Are non-refundable magazine subscriptions legal?
Shady Bob
the declarations page of the magazine, and not on the subscription order
form legally binding? My wife renewed a subscription to a magazine (Orbit
satellite guide) which was transferred to us when another magazine (On Sat)
went under, and the new subscription does not take effect until August. We
found out yesterday that the channels we watch on 4dtv are leaving the air
in July, and 4dtv will disappear completely by the end of 2010, leaving us
with basically a full year of magazines we have no use for! We were never
aware of this policy until I asked to cancel and get a refund. They will
offer us a switch to another magazine for Direct TV, but we have no plans
on switching to that either. According to their email, we can transfer it
to another person too. I am located in Michigan, USA
Thanks in advance,
Bob S.
Barry Gold
>Are Non-refundable magazine subscriptions where the notice only appears in
>the declarations page of the magazine, and not on the subscription order
>form legally binding?
him because of actions taken somebody other than the publisher.]
I don't think it matters where the notice appears. A magazine
subscription is probably no different from any other contract for the
purchase of goods. And the general rule is, that having made the
contract you can't cancel it merely because your circumstances have
changed.
Now... some newspapers and magazines will allow you to cancel the
subscription at any time for any or no reason at all -- and they will
refund the unused portion (charging you for any that have already been
sent, which may arrive several weeks after the cancellation).
But that is a courtesy, just as a department store accepting returns
is a courtesy. Nobody is legally required to accept returns of
validly purchased merchandise (except when they advertise that they do,
or when the merchandise is defective). And newspapers and magazines
are not legally required to let you cancel your subscription.
That said, I think this decision by the magazine is a bad one. You
will probably complain to several friends and neighbors about it, not
to mention this forum which is read by several hundred (thousand?)
people. And some of those people will decide not to buy subscriptions
from that publisher, or give that publisher a lower mental "rating"
when choosing among competing magazines on a given subject. So it's
likely that their decision will cost them ten or more times as much as
they gained by keeping your money.
But the law doesn't require people to be smart. Only to comply with
the laws as written and developed over the years.
--
Barry Gold, webmaster:
Conchord: http://www.conchord.org
Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society, Inc.: http://www.lasfsinc.org
blog: http://goldslaw.livejournal.com/
A Michigan Attorney
> Are Non-refundable magazine subscriptions where the notice only appears in
> the declarations page of the magazine, and not on the subscription order
> form legally binding?
Your question presumes that magazine subscriptions are generally
refundable on demand. I don't believe that is true.
Refund policies, such as you see at most retail stores, are a matter
of the grace of the store (i.e., a contract right). In other words, I
am not aware of any applicable LAW which gives the buyer a general
right to change his mind after the sale. There are some laws that
apply in particular situations (such as some in-home sales
presentations), but I don't think there is one that covers magazine
subscriptions (unless the seller came to your home, in which case an
in-home sale law MIGHT apply).
> My wife renewed a subscription to a magazine (Orbit
> satellite guide) which was transferred to us when another magazine (On Sat)
> went under, and the new subscription does not take effect until August. We
> found out yesterday that the channels we watch on 4dtv are leaving the air
> in July, and 4dtv will disappear completely by the end of 2010, leaving us
> with basically a full year of magazines we have no use for! We were never
> aware of this policy until I asked to cancel and get a refund.
The fact that subsequent changes in the channel lineup will make the
magazine useless to you doesn't necessarily help you here. However,
if the demise of 4dtv makes the magazine useless TO EVERYONE, and the
seller of the magazine knew that 4dtv would disappear when it sold you
the subscription, then you have a "refund" right under the Michigan
Consumer Protection Act.
Keith
[ misc.legal.moderated ]:
If you paid by credit card dispute the charge with the bank. Otherwise a
all sales are final policy is totally legal as long as they have a notice
of the policy where you can read it.
--
Best Regards, Keith
http://home.comcast.net/~kilowattradio/
I'm Your Huckle Berry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfbAFgD2mLo
Robert Bonomi
Shady Bob <n...@work.com> wrote:
>Are Non-refundable magazine subscriptions where the notice only appears in
>the declarations page of the magazine, and not on the subscription order
>form legally binding?
Is a contract that requires both parties to perform for the full duration
of the contract period legally binding?
> My wife renewed a subscription to a magazine (Orbit
>satellite guide) which was transferred to us when another magazine (On Sat)
>went under, and the new subscription does not take effect until August.
