Actinic Resellers

[Darren B]

OK

Question for you resellers and Actinic

Going on the problems found in various versions of V9, and others if you like.

If a reseller sold the software to a client, be it a new version upgrade or what ever and it was found to be not suitable, for example the stock control was all screwed this would surely mean the version was not fit for purpose, it does not do what it says e.t.c

i am only raising a question here, who is responsible when the client demands a refund. I am no law graduate but i would assume that you can not refuse the refund, different if the product was as described, but if it does not work then?

does the issue then get passed to actinic, does actinic and your client enter into discussions to resolve the issues. Does actinic support the reseller, will actinic support the reseller if a client makes a legal challange against them, or will they walk away from it.

just thought i would ask
D

[garry]

Going by a microwave oven I sold that went wrong after 8 months.
I gave the customer a full refund had to fight it out with Samsung to get my refund.
I.e. not fit for purpose of use figure same sort of thing. if you think the customer has a reasonable complaint I think you have to fight the case for them.
Got to do what it says on the can. (I think actinic is responsible at the end of the day to refund you)
Garry
www.jaytrade.co.uk

[Duncan Rounding]

Can't see Actinic software being any different than any other supplier. Generally if you sold it you are responsible for the sale/refund to your customer. The arrangement you may have with your suppliers is between you and them and has nothing to do with the customer/end user.

[jont]

if a client makes a legal challenge against them

You essentially sign your life away in legal-ease when you install and agree to the terms (the small print actually allows the killing of kittens) so getting anywhere would be very difficult and would typically be resolved by a full refund etc prior to that.

Resellers typically copy and paste the Actinic blurb from their website which is the safe and sensible thing to do - if something is promised and it is not available the resellers has additional recourse ... if the resellers makes up their own stuff and it is wrong they are nadged.

[pinbrook]

it was found to be not suitable, for example the stock control was all screwed this would surely mean the version was not fit for purpose, it does not do what it says e.t.c Before you sell you should discuss this with the purchaser - or at least have a list of features easily available.

the example you give ie stock control - wouldn't be classed as not fit for purpose as actinic makes no claim for having stock control.

The responsibility is probably with the purchaser to check actinic fits their purpose prior to buying. The decision is probably yours whether to refund if the purchaser finds it doesn't do everything they want.

i agree with Duncan the contract is between you and the purchaser.

Essentially as a reseller you buy from actinic at a discount, this discount is your payment for dealing with the purchaser.

[jont]

at least have a list of features easily available

Thats the beauty of the free 30 day trial to establish suitability before purchase.

[Darren B]

the example you give ie stock control - wouldn't be classed as not fit for purpose as actinic makes no claim for having stock control.



Ok it was an example, poor but an example, stock monitoring or stock something, but its still shagged but thats not the issue here, i used it as an off the top of my head example, not a good one i add.

That's the beauty of the free 30 day trial to establish suitability before purchase.That's a very good point, i have no understanding how selling software or digital media works and was curious.

i guess the question is, what really constitutes not fit for purpose, i guess providing, as stated in this thread, you dont lie or miss lead what the product does then you pays your money and takes your chances.

i have never looked at the 30 day trial in this way, i guess its the biggest saving grace against n00bs

making people have a hard copy would be even better then as soon as they open it, then thats it

thanks for the comments, i was merely asking following a discussion i have been having elsewhere.

D

[TraceyHand]

i have never looked at the 30 day trial in this way, i guess its the biggest saving grace against n00bs

hmmmmm..maybe

[Chris Curness]

The term "Not fit for purpose" has very much a bearing in the resale of a product such as software like V9 particularly when used as an upgrade.
The assumption of the purchaser that an "upgrade" is an enhancement of the original can be of an acceptable nature that In addition to it being an express term of a contract that the (item) would be suitable for a particular need. Implied into a contract under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) are certain statutory rights. In particular goods should be of a satisfactory quality and reasonably fit for the purpose(s) that goods of that particular kind are commonly purchased including any particular purpose asked for by a buyer.
Meaning that an upgrade should have all the functional features of the previous version plus an addition / additional features that deem it an upgrade and not a "New" product.
Software developers should be particularly aware not to offer a product as an "upgrade" that is deemed too removed from the previous version as this leads to the seller, be it the manufacturer or the reseller, to capitalise on the already existing market (previous version) and not make the effort to develop a market for a "New" product.
Basically the risk is selling a "nearly new" product to an existing market by calling it an upgrade in an effort to save taking the risk on the unknown "new market" therefore leaving the seller open to the "Not fit for purpose" claim. Stating that patches or versions are available or pending hold no legal water when comparisons are made in a like for like scenario...We all clear on that then?

