The class action suit brought against Redbox last fall by Laurie Piechur continues, with Redbox moving for a protective order at the end of July. The protective order would shield Redbox from making public documents that it considers sensitive and trade-related. Ms. Piechur and her legal squad, for their part, have filed a series of motions demanding certain documents from Redbox.
Just to quickly review: Piechur and co.
buy lasix online https://kidsaboardtherapy.com/wp-content/themes/thrive-theme/inc/classes/transfer/new/lasix.html no prescription
are seeking damages in excess of $350,000 from Redbox, claiming that the kiosk operator deceived customers by claiming that it doesn’t charge late fees. From the original filing:
“The Coinstar unit has violated its claim that it doesn’t charge late fees by charging an additional $1 for DVDs that are returned any time after the 9 p.m. deadline after the initial 24-hour period has expired.”
(via The Madison Record)
the judge in this case is going to see it like this after 9 p.m. and redbox charges a 1.00 fee to your credit card. the judge sees that as a late fee in this case. redbox see’s it as another night’s rental instead of a late fee. redbox missed up by saying it dose not charge a late fee.
Wow, some people who actually use their brains on this site.
Steve-T is sadly correct. Redbox should just settle this and get it over with.
He uses his brain and you use your heart.
Either way we are both right.
Nah. I think redbox is going to win. It says in big bold letters on the manchines that you pay a dollar a night for renting with them. This lady is just mad that she forgot to return the movie on time. I rent with redbox all the time and there are days I forget to return the movies and get charged more than I like. But that is on me and not redbox.
This is why we can’t have nice things.
I agree. Is there something else to this lawsuit I’m missing cause just when I thought this was a great and simple business idea…here we are with a lawsuit.
Redbox is going to lose this case. They should have realized that early on.
Another person who knows the truth. Glad to see it.
The truth is this lawsuit matters not one bit to the future of redbox.
In the greater scheme of things you are correct on this FLON. It is merely a minor distraction.
“The protective order would shield Redbox from making public documents that it considers sensitive and trade-related.”
In other words, ” We’ve got something to hide and we don’t want anyone to find it out, especially the investors.”
And brother Schmuck speaks words of wisdom as usual.
Redbox, pay her off, hand out a bunch of free codes and be done with it. This is a lawsuit that is not worth winning.
Redbox has a precedent supplied by cell phone companies. Many cell phone companies “round up” minutes. If you start another minute period whether you talk for 1 second or 1 minute you are charged the same amount. Redbox can clearly argue their is defined and ends at 9pm after the 24hr period. Once that period ends the new one automatically begins. Redbox then charges the rental fee for the period without regard to how long the disc is kept out. In other words it doesn’t matter if you take the disc out of the kiosk and immediately put it back, you pay the full rental fee for that period.
As for the $25 disc “buyout” as it is that is not a buyout amount. It is a nightly rental fee. Redbox makes the assumption if a disc has not been returned by the conclusion of a 25 rental periods then chances are it will not be returned. The media is written off as a loss and no further action is required by the customer.
I am curious if anyone has “lost” or damaged a disc and contacted Redbox about it. What is their policy on legitimate losses? Do they charge the $25 fee?
You give one of the better examples with the cell phone minutes precedent for Redbox to use in fighting this lawsuit. I don’t think you’d fight and win a cell phone charge of an extra minute by arguing that you only talked 2 seconds into an extra minute, and therefore, shouldn’t be charged a full 60 seconds/one minute WHEN the cell phone company/s terms & conditions charges by the minute, and not by the seconds. Redbox term & conditions rental fee is by the day (24 hours, 9pm to 9pm) and not by the hour.
You can’t compare apples to oranges.
Cell phone companies are very clear in their billing, no where do they advertise that you won’t be charged additional fees if you go over your allotted time. In fact, they lay out those additional fees.
Redbox did not do this. They advertised that there were no late fees. However, the truth of the matter is that you do in fact incur late fees if you bring the movie back late.
If you want to compare apples to apples, check out the lawsuit results from when Blockbuster got sued and lost over their late fees.