_Until_ the already existing (and paid-for) subscription runs out, the term
of _that_ contract govern. When "On Sat" went under, the publisher offered
to substitute a different product to fulfill their liability to you. You
-apparently- "accepted" that offer of substitution, so the existing contract
remains in force -- with *only* a (mutually accepted) difference in product
being delivered.
*UNLESS* there is explicit language to the contrary in the existing contract,
"renewals" (actually a _new_ contract) are subject =only= to the "terms and
conditions" in effect _at_the_time_of_renewal_.
One *CRITICAL* piece of information that you have failed to provide -- wast
the subscription to "On Sat" refundable or non-refundable? Not what you had
believed to be the case, but 'what the fine print said' on the matter.
If the original subscription _was_ also documented as non-refundable, you
are, in all likelihood, SOL.
If that contract _was_ refundable, there is a chance, albeit a _slim_ one,
that you can cancel _under_those_ terms, and ask for repayment for _all_ the
'undelivered' issues (including those of the 'renewal').
> We
>found out yesterday that the channels we watch on 4dtv are leaving the air
>in July, and 4dtv will disappear completely by the end of 2010,
One of the risks of living in the real world _is_ that it _can_ change out
from under you, and commitments that you made on the assumption that things
would -not- change, turn out to less advantageous than when you entered into
them.
> leaving us
>with basically a full year of magazines we have no use for!
While I understand your frustration, stop for a minute, take a deep breath,
and consider the answer to a closely related question -- was *any* of this,
the *publisher's* fault?
> We were never
>aware of this policy until I asked to cancel and get a refund.
I'm sure you've heard the old saying about "ignorance of the law....".
The concept goes _double_ for contracts entered into where someone has failed
to check out all the details. <wry grin>
Letting someone out of a contract -- like a subscription -- "early", is 'good
customer relations' (and why _many_ publishers do it), but it is *not*
required by law.
> They will
>offer us a switch to another magazine for Direct TV, but we have no plans
>on switching to that either. According to their email, we can transfer it
>to another person too.
They are, to give 'credit where credit is due', attempting to be at least
'somewhat' accommodating. Admittedly, *NOT* to the degree that you think
is appropriate/indicated/desired.
Yes, they could "do better". But they are not -required- to. They have
apparently decided that the cost of 'giving refunds' is -not- worth the
time/effort/expense that it entails. That the occasional "unhappy (former)
customer)', like yourself, is _less_ of an expense than 'being a nice guy'.
That decision _is_ their prerogative. Your recourse is to keep that attitude
in mind, and not spend money with them in the future.
David Chesler
] On Apr 8, 5:32 pm, Shady Bob <n...@work.com> wrote:
]
] > Are Non-refundable magazine subscriptions where the notice only
appears in
] > the declarations page of the magazine, and not on the subscription
order
] > form legally binding?
]
] Your question presumes that magazine subscriptions are generally
] refundable on demand. I don't believe that is true.
Note that in 1997 I wrote here that I'd received a gift card from
Reader's Digest that a friend had purchased a gift subscription to
Reader's Digest for me, and then a little while later that she'd taken
it back, and I wondered how this could be. I thought that once she'd
given it to me it was mine, not hers, and the "it" was an entire year
of the magazine, not just the issues one at a time. The general
responses addressed the validity of the gift at all. On April 15,
1997, Valerie Whittier <vwhi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<5j1899$1...@panix.com>:
>
> The birthday gift is a better example, because presumably there is no
> question that you have aged (the motivation for the gift), so it removes
> excess issues of etiquette or law that might cloud the discussion.
>
> Generally, a gift in the legal sense has three elements:
>
> 1) Intent on the part of the donor
> 2) Delivery of the property to the recipient
> 3) Acceptance of the property by the recipient
>
> If these terms were met, then the donor would have relinquished
> control of the property and the gift would not be revokable. However,
> I suspect that your subscription will fail on points 1 and 2.....
>
> With regard to the first issue, you have not provided evidence in
> support. You were informed of the "gift" by Reader's Digest, not
> Xxxxx. Surely, this is not sufficient to assume that Xxxxx did in
> fact order and pay for the subscription and then cancel it. There
> are many possible scenarios in which this could be purely an error
> on the part of Reader's Digest.
>
> You provide no evidence that a subscription was in fact purchased.
> If not, it couldn't possibly have been delivered to you.
>
> >> What puzzles me is why this is even a question. Could you perhaps post
> >> why you think you might have any legal rights to continue receiving a
> >> subscription you never paid for?
