Resolved

Scammer's profile link: @Chicks
Amount scammed: Falsely advertising accounts, im requesting a refund of 50% ($150)
Discord ID + Unique Discord ID:N/a occurred through his site, chicksgold.com
Proof that it's their Discord:N/a
Explanation of the trade: 2 HCIM accounts were purchased, the exact title of the accounts were as follows: "No Email | HCIM | Level 3 Skiller | 99 Agility | MoG | Graceful [100% Manual]"

MOG in this case, referring to marks of grace. As a little context, Ironman require marks to get stamina's & herblore XP, and I purchased the accounts with the intention of never doing agility again on the accounts.
And ~4000-5000 marks is expected from 99 agility
How they scammed:
The accounts were advertised with marks of grace, which anybody with a 3rd grade reading comprehension would imply that they collected the marks of grace from the 99 agility grind,

One account had 9 marks of grace, and the other had 0.

On Friday immediately after changing emails, I notified support of the issue, they didnt even take responsibility for the false advertising, and said to come back tomorrow morning for a manager,

Saturday I came back, requested a manager and was told one would be on later,
then came back later and was told to come back Sunday as no manager responded,

Sunday came around and I was told once again to wait 2 hours and a manager would be on, then I came back a few hours later and I was told to wait until Monday morning.

During this time, roughly 20 hours of skilling on one of the accounts was completed, and the other account had 10-15.

Now Monday morning the manager offered me 1b gp as a refund, and he would take the accounts back. keep in mind resellers are currently selling gold at .28/m meaning they expect me to take an 84m and 30-35 hour loss because they messed up.


Given that fixing their mistake will cost me ~444 hours of agility, I think a refund of $150 out of the $300 is fair.

Also as a note, chick's site has recently renamed the accounts to "No Email | HCIM | Level 3 Skiller | 99 Agility | Graceful [100% Manual]" clearly acknowledging that there was false advertising occurring.

Other relevant trade screenshots: N/A chick staff should be able to confirm everything to be correct.

 

[Grendmas RS]

Hi,

LordZuku purchased 2x HCIM 99 agility accounts from us on Friday, 4/14/2023 for a total of $294. The titles associated with both purchased accounts were "No Email | HCIM | Level 3 Skiller | 99 Agility | MoG | Graceful [100% Manual]." LordZuku was under the impression that the account had "4000-5000" marks of grace on each of the accounts even though this wasn't speficially stated in the title or description, didn't have pictures associated with their being "4000-5000" marks of grace on the account, or asked beforehand.

We offered either a full refund for both accounts, or 40m in OSRS gold as compensation to keep the accounts which were both denied. LordZuku instead wanted half the order refunded ($146) to keep the accounts which we are not willing to entertain. It's also worth mentioning that we didn't provide either solution until today on 4/17/2023 as this needed approval of one of our 2 managers who were both gone this weekend. During that gap both accounts were actively being played on even though no solution had been provided yet.

In response to us changing our title for this particular build you are 100% correct. We did this earlier today to avoid the same issues other potential buyers of this same build may have and are constantly updating our listings. We have sold more than 20 of these accounts previously with this being the first time someone has complained about this.

As stated before we are willing to fully refund the order and re-secure the accounts on our end or offer 40m in OSRS gold to make up for the miscommunication. There were no pictures provided of the account having any marks of grace and the title would have reflected "4000-5000" MoG if they were on the account as this would be a big selling point for us.

 

Hi,

LordZuku purchased 2x HCIM 99 agility accounts from us on Friday, 4/14/2023 for a total of $294. The titles associated with both purchased accounts were "No Email | HCIM | Level 3 Skiller | 99 Agility | MoG | Graceful [100% Manual]." LordZuku was under the impression that the account had "4000-5000" marks of grace on each of the accounts even though this wasn't speficially stated in the title or description, didn't have pictures associated with their being "4000-5000" marks of grace on the account, or asked beforehand.

