RE: Introducing Strada Magazine

[CardinalFang]

Geofflove said:

Apologies for the unhelpful email that was sent via our subscription bureau yesterday.

As we loaded all of the Strada data into the system it generated the automatic message which everyone received. Hopefully you should now have received a second email to apologise and correct the information.

For everyone that has requested a refund this will be processed in the next few days now that we have all of the information loaded onto the system.

Thank you for your patience!

With best regards

Geoff Love
Publisher

Geoff, no worries. Appreciate you coming on here to explain what's happening. My comment above was intended to give people a heads up if they saw the "welcome" email - didn't mean it to come across as a whinge. Wish you luck in picking up some new subs & I'll certainly be giving Magneto a go.

Chs, CF

[acme]

Re the Strada refund, anyone else had it refunded to PayPal?

All rather odd as I never use PayPal.

Cheers

[s m]

acme said:

Re the Strada refund, anyone else had it refunded to PayPal?

All rather odd as I never use PayPal.

Cheers

Yes

[Mezzanine]

acme said:

Re the Strada refund, anyone else had it refunded to PayPal?

All rather odd as I never use PayPal.

Cheers

Yes, I have money into my PayPal too.

Many thanks to Geoff and the Hothouse team for sorting everything out, it’s much appreciated (from me at least).

Hope you pick up a fair few new subscribers from this

[Silenoz]

acme said:

Re the Strada refund, anyone else had it refunded to PayPal?

All rather odd as I never use PayPal.

Cheers

Yes, and as I don't use PayPal or have a PayPal account it's now "pending", so have another wait until they decide to release it. Not what I thought was promised and really frustrating. Is this another "mistake" Geoff?

[acme]

Thanks for the replies chaps.

Intrigued how they ‘found’ me as I never use it, guess the fact I clearly don’t know how it works proves this!

[Truckosaurus]

I suspect the new publisher only has email details not the original payment details.

Fire off the refunds as Paypal payments, hoping most people claim them. For those that complain, cancel the payment and print a cheque or ask what the card details are.

[CS Garth]

People moan about magazine not getting off ground.
People moan about no refund.
People moan about precise method of refund.

Help them to help you - it takes 5 mins of your time to set up a PayPal account.

If you can’t be arsed I’m sure Geoff will drop off a gilt edged cheque personally (no doubt people will be on here moaning about the car he turns up in).

No association to Geoff or the magazine -I just struggle with really needy types.

[Silenoz]

CS Garth said:

People moan about magazine not getting off ground.
People moan about no refund.
People moan about precise method of refund.

Help them to help you - it takes 5 mins of your time to set up a PayPal account.

If you can’t be arsed I’m sure Geoff will drop off a gilt edged cheque personally (no doubt people will be on here moaning about the car he turns up in).

No association to Geoff or the magazine -I just struggle with really needy types.

It's not "needy" to expect a proportional refund, or for that refund to be by the original payment method. It's basic law.

[CS Garth]

Silenoz said:

It's not "needy" to expect a proportional refund, or for that refund to be by the original payment method. It's basic law.

I’m sorry but that’s complete garbage. Any claim for a refund is against the original publisher, who assuming they have a modicum of common sense will have started the magazine out of separate company that will have now folded. That’s basic law

[Silenoz]

CS Garth said:

Silenoz said:

It's not "needy" to expect a proportional refund, or for that refund to be by the original payment method. It's basic law.

I’m sorry but that’s complete garbage. Any claim for a refund is against the original publisher, who assuming they have a modicum of common sense will have started the magazine out of separate company that will have now folded. That’s basic law

So what I said is correct - there is a right of refund. If Hothouse weren't getting involved then I'd have done a chargeback as I paid by credit card.

[CS Garth]

Silenoz said:

CS Garth said:

Silenoz said:

It's not "needy" to expect a proportional refund, or for that refund to be by the original payment method. It's basic law.

I’m sorry but that’s complete garbage. Any claim for a refund is against the original publisher, who assuming they have a modicum of common sense will have started the magazine out of separate company that will have now folded. That’s basic law

So what I said is correct - there is a right of refund. If Hothouse weren't getting involved then I'd have done a chargeback as I paid by credit card.

Not really as you claimed it was ‘basic law’ for the refund to come from the new publisher and to be via the original payment. Both of which are incorrect statements I’m afraid.

Right of refund? Probably correct but not watertight.
Expecting refund from new publisher to be via original payment method: Not unreasonable but no legal right.
Likelihood of receiving refund from original publisher: Low.
Doing it via a chargeback: I don’t think I have seen precedent for part performance chargeback so unsure but suspect possible.
What the new publisher might ever so slightly feel like saying to you for your request for £22.50 having stepped in to do the right thing: refer applicant to Arkell v Pressdram.