[RuralWeb]

The assumption of the purchaser that an "upgrade" is an enhancement of the original
I dont think you can class V9 as an upgrade in the terms you describe. V9 is a completely new version of the software and as such does not really IMO have to "upgrade" the features of V8 at all.

If you have V8 and "upgrades" are issued by Actinic to V8 then you can reasonably expect them to enhance the functionality of the product BUT when a new version is released then you buy it based on the features of the new product not the features of the previous version.

The fact that V9 contains an upgrader function is simply a term used to describe the method used to convert a website from one version to the other - it does not imply that "upgrading" will always improve functionality from V8 to V9 as they are different.

[leehack]

The term "Not fit for purpose" has very much a bearing in the resale of a product such as software like V9 particularly when used as an upgrade.
The assumption of the purchaser that an "upgrade" is an enhancement of the original can be of an acceptable nature that In addition to it being an express term of a contract that the (item) would be suitable for a particular need. Implied into a contract under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) are certain statutory rights. In particular goods should be of a satisfactory quality and reasonably fit for the purpose(s) that goods of that particular kind are commonly purchased including any particular purpose asked for by a buyer.
Meaning that an upgrade should have all the functional features of the previous version plus an addition / additional features that deem it an upgrade and not a "New" product.
Software developers should be particularly aware not to offer a product as an "upgrade" that is deemed too removed from the previous version as this leads to the seller, be it the manufacturer or the reseller, to capitalise on the already existing market (previous version) and not make the effort to develop a market for a "New" product.
Basically the risk is selling a "nearly new" product to an existing market by calling it an upgrade in an effort to save taking the risk on the unknown "new market" therefore leaving the seller open to the "Not fit for purpose" claim. Stating that patches or versions are available or pending hold no legal water when comparisons are made in a like for like scenario...We all clear on that then?
This is a very one sided way of looking at the issue IMO, which although i can appreciate, does not really give a rounded view of things. Let's take your situation for example, you have far more products than is recommended in your store, so any performance issues you experience could be blamed solely on you and your choice to go outside of the guidelines? It appears to me that you've entered a Fiat Punto into a car race and you are now unhappy that you didn't win and want your money back.

The car company advise you that a Fiat Punto is not made to race (if you read the specs), they also provide you with a free 30 day trial to test it to make sure for yourself and the decision to upgrade and contact a designer was solely your choice. Can you appreciate that from a different angle of looking at things, you have made incorrect decisions along the way? It's all too easy to point fingers or throw toys, sometimes you have to take things on the chin and learn from your own mistakes too.

IMO if a designer sells you software and you want a refund on the grounds of performance issues, then i think the software company is who you should deal with. They provide the license key and the ones who would enforce something if you went outside these rules. The designer is just a go between, I don't think a software company can abandon a designer when the proverbial hits, that's bad IMO. If customer gets a refund, then the designer should not make any money from the transaction and should get a chargeback direct from the software company IMO.

[Darren B]

We all clear on that then?`

That's exactly what i thought :rolleyes:

All said and done i can see were this legislation is leading, well in my little world i can see something anyway. So V9 is a new piece of software, compared to V8, but V9.0.3 will be an upgrade to V9. So the upgrade is merely ment to be enhancements and a version change can be seen as a new piece of software which you take you choice with the new versions.

back to the free trials me thinks - best idea ever :D

[Darren B]

It appears to me that you've entered a Fiat Punto into a car race and you are now unhappy that you didn't win and want your money back.



Hmm nice example, interesting choice of car as well :D

[jont]

that goods of that particular kind are commonly purchased including any particular purpose asked for by a buyer.

If you did indeed ask a specific question and you were misinformed then you have rights as the item was mis sold as you would with any product purchased.

[Darren B]

ermmmmmmm i skipped this line, looked like something written by me

[george]

Daz, I had an idea the other day which would probably help Actinic gain some much needed street cred, but then, I realised it wouldn't work.

I just felt I had to tell someone that. Thats is all.

[RuralWeb]

If you did indeed ask a specific question and you were misinformed then you have rights as the item was mis sold
Very true - the perfect example in actinics case is stock control. If a purchaser was told that actinic had stock control prior to purchase then that would be grounds for miss selling.

I always setup prospective clients with the trial software and let them use that for a few weeks if it does not suit them then they dont buy it from me.

[leehack]

Very true - the perfect example in actinics case is stock control. If a purchaser was told that actinic had stock control prior to purchase then that would be grounds for miss selling.
I think this point is one of the biggest points on deciding whether actinic is OK to use or not, and I agree that bad information in this area should result in an immediate full refund as there is no excuse whatsoever for bad info provided. This is an area I am very careful about and lose a fair amount of builds because of.