We offered either a full refund for both accounts, or 40m in OSRS gold as compensation to keep the accounts which were both denied. LordZuku instead wanted half the order refunded ($146) to keep the accounts which we are not willing to entertain. It's also worth mentioning that we didn't provide either solution until today on 4/17/2023 as this needed approval of one of our 2 managers who were both gone this weekend. During that gap both accounts were actively being played on even though no solution had been provided yet.

In response to us changing our title for this particular build you are 100% correct. We did this earlier today to avoid the same issues other potential buyers of this same build may have and are constantly updating our listings. We have sold more than 20 of these accounts previously with this being the first time someone has complained about this.

As stated before we are willing to fully refund the order and re-secure the accounts on our end or offer 40m in OSRS gold to make up for the miscommunication. There were no pictures provided of the account having any marks of grace and the title would have reflected "4000-5000" MoG if they were on the account as this would be a big selling point for us.

Saying its 99 agility with marks of grace implies that it has all the marks of grace from the agility grind.

Just as an FYI the marks are worth ~ 100m on a main, and worth exponentially more on an ironman due to the difficulty of getting them, your refund offer of 40m is under 1/2 of what they are worth on the ge to a main.

 

Saying its 99 agility with marks of grace implies that it has all the marks of grace from the agility grind.

Just as an FYI the marks are worth ~ 100m on a main, and worth exponentially more on an ironman due to the difficulty of getting them, your refund offer of 40m is under 1/2 of what they are worth on the ge to a main.

Also just so we are clear, my initial post was incorrect, original purchase price was $294 I belive due to the 2% discount.

And the 2nd offer of refunding the purchase price involves chicks profiting of 30+ hours of dangerous skilling on a HCIM, which in turn has them profit from false advertising, hence why I declined that offer

 

What was the payment method used for the transaction (proof of transaction would be nice)?

is the listing here the correct listing (with only the title being changed)? if not can you link the correct one

 

What was the payment method used for the transaction (proof of transaction would be nice)?

is the listing here the correct listing (with only the title being changed)?

Yeah the listing looks the same as before with just the title changed

Paid through coinbase via btc

Transaction: 8e8a3720f04cbe0733b5dc01887956911e6627604e3cce6d4a392b0306526423 | Blockchain.com

Screenshot - e09100cc476ddfd0bf3ce48a1fe19793 - Gyazo

 

@Grendmas RS
just to make sure it crystal clear. There was meant to be no marks of grace on the account? (just a yes or no answer please)

Secondly if the answer to part one is yes.
In the title of account listing you stated it said:

"No Email | HCIM | Level 3 Skiller | 99 Agility | MoG | Graceful [100% Manual]."

can I ask why you guys would have "MoG" in the title if there was not meant to be a mark of grace on the account? I'm aware it wasn't in the pictures or the description.

 

[Grendmas RS]

No, there was never meant to be all marks of grace from 1-99 agility on the account hence why the title was proactively updated for the listing after we were made aware of the issue and a full refund was offered as soon as I was made aware of the situation. All of our titles for our in house agility accounts have "MoG" in the title and don't specify the exact number unless we feel it's worth mentioning. MoG being in the title doesn't represent there being 4000-5000 marks of grace on the account.

We also don't understand why both accounts were being played on while there was an active problem with the order. At no point in time did we ask the buyer to spend "30+ hours of dangerous skilling on a HCIM" as losing status would have severely crippled the value of the accounts. The additional skilling on the account does not provide any additional value to us as these accounts would be relisted at the same price to avoid "profit from false advertising" if the buyer doesn't wish to keep the accounts.

As stated before, we understand MoG being in the title may be interpreted differently by buyers and we proactively updated our listings for both 99 agility HCIM & Ironman accounts to avoid any future miscommunication with buyers. We don't create our titles with any malintent and do our absolute best to avoid confusion with our listings. We've been trying to issue a full refund from the point I was made aware of the issue. If the buyer wants to keep the accounts, we can alternatively offer 100m in gold as that would have roughly been the value of the marks of grace on the account.

