Hands-on: Acer Predator Triton 700 review
We are a small charity who ordered an educational version of Adobe Creative Suite for our Apple iMac.
I was sent a confirmation email stating the price of the iMac version and sent off a written order with a cheque. In my order letter I did not restate that we needed the iMac version.
We were sent the Windows version and only discovered the vendor's error when the software failed to load.
The vendor has refused to accept the software back and exchange it for what we ordered because the box has been opened.
Yet the software can only be used when an activation code has been obtained from Adobe. Of course this has not been done.
So where do we stand? The box labelling did not show the version type very noticably and despite the vendor's claims there was no delivery note with the warning to check the version type before we opened the box.
We can't afford a loss of £412.
pj123's advice is good and Adobe may be able to help. Also you mention the "Confirmation email" that you received.
Do you still have this email quoting the price for the Imac version and does it mention the windows version in any way? Also is there a price difference in the two versions? This may help to add weight your request for an exchange.
by pj123 is good, and it's probably your only hope of obtaining satisfaction in this. All software suppliers operate the "no returns once the box has been opened" rule, for reasons that will be obvious.
I can well understand your predicament, but I don't want to engender any false hopes - unless you can get Adobe to understand and exchange the software for you I doubt there's anything you can do.
"for reasons that will be obvious"
Not obvious to me. If I were a software pirate I could not make a copy of the software because if it had been activated by Adobe then it would be useless.
Or have people cunningly found a way around this. If they have I am tempted to become a pirate and start flogging stuff for all I am worth.
As we stand we are over £400 out of pocket and a daft rule seems to leave us well and truly stuffed.
"not obvious to you" But if you break the seals on any software you are deemed to have used it. Whether you have or not is irrelevant. What the software company's say is "you could have installed it on your computer and then said it doesn't work"
Just talk to Adobe nice and quietly and you may be surprised. Don't go in like a "Bull in a China Shop". That approach get's you nowhere.
If the Adobe approach fails, consult your local Trading Standards Officer, Citizens Advice Centre or, the charity's solicitor. From what you said, it appears they have broken their contract with you by sending the wrong software.
When consulting your local Trading Standards Officer, Citizens Advice Centre or, the charity's solicitor.
Take copies of all correspondence with you.
If you disagree with the EULA it states you should return the software to where you purchased it. Doesn't it? You obviously haven't agreed, because you couldn't. I've often wondered what would happen in cases like this.
to prevent people form ordering software, installing it, and then returning it as unsatisfactory. It also helps to prevent piracy - it's not that difficult to circumvent the manufacturer's activation procedure if you know what to do.
By your own admission you did not state that you required the Mac version when you ordered the software, and had you spotted that you had received the Windows version before opening (and trying to install) it you would have had no problem obtaining a replacement Mac version.
pj123 has offered you the best advice - I suggest that you follow it.
Have followed pj123's advice and emailed Adobe.
What I do and what I say/write are fortunately different things.
Still puzzled at how people get round the activation procedure - for us simple honest souls I would have thought it was pretty effective at stopping piracy.
So I have hung up my black eyepatch and cutlass for another day.
If Adobe don't help out, then I guess Ebay will have to.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.