to place it that week, I didn't want to create yet another account that I had to manage and I didn't know about their "policy" (it happens) -- and they rejected it because you did not get an email. And then their CSR didn't honour the deal when you did manage to call in. Why did it take a lengthy e-mail for anything to get done -- and also for them to totally disregard the e-mail in the first place? And why does that become your failure?

When I sent the formal complaint, I did not ask them to reopen the order. I was complaining. I didn't want the alarm clock anymore. I told them it was a bad customer experience and that I wouldn't be buying from them anymore. I said that I wouldn't take it unless it was free precisely because I didn't want it anymore. My original response said NOTHING about re-opening the order or resending it. It only made that comment in a single sentence at the very end. If they were open to trying to solve the situation, they would have either sent it free or offered some sort of compensation for their mistake (of relying soley on a single email and then not allowing CSRs to re-open or resend the order). I certainly didn't expect anything least of all for them to reopen the order out of the blue like that.

They didn't read it. Even if I had said I didn't want it at all, they would have re-opened the order and sent it simply because I quoted the order number. This prompted the second response telling them to cancel it unless it was free. Because they had REOPENED the order. It's a response, not a request.

Also, as part of the credit card verification process (for anyone who's actually done it -- not for those who are spewing out of their @$$es), it involves asking for some information about the credit card itself and the order itself. Since I was only complaining to the CSR on the phone and the email was a formal complaint, I did none of that. I didn't trade a single shred of information. I didn't trade my billing address, my billing phone number, my name, nothing. Are you telling me also that they've decided to forego such a awesome and foolproof credit card "verification" check because someone complained in an email? Really. They can't even tell who it is since my email address has no resemblance to my name! Where is the weak argument now?

And please, let's not say what we expect CSR's with only high school diplomas to do. It's not even a question of that. It's a question of what you should expect from Retailers and the CSRs they hire. It's not your problem who they hire as CSRs, it's theirs. As a customer you only care about the service their collective team of CSRs can provide you. If all the retailers started using foreign CSR who don't understand english, are you going to be happy with that? Are you going to lower the bar because Retailers decide to do what they want? Don't be stupid.

It's not like I haven't bought anything online. It's not like I haven't ran into any problems before. It's just that the difference in the level of service between Sony Style and the rest of the field is astounding.

Thanks for your comments, anyhow -- even though some of them are rather short-sighted and others overly simple.

However, I would appreciate it if people who have actually bought from SonyStyle chime in here.

So far, most of these comments are targetted towards how if I was omniscient and read every single piece of text on their site that all this can be avoided -- but really, have any of you actually made purchases at SonyStyle? Or are you going by what experiences you've had at other online dealers? Of course this could have been avoided! -- starting w/ the first SonyStyle CSR. It was simple. Re-open the order. The customer called in. He didn't get the first email. Simple.

People make mistakes on the web, it's part of what UI and Interface Architecting is supposed to address. I can tell you that Sony Style's UI is error prone and unyieldly and that IA's I know would cringe if they saw it. (And this isn't just the checkout process. It's how the entire site was constructed.)

This is why web companies are touting the phrase "Customer Experience Innovation" these days (and yes, I've worked for one -- and yes I have worked on many "e-commerce" websites -- and yes, I've also seen the Sony infrastructure and how they've mandated that all their microsites leverage their existing CMS system -- and yes, I've also worked with Sony's horrible infrastructure as well -- so please, don't think I'm completely ignorant on these things).

Thanks.

[quicksilver7]

Well if you sent Sony an email of that length I probably wouldn't even read it if I worked there. WOW

[siriuskao]

Well if you sent Sony an email of that length I probably wouldn't even read it if I worked there. WOW

second that, lol, I didn't even both finishing the first post. I guess sonystyle needs to sell a few more TVs to make up the loss....... :lol:

[MrDisco]

coles notes version?

its funny, this past weekend there was an article about people using the net to complain and air their grievances.

[mlc2000]

This guy writes longer posts than I do ! :D :D

Sony lost a customer over a $50 clock?
Puhleeze.
You're exactly the kind of customer they don't want.
You'll be doing them a favour by not buying their products, especially when
yyou make this much noise.

[TenzoR]

made the minor mistake of not using the same account name

that's the cliff

[manixc]

Did they send the email to your dad's email and you didn't check or your dad deleted it?

Should've just make a new account for yourself. Takes like 1 minute.

[tofugrunt]

so i wonder if the OP will send this thread to SonyStyle now ..Yup. After it plays out.

Either people support my side and Sony Style decides it's worth their effort to make the minor changes required to "fix" their ordering workflow or people think it's fine and they'll bend over to and continue to accept Sony Style's poor customer experience (and may build up the confidence to put in other stupid policies that are brute force in approach that does not provide much coverage for the type of protection they're claiming to provide).

In the latter case it really wouldn't affect me anymore.

Did they send the email to your dad's email and you didn't check or your dad deleted it?

