|
On September 14 2012 04:05 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 04:02 scypio wrote:On September 14 2012 03:58 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 14 2012 03:56 scypio wrote:On September 14 2012 03:54 bonifaceviii wrote:
And what is the verbally-agreed-upon method of compensation should MoW terminate the full months' inclusive stay?
Don't answer that, by the way, because it's obvious there wasn't one. He had a month to read into the house rules to find it out. It's not like it fell out of the blue sky, eh? "Read into"? What does that even mean? I meant "read through". So you don't disagree that Fuzer agreed to pay rent, and then would have had to sign the contract in order to consent to forfeiting his rent in the case of him getting kicked out?
I think you got it wrong. Maybe he would have to had to sign the contract in order to be entitled to get his money back in the case of him getting kicked out. Otherwise he had no grounds to get his money back, other than verbal agreement.
|
starting to feel bad for everyone living in that house having to deal with such unprofessionalism from the people who own the house, while being in the house in the same time as all this is going on. really disappointing stuff, looked so promising
|
You guys need to open your eyes and realize that this text was written by a lawyer and then they gathered the pictures of kittens. They're trying to clear their names in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of all who are interested in esports.
Not fool me.
|
On September 14 2012 03:48 eight.BiT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 03:28 Veriol wrote:
Rofl this hate against MoW ur all blind or what.
Fuzer goes to poland
1) He doesnt read contract
2) He pays 1200$ without asking for receipt or anything.
3) Then lives in house OVER a month. Wihtout sining contract.
4) They ask him to sing or it leave and he makes TL drama and everyone starts hating on mow?
What im i missing please. Did you read anything in the two seperate threads on the subject besides the first few posts? 1) Non-native English speaker receives contract and reads it well enough to decide on his own that most of the contract is bullshit. Upon realizing this MoW revised the contract as request by Fuzer, which then Fuzer requested to be viewed by a lawyer for approval - which anyone SHOULD DO instead of blindly signing. This is his job, he's not just going there to play around and waste time. 2) Instead of letting Fuzer get the contract to a lawyer to look at, MoW requests the Lawyer's license before sending the document to be looked at. This is obviously bullshit as if Fuzer had requested his mom or anyone, even the fucking Hobo down the street to look at the contract - that should have been fine. 3) He pays 2 months worth of rent as a show of good faith to the house while the contract is being worked over. During this time if MoW really wanted to they could have signed partial agreements and then work out the areas of the contract in question at a previous date since they already had two months worth of pay from him. 4) I have a feeling most of the players that joined the house blindly signed this contract and are slowly also realizing that they maybe should have read it too. How can you possible attack someone for not being a big enough tool to sign a legally binding contract before understanding what is required from it?
Everythin' in this post. There is no point attackin' Ministry of Win. They are a business, they make business decisions. How they went about these decisions may have been inappropriate (I don't know Polish Business, I don't have a degree in Business), but they did what they thought was in their best interest. Multiple companies do this. Refuse to reimburse for any damages suffered until you threaten to expose them and then all of a sudden they want to fork over everythin' they owe in a heartbeat. Its a common business practice. We all would hope eSports would be different, but in the end its all a business. Fuzer is the real winner in this situation currently because of his hesitation to sign a contract that he didn't trust and wantin' a lawyer to look it over. We should be praisin' him for havin' a brain instead of the people bashin' callin' him an idiot etc...
|
On September 14 2012 04:09 Roman666 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 04:05 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 14 2012 04:02 scypio wrote:On September 14 2012 03:58 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 14 2012 03:56 scypio wrote:On September 14 2012 03:54 bonifaceviii wrote:
And what is the verbally-agreed-upon method of compensation should MoW terminate the full months' inclusive stay?
