Zavvi threatening customers with legal action after Tearaway mix up

"You may have heard that a few weeks ago, UK-based retailer Zavvi had a small mess up at their warehouse. Instead of delivering customers their Tearaway preorder for £19.99, they instead sent the Tearaway / PS Vita bundle out. That item retails for around £149.99."

Read Full Story >>
-Foxtrot3824d ago (Edited 3824d ago )

It's there fault at the end of the day

Damn I wish I got in on this...imagine paying £19.99 for a PSV and a brand new game.

Zavvi are arseholes anyway, especialy in the steelbook bussiness, ever since HMV/Play.com went down and they managed to take over the steelbook market they think they can do whatever they want.

They showed an artwork on their site for example of the Man of Steel Steelbook when I got it I noticed it had "3D" slapped on the front yet the picture didn't show this on their site, I complained and complained and took me over a week and a half before they decided to knock money off my order and even then it was only £5.

zeal0us3824d ago

Zavvi must be a poor company to worry about an £129.99 lost.

Godmars2903824d ago (Edited 3824d ago )

Times the number of customers they sent them to.

So that could be 2000 X £129.99

zeal0us3824d ago (Edited 3824d ago )

Well I didn't look it that way. Guess it would be silly to send a notice just to one customer.

Well Zavvi would win if they took the customers to court according to the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000.

That states goods sent or delivered by mistake are not unsolicited goods, and remain the property of the sender.

On the other hand it might be bad for the company's image. Seem like they are in a lose-lose situation. Suing the customers might cause a backlash but not suing them would result in some financial loses.

In the U.S you can keep goods sent to you by accident unless the merchant ask for you to send it back. If that happens you would have to send it back.

nrvalleytime3823d ago

This makes me sick - it's really unfortunate. The customers should have gotten the right item initially, which is why the impetus is on companies to perform efficiently and effectively so these kind of situations are avoided.

However - anyone who receives the bundle shouldn't be treated that way. Customers should never have to face intimidation tactics like this one, just as companies shouldn't resort to empty threats that only further harm whatever good will they might still have.

Can't imagine Amazon ever treating someone like this.

JohnS13133823d ago

zeal0us - According to the FTC, in the US if someone sends you something you didn't ask for you can just keep it if you want. They can't do anything about it.


Dasteru3823d ago


You have that completely backwards.


"Inertia selling / unsolicited goods

It is an offence under the Regulations for a supplier to send unsolicited goods and then demand payment or threaten legal proceedings to get payment for the goods. The recipient of the goods may use, deal with or dispose as if they were an unconditional gift."

Not only would Zavvi very quickly loose any attempt to sue, they could be counter sued and even criminally charged for harassment and violations of this act.

Eonjay3823d ago


That is too damn bad. The customers are under no obligation to employ haste in returning the mistakenly mailed Vitas. They ordered Tearaway and the got Tearaway.


gaffyh3823d ago

Curry's sent me a laptop out a while back, it was DOA, sent it back and asked for (and got) a refund. A day later, they sent me a replacement laptop. Then a few hours later someone from the local store called and basically said "can we have our laptop back?" At this point, legally I could have just said no probably, but morally it is wrong to take something you should pay for. So I said, yeah, and the guy came up and collected the laptop.

At least in this instance, they came to my door and collected the laptop, so very little effort on my part. Zavvi should do the same.

darthv723823d ago

Uh oh.....they are getting "The Hut Group" involved. Jabba and the gang going to go all out with bounty hunters to track these consumers down.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3823d ago
PSjesus3823d ago

Didn't Walmart had a glitch last month and sold TVs for 19.99$ instead of 399 and 499,yet they know this their problem not the costumer

zeal0us3823d ago (Edited 3823d ago )

last month Walmart accidentally price a bunch of games for $19.99



PSjesus3823d ago (Edited 3823d ago )

last week TRU had a misprint ad buy two Pokemon Y each for 19.99$ and get 10$ GC,this happens alot esp in holidays season

nunley333823d ago

Yeah they did but none of the tv's were sent out as wal-mart said they weren't going to honor that mistake.

Goro3824d ago

I ordered Tearaway from Zavvi and i didn't get no Vita :(

DarkBlood3824d ago

lol well when did you order it?

DarkBlood3824d ago

well, im sure this mess up put a smile on peoples faces overseas, kudos to them

MestreRothN4G3823d ago

Dishonest people will keep their karma. I don't think their lenient conscience is a problem to them, but usually this comes back. Not from some astral scheme, but for their choices and by the people that accept to live near them.

Yet they swear they are honest and 'meh, it's no big deal'.

CursedHero3823d ago

Heh, perhaps they are the poor man's version of Breaking Bad characters. That karma certainly came back to Walter. Still, they should fire whomever caused the mix-up rather than threaten lawsuits @_@

Soldierone3823d ago (Edited 3823d ago )

Any customer that gets this threat has one simple solution. "I never received it." Done. Go to court for all they care, just stick to that. it was delivered with tracking? Hmm someone else must have took it, or you only got the game not the Vita too.

It's their mistake, its up to you to be a good Samaritan about it, but if they turn around and threaten you with a court case then screw being nice about it. Now if they kindly asked about it first, thats a different story.

And honestly anyone that does send it back, you should pull the "let me process this for up to 30 days" thing haha. Imagine turning the tables on them, "I'm sorry about your mistake, we will return the item but it may take me up to 30 days to fulfill your request. Thank you for your patience"

CursedHero3823d ago

Again, the company should fire the individual responsible, because she, he or they are responsible for the cluster of a claptrap. Still, interesting court strategy, Soldierone, let us know if it works, lol :-)

ZodTheRipper3823d ago

You must have a great job if you're not allowed to do mistakes there. How about returning an item that you didn't pay for? It sure is tempting to just keep it but it was a mistake and if you order by mistake you're also allowed to undo that.

CursedHero3823d ago

@Zod18: Why would people return something they "paid for"? I am not disagreeing with you. I marked your point as well-said, but I wonder IF humanity is capable? The origin of the problem was the company, which is why I said that. No mess up = No problem. Still, I like your argument, my friend ;-) Cheers!

SilentNegotiator3823d ago

No good. It'll be treated as theft and tracking info will be enough to get a warrant to search your home.

Better to just wait it out. If they take the next legal step, send them the Vita back. If the number of people wrongfully sent a Vita is really high, they probably won't be able to really go after everyone. If it's low, you'll probably get sued if you try to retain it.

rainslacker3823d ago

It's hard to imagine they'd take it to court. I'd imagine court and subpoena fees would cost more than the loss they take on the Vita. Granted I'm no expert on the legal system over there, but imagine court fees exist.

Unless they sold a huge butt load of these things, it's hard to imagine that the bad PR is worth the loss of the system. Bad PR spreads beyond the original customer. They could have owned up to it and spun it as a positive for themselves. Guess it's too late for that though.

SilentNegotiator3823d ago

Good point. There's a good chance that the legal fees/costs will outweigh the loss on a Vita (I'd imagine that they would have to be positive that all legal fees would be on the Vita-receiving party in order for it to be worth).

However, they might still choose to make an example out of some people in hope of scaring people into sending it back. It's probably best to avoid becoming the example, and stay low until/if, as I said, they take the next legal step.