Has compensation been offered? Yes.
Has it been accepted? No.
Why? When you don't accept the offer for compensation what is the end goal:
Is it extortion?
Is it seeking a more equitable solution?
Or is it to inflict more defamation on the "Seller" regardless of the compensation offered so that you can put the "Seller" out of business permanently?
Given the vigor with which the "Customer" and the "Brother" refuse to discuss receiving compensation I suspect there is no resolution available because their goal is not fair compensation.
Who else has had problems with Beastlymac and what were the resolution he had for those other errors and mistakes? There seems to be more evidence in the group buy threads for solutions being offered and accepted than endless back and forth discussions like this thread in the forums. Are we looking at 1 customer that can't accept a resolution or are we looking at a pattern?
----------
When an error is made and the "Seller" tries to rectify it and the "Customer" continually clouds and misrepresents the "Seller",(as documented here in this thread), and does not take the compensation at some point you have to take responsibility as a "Customer" to find the best solution and move on. In this case it is clear that the "Customer" is not acting in good faith given that the "Seller" is trying to make amends.
I think you're missing the point. None of this would've happened had the seller communicated with the buyer after the refund was requested. If you read the conversations from the beginning, you'll see several times the seller had ample opportunity to tell the seller that he wasn't getting a refund. Again, it wasn't until months later that the buyer was told this - he had no idea his order was placed with the manufacturer because his name wasn't on the public buy list. If you requested a refund a couple of days after you made order - then saw that your name wasn't on the buy list when it was published - what would you think? Exactly.
Nothing you said here is relevant in this situation - not even close.
The error came in the form of the seller not properly communicating with buyer - that's what this boils down to. But at least you see that an error was made by the seller.
Errors happen indeed. Point is,
why is the customer left to deal with a loss caused by an error made by the seller? And compensation for an order that the buyer was led to believe was cancelled days after he placed it... why would anyone except it? The buyer didn't want the device anymore, he cancelled it. He was
never told he wasn't getting a refund. Had he been told that in the beginning - he could've taken appropriate action, like selling his order.
Because of an error (failure to communicate) of the seller, the customer is left to accept a measly .05 for a device he originally paid 2.1 btc for. Yes, this is definitely trying to rectify the situation. Would you accept that when you could've sold your order for close to what you paid for it had you were told you weren't getting a refund? Of course you wouldn't.