Sony's no stranger to Watchdog, the BBC consumer awareness show that's been running in the UK for over 30 years. One legendary report saw the PlayStation 3 taken to task following the yellow light of death scandal, but it's the PlayStation Network that will be subject to an Anne Robinson-fronted grilling in tonight's episode.
The story will focus on the organisation's reluctance to refund a digital purchase made after a user's account was purportedly stolen. The Japanese giant's stance on digital refunds is such: you can't have one unless the content in question is defective. However, where fraudulent transactions are concerned, many organisations bend the rules. SCEE is, apparently, not one of them.
As summarised on NeoGAF, PlayStation 4 owner John Lappin noticed that he'd been charged £39.99 for a PS3 title – despite never owning one. This, obviously, gave him proof that the transaction had been made by someone else – and following an investigation, the platform holder agreed. However, it refused to offer a refund, as per the details outlined in its Terms of Service.
This prompted a back-and-forth between the manufacturer and Lappin, in which the organisation essentially admitted that the transaction was likely made fraudulently, but because this couldn't be proved conclusively, he was refused a refund. He eventually contacted the BBC, prompting the Watchdog investigation that's set to be aired tonight. And he's now got his refund.
It's a bit of a black eye for the platform holder, which has had to front up some pretty negative headlines of late. Sony's yet to comment on the report officially, but we're sure that it will make a statement as part of tonight's programme, pointing out that Lappin did, eventually, get his money back. Not everyone's going to have the help of a TV investigation, though, eh?
[source neogaf.com, via eurogamer.net, rllmukforum.com]
Comments 6
I've heard many stories similar to this that have been similar if not worse.
There was one notable occasion when a PS4 owner had his credit card cancel a legitimately fraudulent transaction, as you would, only to then have Sony block his account and stop him from accessing anything online (including I assume his digital games) unless he paid them for the game. The game he didn't buy himself anyway/
This is just absolutely stupid, people held liable for acts that credit companies have confirmed has fraud. I'd expect this from the still relatively inexperienced digitally Nintendo more so than Sony who should have a pretty reasonable code of conduct when it comes to fraud because it's a growing problem. Heard on the radio yesterday numbers in 2015 are 30% up on comparable numbers in 2014 so situations like this are only going to become more common
Another reason I'm hesitant to go digital in the end, even if I don't have much choice when it comes to fraud...
@Jonny what is a legitimately fraudulent transaction?
@Flurpsel It sounded smarter in my head
I wonder what contains more plastic? The PS4 or Anne Robinson Face
As far as their T&Cs are concerned they do not have to refund at all.
And as a user of the PSN this chap would (read: should) have read the end user agreement prior to accepting.
Regardless of whether or not you agree is moot, it doesnt change what is.
However, I am certainly one to argue, that since his account was used fraudulantly, if only from a moral standpoint, the company should refund him in some way.
@ToOGoodOfAPlaya You say he would/should have read and agreed to the Ts and Cs but... whether he did or not makes no difference when the issue isn't even his fault. He did absolutely nothing wrong here yet he got punished for being a victim of fraud. It's completely backwards. I know this sounds like an extreme example but it's like these places where if a girl is raped, the girl is punished instead of the rapist...
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...