Topic: Butterfly Labs Forced "On Hold For Refund" for all my Single SC orders - page 14. (Read 59172 times)

ok here's what I found so far and hope to help everybody understand what their rights as a consumer are:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=217036.new#new

drlukacs ty for your offer to moderate it for me you are an awesome person

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/2909-i-am-considering-selling-mr-three-500gh-boxes-sept-28th-2012-order-takers.html

Earlier in the thread the relevant section of the UCC (400.2-105) was produced that identifies a contract for goods that do not exist. The simple fact that BFL was selling goods that do not exist makes it a "sale of future goods" and that is precisely what a forward contract is.

(2) Goods must be both existing and identified before any interest in them can pass. Goods which are not both existing and identified are "future" goods. A purported present sale of future goods or of any interest therein operates as a contract to sell.

If they have signed a contract to do so, you most certainly can compel an entity to provide service to someone they don't want to.  The wants/needs of BFL do not enter into it. BFL needs to live up to their contract or make restitution for their breach. Also, BFL will probably end up paying for Xian's legal fees if they end up in court and lose.

@ Firefop

The only thing I can determine is that the stack of possible dangers BFL faces is getting larger with every [additional] week that this "situation" goes on.

Honestly, I don't see how they are going to extricate themselves from all the mishaps. It just keeps getting worse as time goes on.

----------------

I can't even begin to imagine how their luck has held out this long. I can't even imagine an exit strategy where the customers end up happy and still get their devices...in lets say a month. I have run the numbers (guesstimates) and I keep coming to the conclusion that unless BFL ships out thousands of units per day, they simply won't be able to fulfill the backlog in any reasonable time frame.

The only scenario that BFL can possibly win is:

A) They send out all orders immediately or within a month (not going to happen based on what I can see).

B) They somehow prevent anyone from complaining or seeking judgements against them. <-- Unlikely

I can't imagine a realistic scenario where this ends well.

---------------------

There is a rumor on the forum that the boards had the wrong mosfets installed on them and they can't be used or need to be modified. So there again, they lose even more time. Honestly, I don't see how they can pull out of the nose dive. All I do know is we need someone from BFL to ship so that the competition can lower their prices. That is in my best interests.

In court there are victims and in this I see a victim by BFL's inaction to deliver and the action to cause distress. BFL can not claim that they did not know the business. They have had over 2 years of business practice and should have understood they have made promises. To this day they take no responsibility and in turn create more problems intentionally. That to me is malice and should be considered along with any judgement.

The evidence is all here on the forums. Which he pays money to advertise. So he validates what is said here I assume.

I agree complete. Which was my entire point - both my scenario and the original one of X trying to sue BFL are inane and based on exactly the same reasoning.

Except there isn't a signed contract. Only an implied one in the sense that he delivered money up front and BFL would provide him with a product once they were created / produced. I would say legally, until they get to the point where they would have his order ready they can still back out of the deal.

The premise you put forth is untenable.

If BFL loses X number of customers cases and that drives them to bankruptcy, the affected Y number of customers cannot sue X number of customers because "BFL failed" or was bankrupted via litigation.

That isn't a possibility to start with. Y simply loses out and the only person to blame would be BFL, not anyone else.

Edit: I can only imagine considering the discussion going on, there are probably more than a few members getting legal advice. If it were zero that would indeed surprise me.

It would be (in my opinion) incredibly difficult to win as a defendant if you were BFL. As someone noted above, there are cogent points that would be difficult to navigate around in a court case.

In the same vein:

Lets assume that X's grounds for suit is valid in it's premise. (which imo it isn't).
Lets assume that X would win the suit.
Lets assume that BFL gets a judgement it can afford to pay.

So BFL pays X, his lawyer takes a good portion of it... everything is settled.

Now instead of assuming BFL pays him, lets look at what happens if they either honestly can't afford to pay him... or decide to use him as an excuse to roll up shop. Now they're declaring bankruptcy...

X gets paid some or all of his damages award and shortly afterwards all the other other pre-order customers who will never get a product file civil suits against X for depriving them of a working product which BFL would have been able to provide eventually if he hadn't put them out of business. Does X's previous award cover the potential damages from nobody else getting the product?

That's why this whole thing is based on a false premise.

There wasn't a forward contract for the simple reason that there isn't anything in the pre-order paperwork that specifies it as a forward contract. Modifications to a 'standard' must be specified. In this case they weren't. The standard repudiation for any sort of failed sales contract (except forward contract) is a return of the purchased item combined with a refund  of the purchase price (for a very good reason). You cannot legally compel an entity to provide a good or service to customer who they don't want to provide that good or service to.

Now if his place in line had been moved down... and that had led to his asshattery and refund that might be a different story, in this example he would be able to recover damages from them moving his place in line... but still not from the refund.

They made sure to imply it would be extremely unlikely for the date to change. Read their own words:

http://www.butterflylabs.com/bitforce-sc-release-notes/


Even as late as mid October, they were claiming they would ship in October.

I agree with this assessment.

Initially, I believed that BFL had a right to refuse service. After consideration (and something passing for discussion in this thread), I now believe that BFL must make restitution for breach of contract.

BFL may refuse to sell Xian further goods (beyond what Xian already paid for), but BFL cannot repudiate the contract of sale. In fact, doing so to retaliate Xian for speaking his mind publicly could arguably be grounds for punitive damages.

Just because BFL no longer likes the face of Xian does not exempt BFL from the legal obligation to perform and deliver.

wow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8vwuwibQ_tQ#t=380s

@drlukacs

Nottm28's take on the subject revolves around the right to refuse service by a retail establishment and that Xian was complaining about BFL on public forums.

Here are his relevant posts on the subject:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2271285
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2270639
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2266057

After thinking about it for a bit, I don't think a business can force a refund on you after your purchase without incurring some sort of liability.


Fair enough. I was not casting aspersions. I just noted that the conversation had moved forward since your last post.

I would have nothing to lose if I were you.

Just call the authorities and get this company shut down (they gotta be doing something illegal) after all if you can't have it why should anyone else. I cancelled my orders so no sweat off my brow.

Get the law involved if you want. Up to you. You're just an asshole to Josh remember?

I believe he is in breach of contract and pain and suffering has been endured. As long as you don't provide a paypal information you have them stuck in breach and possibly able to sue.

Call a lawyer! Tell him all about it.

Time for me to retire - I have said my piece. I do hope xian learns something from this (and refrains from telling people to FO - that might help).

Yes I sleep and have a life. Speed read the posts and found little of interest.

Is it not sad that BFL has to induce fear in the pre-order customers? To actually pursued them from cancelling their orders!

Now why would BFL cancel an order that has been waiting for so long? Now this is speculation on my part, however it does require you to think that if cancelled they could make more money on new orders at the slightly elevated cost. Now that would be disturbing to me at least if that was true. BFL would never do that.

Plus examining 49 pages of this particular thread could cause blindness, nausea, vomiting, liver damage, and a diminished outlook on humanity. Did I mention the uncontrollable flatulence?

Nottm28 left the thread for a time and missed the discussion on contract law. I would recommend that he read a few pages, but I wouldn't wish that on another human being.