[darkyoung1000]

Thanks to the team at Magneto for resolving this - while the magazine isn't for me, I appreciate the fact that you have picked up the liability and issued refunds where requested.

All the best with future publications.

[Doofus]

darkyoung1000 said:

Thanks to the team at Magneto for resolving this - while the magazine isn't for me, I appreciate the fact that you have picked up the liability and issued refunds where requested.

All the best with future publications.

This is what's worth bearing in mind. It wasn't their liability to settle, but they stepped up. All of us who subscribed knew we were seed funding a start up, and if we didn't know that, then perhaps we shoupd have spent three minutes using some common sense. The people who created Strada took a risk, and so did those who subscribed.

I don't want my money back, for those reasons, and because the creators of Strada will have suffered more than I.

If, however, I had asked for my money back, I wouldn't be whinging about the method they used to repay it.

[simonrockman]

Silenoz said:

It's not "needy" to expect a proportional refund, or for that refund to be by the original payment method. It's basic law.

It might not be needy but it's certainly petty.

[cerb4.5lee]

It was never about the money for me, but the arrogance to switch you over to a completely different magazine without asking was totally out of order for me.

[Geofflove]

Hi all,

With regards to refunds, yes we did use Paypal to refund the outstanding subscription liabilities.

This was definitely not an error.

For data protection reasons we were not provided with financial details for any of the subscribers and this felt the most efficient route to repay the £22.50 remaining for UK subscribers. If you do not have a Paypal account then it is very simple to set one up to receive the money.

As others have pointed out, the liability for the outstanding subscribers lay with Eau Rouge not Hothouse Media but we stepped in to try and help an independent publisher whose business model had unfortunately failed and have tried to do the best we can for those subscribers wanting their money back.

For those that do not want their money repaid by Paypal then please refund the money in your Paypal account and email [e-mail] with your bank account details and a request for a bank transfer.

With best regards

Geoff - Publisher

[AngryPartsBloke]

Silenoz said:

CS Garth said:

Silenoz said:

It's not "needy" to expect a proportional refund, or for that refund to be by the original payment method. It's basic law.

I’m sorry but that’s complete garbage. Any claim for a refund is against the original publisher, who assuming they have a modicum of common sense will have started the magazine out of separate company that will have now folded. That’s basic law

So what I said is correct - there is a right of refund. If Hothouse weren't getting involved then I'd have done a chargeback as I paid by credit card.

Only on pistonheads could a company send someone some money, acting as a refund that they have no liability or obligation to pay, and someone still moaning about the manner it was paid.

[Gad-Westy]

AngryPartsBloke said:

Silenoz said:

CS Garth said:

Silenoz said:

It's not "needy" to expect a proportional refund, or for that refund to be by the original payment method. It's basic law.

I’m sorry but that’s complete garbage. Any claim for a refund is against the original publisher, who assuming they have a modicum of common sense will have started the magazine out of separate company that will have now folded. That’s basic law

So what I said is correct - there is a right of refund. If Hothouse weren't getting involved then I'd have done a chargeback as I paid by credit card.

Only on pistonheads could a company send someone some money, acting as a refund that they have no liability or obligation to pay, and someone still moaning about the manner it was paid.

That's not quite what's happened here is it? Maybe things are different from behind the scenes but since we're not privy to that this is what I see as a customer. I pay x amount to subscribe to Strada for 4x issues. Despite all but selling out, after issue 1, Strada folds and a deal is done behind the scenes for Hothouse (magneto) to take ownership of the subscriptions from Strada's publishers (or administrators). We as customers then get to hear about this for the first time with an email along the lines of 'sorry it turns out Strada didn't work out but here's a subscription to a totally different magazine instead, you're welcome.

Then what follows that is a lot of noise about subs having to transfer before refunds can be looked at, emails sent in error and then ultimately a refund sent to an account that for many doesn't yet exist. Would asking for account details first not have been possible or even an email explaining why it had been done that way?

I don't think anyone is particularly moaning about Strada's demise, it's a real shame but it happens. Nobody is moaning about being given the option to try Magneto either. The only complaints I've seen on here are they those who are somewhat annoyed at how the whole thing has been handled. If the first email regarding Strada's demise had simply offered the option of a refund or a 'but please consider instead swapping to this other enthusiast magazine', I'm sure many of us would have had far more sympathy. I don't think anyone is losing sleep over £20, simply the way the messaging has been delivered.

But despite all that, I still wish all of those involved well, I realise we're not dealing with large faceless corporations here, but well meaning individuals operating in a difficult sector.

Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 19th July 17:27

[hungry_hog]

I have no skin in the game, but assuming that people wanted Magneto and assuming people have Paypal seems to be two errors that could have been avoided.

Not everyone wants to be on Paypal. They may have valid reasons for not being on it, also as I recall the onboarding process for PP is quite tedious, it's not like opening a 'challenger' bank account which can be done in 10 mins on a smartphone.