Don't answer that, by the way, because it's obvious there wasn't one. He had a month to read into the house rules to find it out. It's not like it fell out of the blue sky, eh? "Read into"? What does that even mean? I meant "read through". So you don't disagree that Fuzer agreed to pay rent, and then would have had to sign the contract in order to consent to forfeiting his rent in the case of him getting kicked out? I think you got it wrong. Maybe he would have to had to sign the contract in order to be entitled to get his money back in the case of him getting kicked out. Otherwise he had no grounds to get his money back, other than verbal agreement.
I thought the contract states specficially - "Each months rent is paid in full and no refunds." In consideration, MoW's statement is that they present this to the incoming player before they arrive, so I don't think whether it is in the contract or not matters.
However - if they present this to the incoming player before they arrive, how can they force a player to choose between leaving or signing a contract? That's coercion - holding the worth of the money hostage until the player signs. It's one thing if they accepted one month and told the player that he cannot stay for the next month unless he signs the contract. It's another if they accepted two months of pay, and then in the middle decide to play hardball.
|
Vatican City State582 Posts
LoL, nice kitty pictures, what a way to misdirect attention. Not to mention the press release addressed none of the core issues the community raised.
What do you even mean by a refund was offered, and rejected? You offered to pay Fuzer back ONLY AFTER he threatened to go public with this incident, as per Fuzer's Skype screenshot indicates.
Try including some truth instead of sugarcoating or conveniently omitting details.
another joke of a press release
1/10
|
On September 14 2012 03:51 scypio wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 03:48 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 14 2012 03:41 scypio wrote:
And what if Fuzer knew that part of the house rules that early leave does not entitle him to get a refund? Would you still give him his money back unconditionally? The house rules that he didn't sign, you mean? You can't enforce the rules of a contract that the person didn't agree to. This is what MoW wrote in the OP: "The fee of 2 500 PLN (circa €600 or $785) is charged up front for full months of all inclusive stay in the house. This is the first consideration the players are presented with before coming to the house" If he was informed about it in the first place and moved into the house I would assume he at least verbally agreed to that rule. Verbal contract is binding.
that verbal contract doesnt say anything about keeping the deposit if MoW decide to terminate it before its end. This was pointed out numerous times, if you accept a payment upfront you are committed to deliver the services. If the player picks up the bags and leaves you keep the money, if you cant have him stay because... he is irritating, you return him money. Actually they should return him the whole mothly fee, he is being nice demanding only for the days left.
|
<3 kittens and that TT1 puppy.
Professional answer from MoW...thumbs up....Fuzer still hatin....thumbs down
|
I think TL is maybe making a bit to much drama about this. I think their overall idea was nice but they made some mistakes here and there. (it sounds like their a bit noobish in leading a gaming house haha but yeah how do you get expierence in doing so).
|
On September 14 2012 04:05 bonifaceviii wrote:
So you don't disagree that Fuzer agreed to pay rent, and then would have had to sign the contract in order to consent to forfeiting his rent in the case of him getting kicked out?
Hmmm... I've done some poking around and this is what I've found (in Polish):
http://www.prawo.egospodarka.pl/77262,Rezygnacja-z-uslugi-a-zwrot-pieniedzy,2,84,1.html
What the article says is that Polish Register of Unlawful Provisions contains one, that states that the right for compensation for a service that was not provided (or was provided in part) cannot be revoked by a provision in the contract.
So it seems that MoW terms could be challenged in court. I wonder if they new it though.
Now that I know about that provision in the registry I would say that MoW is in fact obliged to pay Fuzer back whether he knew about the rule or not.
|
So basically ...
"We admit we had shifty dealings and were glad to keep doing shifty things until it became public. We are deeply sorry anyone had to find out about this."
|
Why post the kittens?
Seriousness of the statement just drops vertically.
|
On September 14 2012 04:13 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 04:09 Roman666 wrote:On September 14 2012 04:05 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 14 2012 04:02 scypio wrote:On September 14 2012 03:58 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 14 2012 03:56 scypio wrote:On September 14 2012 03:54 bonifaceviii wrote:
And what is the verbally-agreed-upon method of compensation should MoW terminate the full months' inclusive stay?
