RS would never ask an actual lawyer to confirm his silly opinion, because his delicate ego would be grievously wounded when the lawyer inevitably informed him that he's FOS. 
Actually it's HF who ignored the possibility of a BTC price spike when Anna (I think it's the correct name) promised full BTC refund.
If a customer actually believed HF was really ignoring the possibility of a BTC price spike, why would they be so foolish as to do business with HF regardless?
Sheer cupidity is the only plausible explanation; some people thought that by playing dumb/innocent they might reap a windfall at HF's expense.
The hypothetical "full BTC refund" scenario obviously assumes the USD price of BTC is equal at the times of purchase and refund.
Common sense and common law dictate actual refunds take fluctuations into account.
Sorry if this is all too complicated for your little pea brain, for which logic is a very hard thing.
Why don't you simply call a lawyer and have the assurance of their legal authority settle this contentious issue for you?
Is the hesitation due to your desire to avoid the cognitive dissonance of having to admit I was correct?