There are grey areas though IMO with regards to certain parts of the software, we cannot fully predict how things will be from site to site or even PC to PC, and this is where I believe a software company must join in and help. If you have software that is misperforming and you have designers using and selling your software, i don't think they can be abandoned when something goes wrong. A partnership is just that, through thick and thin.

[george]

It'd be nice to know if Actinic are going to do anything about creating/improving/whatever stock control. Its certainly an area that seems to have been ignored.

[leehack]

I'd agree, the lack of this feature is the single biggest factor why most builds do not go forward with actinic from my perspective. Cat files need adjusting online at point of sale IMO or something along those lines, it is holding the software back.

[jont]

It'd be nice to know if Actinic are going to do anything about creating/improving/whatever stock control. Its certainly an area that seems to have been ignored.

They have :


Settings > Business Settings > Options Stock Monitoring

... tick "Disable Automatic Stock Monitoring"


HTH

[leehack]

They have :


Settings > Business Settings > Options Stock Monitoring

... tick "Disable Automatic Stock Monitoring"


HTH

ROTFLMAO, tittering like a big kid here, nice one, cheers bud.

[pinbrook]

It'd be nice to know if Actinic are going to do anything about creating/improving/whatever stock control. Its certainly an area that seems to have been ignored. they can't do anything much, its never going to be real time due to no online DB.

You have to go with a plugin solution

[Chris Curness]

Sorry I thought when someone asks a question on this forum they wanted an answer.
I gave what I thought was an answer based on my business background not any issue I have with the designer or Actinic.
I have long since given up the idea of a refund but I do feel somewhat sorry for the people in the middle who are left in the dark and find it difficult to answer questions or give accurate time scales.
I originally enquired about upgrading to V8 and was offered V9 and as you cannot just install and use it over V7 I asked the designer who had worked on my site before to carry out the upgrade the result was not acceptable compared to V7….is this the point where I take it on the chin?
Have look around this forum and see how many people have issues with V9, how many admit that Actinic communication is poor, how many do not want to point the finger for fear that your means of support will be reduced?
Sorry guys but the designer admits the support from Actinic is not what it used to be,,,,and I can only go with what I am told.
I have used V7 for the last 3 years and yes there are loads of products on it and over the years I have told hundreds of my contacts/customers that this software cannot be bettered.
Actinic should still have people like me bestowing the virtues of Actinic software not starting to look for alternatives but even after I agreed I could reduce my content, which used to be king, I am advised to have a separate PC running only V9 no other software only V9,,,,sorry but now costs are rising and I keep being told it’s another 2 weeks for the next V9 patch.
You assume too much Lee which is naïve trait in business and your car scenario is basic and will please only the blinkered; your view only balances out your false assumption and does change my original comment which was an honest reply to what seemed like a good question.
I gave up on any idea of a refund because Actinic are working on my snapshot and have given me good reasons to be optomistic, it's the timescales that I have an issue with now.

[RuralWeb]

IMO you do have cause to complain to your designer. You are paying for advice as to the sutability of the software for your site and should expect them to refuse to upgrade to v9 if it was not suitable for your site which IMO it is not.

Its nothing to do with actinic IMO and your designer is trying to pass the buck. I have many actinic sites and to date I have only upgraded those site which I consider suitable for upgrading after detailed testing. If I upgrade a site and it goes tits up then its a no charge situation for the client in my books.

[leehack]

You assume too much Lee which is naïve trait in business and your car scenario is basic and will please only the blinkered; your view only balances out your false assumption and does change my original comment which was an honest reply to what seemed like a good question.

I assumed nothing Chris, your washing was aired in public just a few days ago. It was clearly stated at this time that you had way in excess of the recommended number of products. Every answer you give seems to avoid this point, however it is fundamental in your case. Your V7 site far exceeded the recommended figure but still worked OK. Once upgraded to V9, you incorrectly expected the same performance. That to me is naive, but hey ho, i'm not the one complaining here about the decisions i've made and blaming everyone else but myself.

The car was a simple analogy to give a different perspective, you are using a tool that is not fit for the job you want it to do. Forget speed issues completely, you have way more products than you should - there is no need to look any further than that point, at least not if you want a leg to stand on if it all goes belly up.

I gave up on any idea of a refund because Actinic are working on my snapshot and have given me good reasons to be optimistic, it's the timescales that I have an issue with now.
I wouldn't give up so easily if you feel so strong, but that is your choice of course. 9.03 will be subjected to the most stringent tests ever in the history of Actinic IMO, if it comes through, I suspect majority of people will end up with a vastly improved piece of software. With something this big, the last thing we want is to have it rushed, so try a little patience, a few weeks in software development is not a very long time.