Don't answer that, by the way, because it's obvious there wasn't one. He had a month to read into the house rules to find it out. It's not like it fell out of the blue sky, eh? "Read into"? What does that even mean? I meant "read through". So you don't disagree that Fuzer agreed to pay rent, and then would have had to sign the contract in order to consent to forfeiting his rent in the case of him getting kicked out? I think you got it wrong. Maybe he would have to had to sign the contract in order to be entitled to get his money back in the case of him getting kicked out. Otherwise he had no grounds to get his money back, other than verbal agreement. I thought the contract states specficially - "Each months rent is paid in full and no refunds." In consideration, MoW's statement is that they present this to the incoming player before they arrive, so I don't think whether it is in the contract or not matters. However - if they present this to the incoming player before they arrive, how can they force a player to choose between leaving or signing a contract? That's coercion - holding the worth of the money hostage until the player signs. It's one thing if they accepted one month and told the player that he cannot stay for the next month unless he signs the contract. It's another if they accepted two months of pay, and then in the middle decide to play hardball.
What I meant was that he would have at least some confirmation of closing the deal. And if the contract has "no refunds" clause I am sure they could reach some kind of an agreement here. Now it is too hard to tell who was doing it in bad faith, it could be even both sides.
|
Your post doesn't answer most of the questions that were asked, and furthermore it's written to persuade and deceive.
|
Very dissapointed with MoW these past few days. Statement doesn't do anything for me, still hungry for answers, and very dissapointed with these "o look heres an interview forget the problem, O here are some kittens forget the problem"
|
What exactly is the affiliation between "boss guy" (kropekkk?) and MoW?
It seems to me that there are two parts to this.
One thing is the managing of the contract, which while sad is not exactly a catastrophe.
The other thing is that if kropekkk is boss guy, and these allegations are true, he seriously seems to be a crook.
1. Tried to be a dick and steal money here
2. is having a history of being a really shady guy with missing money. Do not understand polish, but google translate for the article header is "The stolen money for ESC1 few words". Quote from source: "Back in 2011 he was accused of of stealing and lying, he blamed his failures on incompetence and being "young and stupid" (his own words)."
+ Show Spoiler +(http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/zs2bh/drama_in_mow_house/c678kmj)
Edit for being stupid
|
On September 14 2012 04:18 scypio wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 04:05 bonifaceviii wrote:
So you don't disagree that Fuzer agreed to pay rent, and then would have had to sign the contract in order to consent to forfeiting his rent in the case of him getting kicked out? Hmmm... I've done some poking around and this is what I've found (in Polish): http://www.prawo.egospodarka.pl/77262,Rezygnacja-z-uslugi-a-zwrot-pieniedzy,2,84,1.htmlWhat the article says is that Polish Register of Unlawful Provisions contains one, that states that the right for compensation for a service that was not provided (or was provided in part) cannot be revoked by a provision in the contract. So it seems that MoW terms could be challenged in court. I wonder if they new it though. Now that I know about that provision in the registry I would say that MoW is in fact obliged to pay Fuzer back whether he knew about the rule or not.
I am not sure it would apply here cause they didn't sign a contract - there was no deal about providing the service. For all we know with "good" witnesses MoW could even deny the fact that he was staying there.
|
On September 14 2012 04:26 Kairo wrote:3. Basically scammed thegunrun out of 1000$ + Show Spoiler +
This is total and utter lack of reading comprehension:
This what some guy wrote about kropekk:
BulletTimex2: Reminds me of that organizer from Philippines.
This is what thegunrun wrote
thegunrun: he still owes me 1k usd
http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/zs2bh/drama_in_mow_house/c6790tz
Did kropekk organize the event in Philippines?????? Seriously?????
|
On September 14 2012 04:26 Kairo wrote:
3. Basically scammed thegunrun out of 1000$
Err thegunrun part is in reference to that Gus guy from the Phillipines.
|
No proof of residency and/or payment is just asking for trouble. Still doesn't legitimize MoW's actions, seems less like a mistake and more like exploitation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