Should've just make a new account for yourself. Takes like 1 minute.That account used my e-mail. It was created for the purpose of registering my dad's sony camera which he traded through an airmiles (or other) plan -- through his insistence because he thought it was important for warranty purposes. He doesn't really check e-mail, so I put it under my e-mail. In effect, it's my account. My dad does not have access to that e-mail account. Do you think he would have deleted it? Do I have to explain everything or do you really think I'm a complete moron? At least humour me and provide a case that's less obvious.

There's also the potential problem of using same the same e-mail for two accounts and whether it might force me to use another e-mail to create a new account. I'm certain that in the latter case, it would take me well over 1 minute.

Have you heard of "hindsight is 20/20"? Really. You make it sound like I had every intention of making my own life difficult. It's like saying "if you knew that a lady in front of you would have wasted 30 minutes in a line-up, you should've bought 1 more hour for parking instead of getting a $54 ticket". Really. At the time it wasn't an issue. I figured if they had an issue, they'd CONTACT ME about it. Little did I know it was such a painfully stupid process...

----

However, it is interesting to note how most people who responded really don't care. I guess this is why retailers get away with what they do. Of course retailers only want the sheep -- the people who'll buy at full price w/o complaints. If I was a retailer, those are going to be my prime customers too. Wouldn't you? Yes, I assume this is a "lot of noise" for something so small -- but that is the question isn't it? Why is it so difficult to handle such a small order. If you're getting this much grievance over an alarm clock, would you order a TV from them? Don't tell me that just because your account and credit card name are the same that you won't get a verification check from them for a $1000 TV. And if you missed the email and weren't able to complete an order on a $500 off promotion, I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune then. Think about it.

Plus, if you follow the 1% rule, you'd realize that I'm not the only one who has had bad CSR dealings (http://www.redflagdeals.com/deals/main.php/ratings/sonystyleca) by far with Sony Style after a glitch.

Silly people. You've gotta think you know. Anyhow, please continue. (So far I haven't found any SonyStyle customers actually replying... just a lot of people with a lot of opinions. C'mon, I know you're out there...)

[TenzoR]

Their "verification" consists of making sure the "account" name and the "credit card" name match... :confused:


If the first "verification" doesn't even pan out why would they bother process anything else (e.g. credit card info, address, etc)

Hell if my brother was using my credit card on his account I would want to be notify or cancel without having me intervene. All his info would be nearly identical to me except first name.

Yup. After it plays out.

Either people support my side and Sony Style decides it's worth their effort to make the minor changes required to "fix" their ordering workflow or people think it's fine and they'll bend over to and continue to accept Sony Style's poor customer experience (and may build up the confidence to put in other stupid policies that are brute force in approach that does not provide much coverage for the type of protection they're claiming to provide).

In the latter case it really wouldn't affect me anymore.


I'm sure the workflow of their website is fine, I haven't heard anything bad about it. but I'm sure there are probably several UI problems here and there. The problem with UI is that it's impossible to satisfy everyone. SonyStyle may have lost you as a customer but in the end you'll still end up buying and using something of Sony whether you know it or not

[Sylvestre]

so you use someone else's creditcard (doesn't matter who it is, it's NOT yours) and you complain when the store wants you to verify it.

jeeze, I wish more stores were like that. I had to wait almost 3 months for visa to refund me when someone "used" my card in Alberta.

props to Sony!

[Siefer999]

Most companies require the names to match for the delivery name and the billing name. they put your item on hold if they dont match. thats normal.

the fact that they didnt bother reading your emails is stupid. i have the same problem with bestbuy EVEN though i keep my messages SHORT, SIMPLE, and CLEAR. they just send me a generic response and a copy of the user policy no matter what i write in my emails

[tofugrunt]

Really, I think people are missing the point.

If I was falsifying credit card information, I would have used the same account name as the credit card name (obviously). Thieves aren't that stupid so I don't see how that check is guarding against anything. It's what we call a "brute-force" check (kind of akin to stopping people from bringing water onboard a plane -- due diligence to gathered intelligence will find more terrorist than an advertised all-out global ban for the same effort overall; again terrorists aren't that stupid... well except the shoe bomber...).

If your brother was using your card, he'd be using his account. This means that Sony Style will be calling your brother, not you. He could fake your voice by altering it slightly and claim that he was you after being asked to get you. Certainly he'd know all the information you know -- especially if he copied down your credit card info. Tell me again how this is a strong argument?

By ordering workflow, I'm not talking about their website, but the entire order processing mechanism. So after you commit the order, what happens? We know now that Sony Style only sends out a single e-mail and I would like to see that changed to at least 3 if not also a phone call. Also, you say that you're "sure" the workflow is fine. Mind if I ask you if you've actually ordered anything from the Sony Style website then? If not, then you're just making an assumption aren't you?

If there was a problem, sending one e-mail out is unacceptable because one single e-mail can be easily lost. Futureshop sends out 3 and calls you immediately. That is acceptable. Sony style sends out one and doesn't call you. Basically Sony is doing the absolute bare minimal it can at providing customer service.