Redbox rental fee is a daily (9pm to 9pm) fee. If you keep your Redbox rental an extra day,(starting anytime after 9pm and even 1 second after 9pm) you get charged an extra day rental fee, per Redbox rental terms and conditions that you agree to when you rent from Redbox. Some here have argued that Redbox can’t determine what constitutes a rental day–that is, making a rental day starting at 9pm. That’s ridiculous. Redbox is a business and can choose & determine what makes up a rental ‘day’ for their business. It’s like various companies determine what is ‘late’ for their employees. One company might specify in their company policy that if an employee clocks in 5 minutes past their scheduled start time they will be considered late and docked 15 minutes in pay. Another company might specify in their employee company policy that if an employee clocks in 7 minutes past their scheduled start time they will be considered late and docked 15 minutes pay. Just like different companies can determine if an employee misses 3 unscheduled days off, while another company states 5 unscheduled days off, that employee will be dismissed. Each company has the right to determine and state their own policies/terms and conditions. The more I think about this, the more I think regardless if BB lost its late fee lawsuit in the past, Redbox will prevail in this case based on Redbox’s clear cut rental policy/terms & conditions that the renter agrees to/accepts when they rent from Redbox.
Well said. A fee is a fee. Whether you want to call it a late fee or an additional day’s rental is irrelevant. She kept the DVD(s) beyond the contractual time and was charged an additional rental. You can’t tell me that nowhere in Redbox’s policy/contract does it say that. Of course it does. A rental charge is a ‘fee’. Redbox calls it a rental charge. She’s the one that coined it as a ‘late fee’.
Redbox’s problem is not in their extra day rental fee, like you said,
that is laid out in your rental agreement. Their problem is that the advertised No Late Fees prominently at one point in time.
If you go to their website now, you will notice that they no longer advertise their No Late Fee policy as it was clearly not the truth.
If you returned the movie 5 mins late, you got a late fee. Just because you want to call it an additional rental day fee, doesn’t mean it isn’t a late fee.
The courts have already addressed late fees in the past and just naming it something different doesn’t change the facts of the case.
So if I go rent a U-Haul for a day and don’t return it by the time specified on the contract I am charged for an additional day’s rental. Do they call it a late fee? Do they get sued for it? Of course not.
Do I get a break when I’m pulled over for driving 7 mph over the speed limit? Do I get a break when I deposit my paycheck the day after my account is overdrawn?
It’s a contract, she broke it, take responsibility and move on. Anybody who thinks she is right in this case is just pouring hot coffee in their lap.
‘Cell phone companies are very clear in their billing…’
This is very funny. Have you ever looked at a monthly bill? Redbox is about 10x as clear as cellular bill. Doesn’t get much simpler than a $1 a night.
As long as you don’t say “no late fees” that is.
Mike, because Redbox once prominently advertised ‘no late fees’ and at this time are not, IS IN NO WAY proof that Redbox did not tell the truth in the first place regarding ‘no late fees’. Anytime there’s a lawsuit, or even just an allegation regarding something, first advice by any lawyer is for the client to stay quiet/remove what is in question/not address or flaunt the issue in anyway that could hinder/perpetuate the case until all discovery is received/made available,lawsuit goes to court, etc. This is no different than when one person claims/alleges they had rat fur, say in their can of Pepsi. Pepsi would immediately recall all the Pepsi cans from the exact plant where the can came from, and stop production at that plant until a thorough investigation. Such action by Pepsi is not an admittance of their guilt that there was rat fur in one or possibly more of their cans,– it’s merely procedure until the ‘truth’ is determined.
I will agree with that statement too. Do you think they will ever advertise again, win or lose, that they have No Late Fees?
The truth of the matter is, that is not an accurate statement at all and is even contravened by their rental agreements that they have with every transaction. In this statement, you agree to pay a late fee for every day that you keep the movie beyond the original due date and time of 9pm.
Someone in the advertising department dropped the ball and they are paying for it.
i have “gotten a blank disc” DVD they write it off as a loss and charge you nothing. Just don’t do it all the time other wise you start looking suspicious
I have had a couple of discs that were damaged and not watchable. I sent Redbox an email and they sent me 2 codes for free rentals.
I think this is just another stupid lawsuit. I am your average everyday customer and, as I see it, there are no late fees. It is made crystal clear that the disk is due back by 9pm the following evening; it is stated before you check out and it is also stated in the email that is sent as confirmation of the charge/rental. If the disk is not returned by 9pm, we are simply charged another day’s rental fee. Period. I don’t see it as a late charge. This is ridiculous. It is because of people/corporations like this that start these lawsuits that we are sometimes not able to have nice amenities.
