Putting my lawyer hat on for a minute… even if that were the case (my address was up to date and I’d confirmed it with you twice already), sending one to an old address is still completion on your behalf.
From a practical perspective, what if the people you re-prioritised to didn’t respond? Then you’ve got an even bigger backlog because you’ve told 2 or 3 people that one phone is ready for them! Since you’ve had no stock for ~10 months, you’d be in a much better position if you’d spent that time chasing those people rather than re-prioritising orders willy nilly without notice (if ‘parity’ was really your major concern… I’ll assume good faith for now so that we don’t sidetrack).
Franky - I don’t think backend loading your refunds and deliveries is ever good practice because you end up with a large bucket of undelivered promises rather than a steady triage system that’s keeping up with the said promises. Todd’s clearly made some internal decisions here to try and keep his company afloat. I respect that you’re gotta do that as an entrepreneur. However, you can only trust people’s shifting promises for so long. Just like he’s made these calls internally, I’ve made my own judgment call about how long that piece of string is… I don’t think I need to justify having done so.
My point was mostly that shipping parity / having stock for new orders is a news that could likely reach at least some of those people who had changed their e-mail addresses or don’t look into their spam folder, who could then start to wonder what’s going on with their old orders and reach out. If even that doesn’t help, then there’s nothing else to do than to just send these orders to originally provided addresses.
So an update on this for you people unfortunate enough to have bought anything from this trash of a company.
After saying they will give me a refund when my turn came to ship the product, they are now REFUSING to refund my order.
Hello xxxxx,
Since your pre-order has reached the shipping queue, we can ship your
phone now, we are happy to provide you with the latest software as well,
which greatly improves the life and capabilities of the Librem 5. All
you have to do is to confirm your address.
We do not offer refunds as the original purchase funded R&D into PureOS
and is built into the phone offering.
Let me know if you have questions.
Kind regards,
João Azevedo
I hope anyone thinking of purchasing anything from this company takes the time to do some research so they know to avoid.
What’s funny is they literally admitted to using my payment for a specific product and said they spent it on something else and are now refusing to refund me after making me wait almost 3 years.
I may just call a lawyer because now this is quite obviously looking like some sort of variation of a ponzi scheme.
Thanks. This means your order got delayed multiple times by Purism, which means you’re entitled to a prompt (seven working day) refund according to the FTC. And even by Purism’s own policy you’re entitled to a refund, as their refund policy said this in Nov 19:
If, for any reason, you want to cancel your order before it was shipped, we will issue a full refund. Source
Maybe start by confronting them with that information and insist on your refund and see how they’ll react.
yeah it doesn’t matter. They don’t care. They just straight up lied to me and said that the return policy stated on their website was for “orders” but my order was a “pre-order” and was subject to crowdfunding policies.
I think that given the long shipping delays, that it is reasonable for Purism to require an address verification before they will ship the phone.
But not giving refunds on non-delivered credit card orders after the elapsed time prescribed by law has passed, puts Purism on the dark side from a legal perspective.
Based on how badly Purism violated our trust this time, I will likely be someone who objects the next time Purism tries to raise money via a new campaign. A third party Trustee needs to control the funds and issue refunds based on the law and the advertising promises. The way to prevent future abuses is to stop the same mistakes from being made again before the campaign reaches its financial goal pre-launch. Complaints to Attorneys General and possibly, private lawsuits can stop questionable fund raising practices before the abuse starts. The financial abuses that took place this time are ample evidence to prove the need for better financial oversight in the future.
Nah. Purism has made it clear (as at one point in time after the Librem 5 experience) that there won’t be a next time in terms of pre-order crowd-funding the development of a product. Instead, they will raise the funds on the debt market (if required), develop the product, announce the product, sell the product (i.e. the more traditional approach) - thereby avoiding all the negative issues with lengthy visible product development delay and also therefore purchasers changing their mind and requesting a refund.
That is what they appear to have done with the Librem 11 tablet and the Librem 16 laptop.
That is a big step forward. The problem with pre-orders is that there is not much of a contract and no way to enforce a contract. But if Purism incurs debt, then not paying the debt (conventional loans) as agreed has real life consequences. Crowd funding has its place. But even in crowd funding, there are supposed to be agreements that get kept. Fortunately, it appears that Purism might be moving past this phase as they are about to hit shipping parity.
hmm no it seems at this point there are multiple people not receiving any refunds at all, myself included. No feedback from the company, no response to emails, nothing. Doesn’t look good for anyone trying to get a refund.
That depends. I saw the post a while back about no longer crowd funding development of new products. That doesn’t preclude pre-ordering of products directly from Purism which they also appear to not be honoring refund requests for and have nothing to do with any crowdfunding campaign.
I think something like this for all orders would go a long way toward re-building confidence in that regard, though I wouldn’t say rebuilding trust, as I don’t see needing a third party to keep you honest as a sign of improved trustworthiness.
The paragraph I wrote above is just my interpretation of Purism’s actual post but it seemed as if the intention is to avoid pre-ordering. If they offer to sell a product, it has been developed and manufactured and is “in stock”. Shipment is within 10 business days. No grumpy customers.
Of course it is always possible that stock is exhausted and later orders get left unfulfilled, and we then get into unspecified delays to fulfill, but that wouldn’t be “pre-ordering” in my interpretation.
I guess the only real test of it will be when the e.g. Librem 11 tablet becomes available for sale. Will it be offered for sale before there is stock and before the lead time is 10 business days? We just have to wait and see.
I have suggested before that a compromise between pre-ordering and straight up available for sale is … a request for expressions of interest that reserves a place in the queue but either costs $0 or costs only a nominal amount.
I realized as time passed after my pre-order, that getting a refund from my credit card company, especially after a few years, probably wouldn’t be possible. But now with Purism not taking pre-orders, the boundaries are simple. Call your credit card company to find out what their rules are. Ask your credit card company (not Purism) for your refund after their required time passes and your product has not yet arrived. Why even bother to notify Purism in that case? They will figure it out when their merchant account with Visa/Mastercard goes negative and their bank demands immediate repayment. If Purism doesn’t pay immediately in that case, then they lose their capability to accept credit cards. That would be with Visa/Mastercard international. Switching banks wouldn’t help them to get a merchant account again. Too many people waited too long for that to work with Librem 5 pre-orders. But the Secret Service tends to investigate when merchant accounts get abused by the merchant and their accounts go negative.