>
> It took me a while to figure out what your issue was.... I was confused
> by the specific facts and my assumption that Xxxxx never really
> contracted with Reader's Digest for your benefit.
>
> > Subscriptions are usually atomic. I'm not suggesting that Xxxxx
>
> If you mean atomic in the software engineering sense, I would say that you
> are now assuming the answer to the real question that you are asking:
>
> Is a subscription ONE thing that is either delivered or not delivered? or
>
> Is a subscription a SERIES of things which must each be delivered?
>
> > was obligated to renew it, but that I, and not the donor, owned
> > the subscription.
>
> I think that the answer to your question depends entirely on the terms
> of the underlying subscription contract (if there is one). If you were
> given a contract that said that Xxxxx could terminate its benefits
> at any time, then I assume that he can.
--
- David Chesler <che...@post.harvard.edu>
New York's home, but it ain't mine no more
mm
>
> If you paid by credit card dispute the charge with the bank. Otherwise a
>all sales are final policy is totally legal as long as they have a notice
>of the policy where you can read it.
But if an all sales are final policy is totally legal, what is the
basis for disputing the charge via the credit card? Won't the credit
card company say the same thing? Shouldn't it? Won't it just waste a
lot of various people's time?
And Barry, I do think this forum is read by several hundred thousand
people. In the US and more abroad.
I would go to a family member or practical friend and give him a
chance to find a magazine he wants, a normal person who won't be
offended by getting a cast-off from you. From advice colums, I get
the impression there are a few people who wouldn't appreciate such an
offer, but I wonder if they would turn down free tickets to the Knicks
if you couldn't go.
--
Posters should say what U,S. state they live in. Why do
so many keep their state as secret as their own name?
Stuart A. Bronstein
> Keith <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> If you paid by credit card dispute the charge with the bank.
>> Otherwise a all sales are final policy is totally legal as long
>> as they have a notice of the policy where you can read it.
>
> But if an all sales are final policy is totally legal, what is
> the basis for disputing the charge via the credit card? Won't
> the credit card company say the same thing? Shouldn't it?
> Won't it just waste a lot of various people's time?
An "all sales are final" policy will not apply to sales of defective
goods if not sold "as is." Or if the vendor otherwise breaches the
contract in a way that substantially deprives the other party of the
benefit of his bargain (e.g. the company stops sending magazines),
that could also allow the purchaser to rescind and get restitution of
any unused funds.
Daniel R.Reitman
>Are Non-refundable magazine subscriptions where the notice only appears in
>the declarations page of the magazine, and not on the subscription order
>form legally binding? My wife renewed a subscription to a magazine (Orbit
>satellite guide) which was transferred to us when another magazine (On Sat)
>went under, and the new subscription does not take effect until August. We
>found out yesterday that the channels we watch on 4dtv are leaving the air
>in July, and 4dtv will disappear completely by the end of 2010, leaving us
>with basically a full year of magazines we have no use for! . . .
This strikes me as potentially a frustration of purpose situation, but
I doubt a lawyer would take this except as a class action.
Daniel Reitman
FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NO ATTORNEY CLIENT RELATIONSHIP
INTENDED.
Stuart A. Bronstein
In general non-refundable magazine subscriptions should be legal.
Otherwise it would be like saying you could buy, say, a bottle of
vitamins, take half and then return the rest to the store for a
refund.
Your case, though, is different. You purchased one magazine which
you will no longer be getting. Giving you a different magazine,
unless substantially similar, is a breach of contract that deprives
you of the benefit of your bargain. As such you have the right to
rescind and get a refund for any unused portion of the
subscription.
Mike
I'm not familiar with the specific magazine but apparently Orbit covers
Dish Network, 4dtv and C-Band (yes, there ARE still satellites using
those old 10-12' dishes.) So even though 4dtv will be going bye-bye, the
magazine itself will not. So the company is not saying "we will no
longer provide Orbit. Here's another magazine." Instead, the customer is
saying "we no longer will want Orbit, because our needs are changing."
Now there IS the matter of how Orbit will no longer be "a unique and
comprehensive programming guide exclusively for owners of a C-band, 4DTV
and DISH Network satellite systems" but will become something a bit
different so maybe there's some legal issue there.
But then again, the publisher of Orbit can say "hey, we STILL show the
line-up for 4dtv. See, here it is right between these dots: .. It's
not OUR fault if that line-up happens to be empty now."