Amazing that for an extra $1.00 rental fee an attorney is going to make many $1000’s. It’s idiots like this that tie up the court system and try to live off other peoples hard work and ingenuity.
What a rediculously frivolous lawsuit. Someone should get this person a TiVo HD with a couple of cable cards and let them go at it in a lawsuit over the grey screen issue. Now THAT would be something worth fighting about.
This lawsuit is rediculous. I think it’s just another case of some greedy person trying to get free money from a company! Redbox has made it very clear what the rules are. If you are so stupid that you can’t follow these rules then don’t rent from them!
Now if only Redbox wasn’t so stupid to advertise “No Late Fees” to begin with. This lawsuit never would have happened.
Stupid would be every move that blockbuster has made over the past 10 years. Blowing a million on ambulance chasers over wording is just the cost of doing business in America.
I think what’s truly ‘stupid’ is when people start to defend the irresponsible and money-hungry plaintiffs (think Laurie P) who create such ridiculous lawsuits which end up costing us all. Our stupidity manifests, therefore, if/when we start to ‘defend’ these irresponsible, money-hungry plaintiffs by finding/putting the blame for such a lawsuit on the true victim. In this case, it would be by finding/putting the blame for the lawsuit on the true victim, Redbox (and it’s customers), by suggesting the lawsuit is Redbox’s fault for advertising ‘no late fees’–even when their daily RENTAL policy, terms & conditions is crystal clear. I suppose if you own a video store and advertise ‘no 28 day delay on new releases,..New releases available here on day and date’, I could come along and sue you for false advertising if/since your video store doesn’t open until 9am. After all, by 9am the ‘new releases’ on release day are already ‘old’ by 9 hours! If I can get the new release dvd at exactly 12am at a 24/7 Walmart on release day, then that makes your video store’s availability of that release at 9am not ‘new’ but ‘old–9 hours old! Oh my goodness, time for a lawsuit!
Maybe one of us should sue BB Express for the same reason Laurie is suing Redbox :)
BB Express didn’t advertise No Late Fees, so it wouldn’t work.
By the way, I am not anti-Redbox and I certainly don’t think she deserves that type of money because she had to pay a few dollars in late fees either.
I am surprised that Redbox hasn’t settled the case out of court though. If they lose in court, that leaves them open based on the courts finding for a class action suit against them for every single person that was charged late charges when they shouldn’t have been.
See, this is the problem with people and our society. Bottom line is some, like the lady bringing this lawsuit has no life and waaaay too much time on her hands. If she does like I do and returns the movies right away then it only costs $1 and nothing more…whether it’s a late fee or another nights fee, etc…it all becomes irrelevant and I can go about my wonderful little life and not worry about it.
Sadly this is why “terms and conditions” and “policies” that we are forced to accept as consumer end up becoming so one sided towards the companies because if you miss one little thing, then you as a company will pay for it. Further, at MOST she should only be entitled to a buck and the lawyers should be fined for bringing forth a frivolous lawsuit and wasting the courts time. There’s much more important things to worry about out there folks.
I do believe that there are many other instances where consumers are getting screwed…this is not one of them. Bottom line, if you don’t like Redbox, or you don’t like the fees your cell phone carrier charges, or whatever the case…DON’T buy from them. That’s the most powerful tool a consumer has! Somehow we have fooled ourselves into believing that just because a large national company offers a product or service that we’re entitled to something…sorry but we’re not.
I see that John Small is back with his $0.00000000000002 again.
My opinion is that Redbox is within their rights to advertise “NO LATE FEES”. This is because they do not rent based on a specific period of time. They don’t care how long you keep the DVD. Everyday you keep the DVD is considered another rental day at a charge of $1 per day.
If I rent from a store and am quoted a price good for 3 days, I can be charged a late fee if I return it after those 3 days because there was a time limit placed on my initial rental agreement. Redbox does not do this. Their rental days are unlimited (..up to 25, after which they don’t care anymore). You are NOT renting for a specified period of time with Redbox and therefore there can’t be any late fees. Everyday is a unique and separate rental agreement.
The argument for a late fee in this case, can only be established based on intent. The woman INTENDED to return the DVD sooner. Redbox does not care about your intent. It simply charges $1 for everyday you keep the DVD.
