Last week, a promotion on Samsung’s online store circulated through websites and groups of offers: when using the SPECIAL300 coupon and opting for cash payment, the Galaxy Buds Live went from R$799 to R$119.10. The value was a bargain: the cordless phone is available for around R$ 450 at retail, much more than the price on sale. However, many people who bought had their orders canceled.
One of these cases was the client Lucas. He reports to the Techblog who placed the order and paid the ticket on August 3rd, Tuesday of last week. The payment was approved, and the online store said it was preparing the order. On Saturday (9), however, the order was cancelled. Lucas says he received no further explanation from the brand.
He only learned the reason in the promotion-sharing app Pelando: Other customers said that Samsung had reported that the coupon incorrectly doubled the discount.
“Samsung did not make any notes on their networks saying the error nor did they apologize. They’re just canceling,” says Lucca, in an email. “They didn’t contact me to give an explanation or tell me how I’m going to get my money back.”
The client Danilo had a similar case: to Techblog, he says that he made the purchase on the 3rd, with delivery scheduled for the 5th. As the product did not arrive on the scheduled day, he contacted customer service. An employee asked if he had not received an email.
After saying no, Danilo received a message explaining that the coupon discount had been incorrectly doubled and that the order would be cancelled.
The customer did not accept the situation, and another attendant said she would check what had happened. Days later, a third company representative informed that the order would be cancelled, without giving further explanation.
Consumer Carol also went through this situation. She and her boyfriend bought the headphones and paid via credit card, but had their orders cancelled. Carol tells the Techblog that, in the groups, many people showed that they had received the products and posted photos of the headphones with the invoice in the amount of R$ 119.10. “Apparently whoever paid and paid the day after the purchase received it.”
Three other consumers reported similar stories to these three, and more reports can be found in the Promobit and Pelando apps. In the website Complain here, many customers complained and had no response. At the time of order cancellation, however, the reasons alleged by the brand varied: many said that the delivery had been suspended without further explanation, and there were those who even said that Samsung was claiming a risk area for delivery as the reason for the cancellation.
What Samsung Says
Wanted by Techblog, Samsung issued the following positioning:
“Samsung informs that last week, a discount coupon in the amount of R$300 was enabled in our online store so that our consumers could purchase Galaxy Buds Live. However, by mistake this coupon was duplicated. The company regrets what happened and informs that it will cancel purchases made with this coupon and will refund or refund the amount paid. The company also reinforces that it will keep the R$300 voucher valid until August 15, so that the consumer can purchase Galaxy Buds Live in the online store. ”
What Consumer Law Experts Say
In conversation with the Techblog, Renata Abalém, president of the Consumer Law Commission of the Brazilian Bar Association – Goiás Section, says that Samsung is not obliged to deliver the products if it has made a mistake.
This understanding is shared by Bruno Boris, professor of law at Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie and specialist in consumer law. To the Techblog, he says that judges generally consider that products advertised at less than 50% of the original value are a gross error and therefore the supplier is not obligated to fulfill the offer. In this case, it is assumed that the customer is able to identify that the offered price is not consistent with the product.
As the coupon was advertised as a R$300 discount, the professor believes that the customer himself should realize that it was a mistake. He points out that Samsung has yet to meet the correct discount.
For Boris, the fact that some customers have received the product does not force Samsung to make all deliveries. He argues that, in many cases, the logistical process is too quick to reverse.
Abalém agrees, but says he finds it strange that products with such a huge discount have gone through so many stages of the sales and delivery process without anyone noticing.
The two remember that the legislation determines that reimbursement must be immediate. Boris, however, considers that the means of payment can make this process difficult. In cases of payment by card, the chargeback may only appear on the next invoice. Those who paid by boleto need to provide bank details to receive the deposit.
Right to information may have been hurt
Although they understand that the company does not need to cover the price of R$ 119.10 for Galaxy Buds Live, experts also consider that the way Samsung dealt with the error may have been inadequate. “Publish [um preço] wrong is normal, but the company has to provide an errata”, explains Boris.
Regarding the different information and the lack of explanations when canceling orders, Abalém says that the company may have violated consumer rules. “When she does this, she may have violated the right to information”, considers the expert. “Even if she got it wrong, the consumer doesn’t have to wait; he has to be informed of what happened.”
Because of this conduct, Abalém guides consumers to look for Procon so that he can evaluate the case. If the entity considers that the company violated the rules, it can apply the appropriate penalties.
It is worth remembering that Procon is an administrative and not a legal body; therefore, he can only supervise and impose fines, but cannot compel them to take action or collect damages.
The lawyer also says that it is possible to seek justice and sue Samsung, if the consumer feels aggrieved. In this case, the judge can determine an indemnity – the expert explains that the amount will probably be low, since this type of payment cannot generate enrichment.
Collaborated: Felipe Ventura