Please let us know how we can fully rectify this so we can move on from this situation.

 

just so we are clear, had a few people ask me this

The reason I was skilling on the accounts was because chicks staff kept saying manager would be in soon
I had nothing to do over the weekend so I was afk skilling on it figured they wouldn't want the accounts back given that we already registered them before logging into the account to avoid getting them locked

 

This is one of those cases where it is difficult to make a ruling, and it is likely to be a ruling that sparks a lot of debate. Even the staff team wasn't unanimous in their decision.

Neither party has handled this transaction in the best way, as there have been multiple faults on both sides.

On the side of the Chicks (tagging @Grendmas RS here as the Chick's employee handling this dispute):

• They should not have used the word "MOG" in the title, as it is highly misleading.
• They should also have included a picture of the Graceful outfit in the inventory and any notable items on the account, as stated in our section rules here. I am aware that this account wasn't actually sold on-site, but it is worth noting (as the Graceful outfit is in the title).

A screenshot of the account's wealth [If specified] (Example) (Example RS3)

On the side of @LordZuku:

• If he was not satisfied with the account, he should have checked it thoroughly and requested a return immediately, rather than continuing to make progress on the account.
• He should have asked about the number of marks of grace on the account before making the purchase.

So, neither party has handled this situation perfectly. The next issue is the subjectivity behind the term "MOG" in the title. It could be one mark of grace, it could be a hundred, it could be 1-99 agility worth of marks of grace, or it could be the maximum possible value of 2,147,483,647. Therefore, we can only make a ruling based on the account that had zero marks of grace, as technically, the other account had "MOG" on it. Another issue is that we cannot set a fixed number of marks of grace that were meant to be on the account either.

Taking all of the above into consideration, we can realistically only provide two options.,

• One option would be for LordZuku to return the account and receive a full refund, which should be done in BTC to avoid any issues regarding the gold price in the original post. This is also the reason why I asked about the payment method earlier in the thread. As LordZuku should not have continued to progress on the account he was not satisfied with, we cannot expect Chicks to pay damages for the progress made on the account.
• if LordZuku decides to keep the account, Due to the subjectivity behind the number of marks of grace since the term "MOG" was used, it is challenging to determine the compensation amount. Therefore, I believe the previous offer of 100m would be fair as we cannot establish a definite number of marks of grace meant to be on the account. To avoid any disagreement over the value, I suggest setting it at 0.27/m if the payment is done via BTC.

Please inform @Grendmas RS of your decision, @LordZuku, and let he/her know which option you would prefer.

 

btc keeping the accounts would be best,
3HzpjESHMUhKpTgAVatA1FAC353xmJkeqQ

Disappointed given that in the past I have had to pay out 4x values for ironman items and that seems to be the standard, but instead this time your using the main price

 

On the side of @LordZuku:

• If he was not satisfied with the account, he should have checked it thoroughly and requested a return immediately, rather than continuing to make progress on the account.
• He should have asked about the number of marks of grace on the account before making the purchase.

Just as a note, I requested a return immediately, within minutes of logging in. I was told by chicks livesupport that it wouldn't be happening, and they offered to swap for an account with 5 marks. I even asked them to refund and take back the accounts on Friday.

it wasnt until 3 days later that they decided to offer a refund for the accounts

 

[Grendmas RS]

$30 has been sent to the given address

 

Thanks for resolving this there deleted post with TRX for staff to see,

Just to explain to @LordZuku why we couldn't provide a 4x valuation, as I stated previously we couldn't realistically set a value on it due to subjectivity behind the number. Normally in these cases, it would be just a refund or keeping the account but as Chicks offered the 100m it seemed to be a fair number.

As for reminding of this case, This will be noted @Chicks TWC reason for misleading/false advertisements. This is normally only an infraction-worthy offense but account sales seem to be a continuous issue (recently report here).

You can dispute the TWC in 30 days @Chicks.