Quote from: ImI on March 15, 2014, 10:00:58 PM

Quote from: Syke on March 15, 2014, 09:56:01 PM

Quote from: ImI on March 15, 2014, 09:48:14 PM

Yes, i hope you are right and as HF stated explicit BTC-refunds i think you got a chance there.

I see a gap in lawmaking more as a general problem when it comes to mining and late deliveries, cause in a traditional customer protection way of thinking there is nothing wrong with not delivering and offering a refund after 6 months. And this fits perfectly to maybe a purchase of a BMW or whatever but it doesnt fit the purchase of a Bitcoin-miner. And thats where i see a gap in lawmaking.

Deals denominated in something other than fiat currency are not new. I think the law is just fine. For example, a judge ordered CoinLab to deliver bitcoins to Bitvestment, and not some USD-equivilent.

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2013/11/07/judge-orders-coinlab-to-pay-up-in-bitcoin/

Yes, i think we have to distinguish here between orders placed with Bitcoin and orders placed with US$.

Orders placed in BTC have a chance imo to get their BTCs back, but whats the situation for those that paid in US$?

They are of course offered a US$ refund but as i already stated thats a situation very close to fraud, cause they basically are able to choose what suits them best. Like a BTC-call-option.

Had Hashfast just accepted BTC as a form of payment like many vendors out there, yes you should not expect full refund in BTC. However, HashFast team had been advertising and giving ppl a sale agreement that they WOULD refund the full BTC amount if they couldnt deliver the products.

Its clearly the contract that they now refused to abide.