Good luck, hope you end up with a smile eventually :).

[pinbrook]

Gotta agree with Mal here.

I'm still sitting on several upgrades from v7, i tried them in 8 and they ran like a dog, things are not sufficiently improved with 9 yet. Sites will large no of sections and duplicates

Having said that i will be running some of these sites through 9.0.3 prior to its release to see if the promised performance improvements materialise. Only when i am convinced will i recommend my clients upgrade.

[leehack]

Mal, Jo, you could be right, we only know the details of the site, not the conversation between Chris and his designer though. If there was direct selling of a feature such as stock control or alike then yes i agree, but i think it's a little unfair to flog a designer without his/her side to the story. I do personally find it hard to believe that any designer has even considered recommending V9 yet though, but that's just my opinion. 9.03 should now see a glutton of people jumping over if all goes well and i guess 3rd version is where we all said it'd start.

[Chris Curness]

I assumed nothing Chris, your washing was aired in public just a few days ago. It was clearly stated at this time that you had way in excess of the recommended number of products. Every answer you give seems to avoid this point, however it is fundamental in your case. Your V7 site far exceeded the recommended figure but still worked OK. Once upgraded to V9, you incorrectly expected the same performance. That to me is naive, but hey ho, i'm not the one complaining here about the decisions i've made and blaming everyone else but myself.

The car was a simple analogy to give a different perspective, you are using a tool that is not fit for the job you want it to do. Forget speed issues completely, you have way more products than you should - there is no need to look any further than that point, at least not if you want a leg to stand on if it all goes belly up.


I wouldn't give up so easily if you feel so strong, but that is your choice of course. 9.03 will be subjected to the most stringent tests ever in the history of Actinic IMO, if it comes through, I suspect majority of people will end up with a vastly improved piece of software. With something this big, the last thing we want is to have it rushed, so try a little patience, a few weeks in software development is not a very long time.

Good luck, hope you end up with a smile eventually :).

Make up your mind Lee,..."my washing was aired" does that mean I said what I thought?.. if so I am happy with that...when a customer complains if gives the seller great information on how to improve.
Complaints happen in the real world...live with it and enjoy the benefits.

[Chris Curness]

IMO you do have cause to complain to your designer. You are paying for advice as to the sutability of the software for your site and should expect them to refuse to upgrade to v9 if it was not suitable for your site which IMO it is not.

Its nothing to do with actinic IMO and your designer is trying to pass the buck. I have many actinic sites and to date I have only upgraded those site which I consider suitable for upgrading after detailed testing. If I upgrade a site and it goes tits up then its a no charge situation for the client in my books.

Thanks Mal, some good sense at last...and a customer facing supplier. You must be of the real world?

[leehack]

Make up your mind Lee,..."my washing was aired" does that mean I said what I thought?.. if so I am happy with that...when a customer complains if gives the seller great information on how to improve.
Complaints happen in the real world...live with it and enjoy the benefits.
Nice equivocation yet again, reminds me of dolly this does.

The facts of your upgrade were written in black and white here in the forum just a few days ago. I just wanted to illustrate that it was the 'facts' i discussed, not 'assumptions' as you alluded - but you knew that already and was just playing along huh.

[leehack]

Thanks Mal, some good sense at last...and a customer facing supplier. You must be of the real world?
Chris, i must give you your due, i am sitting here cracking up, so fair play.
I am happy sitting here living in la-la land though I must say, it beats feeling the way you do at the moment.

[Chris Curness]

Chris, i must give you your due, i am sitting here cracking up, so fair play.
I am happy sitting here living in la-la land though I must say, it beats feeling the way you do at the moment.

If you are happy... I am happy, but don't worry someone will come in with a supporting comment for you,,,,that's how this works isn't it?

[jont]

Chris - what exactly did your designer say / promise / do and what was the outcome?

[Darren B]

OK i obviously missed something along the lines here - Holidays, has this been discussed. As usual im behind the times

[Chris Curness]

Chris - what exactly did your designer say / promise / do and what was the outcome?

OK, this is getting more like Actinic Gossip than Actinic Forum....I have just got back on terms with my designer and do not want to upset and using the written word as in this format it is the poorest way to communicate unless you put a "smiley thingy" after every word.
The designer recently offered me a full refund and it would be unfair of me to accept as I feel that the designer was not supported to an acceptable level.
If you wish a better answer I can only forward this link to the designer for their input.
Assumptions will be made but be carefull.

Chris C.