Is it acceptable for a credit card company to call you only once if they discovered you used your credit card locally and then 5 minutes later in a city 300 miles from there and not leave a message? Is it? Please answer this question because I'm very interested. Are you going to rely on just 1 email?

When I was ordering, I knew perfectly well that the two names did not match and that if there was a problem they would have contacted me. But they didn't. At least they didn't succeed.

Now I understand most of you are perfectly fine with bare minimal, but frankly that's your stance and not mine. And if they can't even handle ordering, I can forget about warranties or anything else of minor difficulty.

This may be a single issue, but it largely symbolizes an underlying corporate philosophy. However, ignorance is a bliss, so for those of you who are... please continue -- I will guarantee that your life will be much happier. Well at least until you get screwed over; but don't worry, you'll have my laughing support then.

[tofugrunt]

Most companies require the names to match for the delivery name and the billing name. they put your item on hold if they dont match. thats normal.

the fact that they didnt bother reading your emails is stupid. i have the same problem with bestbuy EVEN though i keep my messages SHORT, SIMPLE, and CLEAR. they just send me a generic response and a copy of the user policy no matter what i write in my emailsYes, I expected that, but I didn't expect such a drawn out process. I also didn't appreciate the CSR bashing the policy over my head several times when I made the call.

Yup, sucks. That's why I call the CSR if I get a chance. Usually I get a better response, but alas... not at Sony Style. I did it in reverse from you, but faired no better.

[rabbit]

The guy sent them NUMEROUS emails stating that he doesn't want the clock anymore unless free... Do they bother to READ?

Yeah, common problem with a lot of retailers.


The policy is there in plain sight if you took your time to read it.

And as is the case with a lot of end-user rants ... :).

[Nyte]

I only see one problem here. They cancelled his order, and then without further request, they reopened it and sent him the item, especially once it was cancelled and he said he didn't want it anymore.

[xenyz]

it's kind of funny: this thread complaining over a $50 item has already cost over $50 worth of time and energy. better keep the clock.

post the actual emails here if you want an unbiased response. reading your paraphrasing of them kind of gets annoying.

[EchoAngel911]

i like sony

[TenzoR]

i like sony

i hate sony so I never use their stuff

[supernerd]

Really, I think people are missing the point.

...snip...

Is it acceptable for a credit card company to call you only once if they discovered you used your credit card locally and then 5 minutes later in a city 300 miles from there and not leave a message? Is it? Please answer this question because I'm very interested. Are you going to rely on just 1 email?


I think you're missing the point.

In that little CC scenario you put up, the answer is "no": its not acceptable that they call you to ask first. They should stop the transaction first, then ask after. We're in a day and age where CC or ID fraud/theft is rampant. When it comes to detecting and preventing fraud, I'd much rather see companies err on the side of caution.

You complain as if they are trying to deceive you out of your purchase. Its a $50 clock. At that price, THEY WANT YOU TO BUY IT. However, they're willing to give up that sale if it means the prevention of CC fraud.

Now, the fact that they said the "cancelled" your order and then suddenly sent it out is stupid and messed up. But your request that they only ship it if its free is equally stupid, considering the situation arose because they are trying to detect and prevent fraud....

Lastly, HOW they try to prevent CC fraud is another issue. Yes, doing the so-called "brute-force" approach, where you blindly follow a set of rules seems dumb, but theres a "good" reason behind it -- it removes human decision-making from the equation. Humans are prone to mistakes and following the rules/policies/guidelines leaves less room for error. It also makes it easier to point fingers when something does go wrong. If you want to use your plane/water analogy... whats easier to implement? 1. "ban all liquids" or 2. "ban all 'exotic' liquids". (I'm not saying I agree with these methods... I'm just saying there's an understandable reasoning for it).

[wing0]

Holy crap...can you post something that's less than say.....5 sentences? :lol:

There's always going to be unsatisfied customers for any stores out there. You're just one of them...

[MilkyWind]

started boycotting sony a long time ago already because of other reasons.

also just to add, their quality in products and service has declined alot in the past 15 years.

[griffonman]

Please, please, please. If a million people are telling you that "you" are the problem, perhaps you should consider that "you" may be the problem. BTW, any correspondence with anyone, keep it SHORT, or lose their interest. Get some people skills too.... Good luck,

[vrus]

Please, please, please. If a million people are telling you that "you" are the problem, perhaps you should consider that "you" may be the problem. BTW, any correspondence with anyone, keep it SHORT, or lose their interest. Get some people skills too.... Good luck,

Welcome ! No need to bring up old topics :)

[rabbit]

The problem is that the sucker used his daddy's account with his own credit card. If he took the time to create his own account, would there still be the same problem?

The problem is that customers can't see out of their ass. Sure, Sony wasn't the greatest here, but the customer has to accept the responsibility for his own stupidity. Being pigheaded doesn't help a bad situation get any better, either.

[i6s1]

This thread sucked a year ago and it sucks now. Lock?