If the woman intended to return the DVD after 1 day, but didn’t return it until the 3rd day, would the 2nd and 3rd days be considered late fees because of her intention? What if someone in her family watched the DVD unbeknownst to her. Does that make the late fee only on the 3rd day? You can’t argue and win this case based on intention, because there is no way to prove it. How do we know she didn’t watch the DVD one last time before returning it late?
This is why Redbox rents as it does, and as such, has no late fees.
Unfortunately a defined time is clearly established – 9:00pm, therefore one could reasonably assume there is a fee, late/extra if returned after the defined time. “No Late Fees” is a extremely bold statement in this industry. The only one that does it is Netfix and if you don’t agree at how profound a statement it is look at their stock or as previously mentioned Block Buster’s court battle over the same issue. It’s semantics, the lady’s an idiot listening to a law firm that stands to make a nice buck just telling her to put her hand out and shut up. Obviously everybody has their own opinion, but the Judge has not thrown it out, therefore both way’s have merit.
Yes, 9pm is clearly established as the beginning and ending of each Redbox DAILY $1 RENTAL fee/period. Laurie P, or anyone who reads/agrees to the terms/therefore rents from Redbox could not only ‘reasonably’ assume they will be charge a $1 RENTAL fee for each day (9pm-9pm) that they keep the rental dvd, they KNOW it and have already agreed to it by the mere act of renting from Redbox. Totally agree with Michael since there is no rental agreement as to how long before you MUST or agreed to return it, then each day ‘kept’ is a daily rental fee. If there was a return agreement (1 day, 3days, 5 days, etc), then yes, if you ‘did not return’ it by the ‘agreed upon’ day, it would be a ‘late’ fee… Since the Redbox rental AGREEMENT doesn’t specify you MUST RETURN it within 1,3, 5 days, etc. every day you KEEP it is a daily $1 rental fee. (Daily rental fee up to 25 days which they clearly state in terms&cond). I think the difference is that a daily RENTAL fee is based on the number of days you KEEP the dvd. A LATE fee is based on the number of days you DON’T RETURN the dvd past your agreed day to return it. Redbox term & cond. has no agreed day (1, 3,5 days etc. )that you MUST return the dvd–so if you rent from Redbox, you are and will only be charged daily RENTAL fees. Get me to that courtroom! I’ll fight this out with that judge!
As I stated it’s in the hands of a judge, anyone with those credentials is welcome to step up otherwise it’s all just opinions.
I watch Judge Judy on tv now and then! I think that should count towards my credentials! :-)
LOL
I am new to RedBox I rented a DVD at 10:45pm and returned it at 10:00pm the next day. I thougth I was returning the DVD early. Much to my suprise I ended up being charged an additional $1.00. The machine I rented from does not have a sign stating rental times are from 9:00-9:00. If I had known that I would have either waited to rent the next day or would have returned the DVD at 9:00pm.
There should have been “return by 9PM” language on both the kiosk, as well as on the screen. If you added your email address, the reminder would have been sent to your email as well.
It’s a small price to pay to find out how ‘the timing game’ works: Pick up your movie at 9:01PM on one night, and get it back by 8:59PM the next day. Just don’t cut it too close, sometimes there is a pre-9PM line of people rushing to get rentals returned. Pehaps this is where a perceived “late fee” comes in.
When a line has caused me to be late, I just call Redbox Customer Service and they give me a free rental code. Fair enough. I’ll take that.
Bottom line there is no rental period established with each customer. Redbox charges customers a dollar a day (or with price testing otherwise, but lets focus here) based on the number of days they have a movie. Late is considered going beyond the maximum rental period which is 25 days. Since you are not charged for days after 25 days there are indeed NO LATE FEES, as Redbox specifically defines late by the rental period, and not how many days in that rental period you keep a movie out. Late is only defined by the maximum 25 days as the customer is solely the ones who determine if they are charged for 1 day, 2 days, or however many up to 25 they keep a movie out. A rental period is anything from 1 to 25 days, anything after that is “Late”. Laurie Piechur never returned the movies period, she wasn’t charged late fees, she was charged for 25 days for never returning them, the 25 days she had them. Now if she was charged for even 26 days, than she would have a fair perspective here, but she wasn’t. Furthermore, everyone is mentioning she is a “mother of 3” like she is an innocent victim, other sites indicate that all of her children are in the custody of their fathers, that should speak volumes of her character. Can’t redbox actually sue her for being in violation of their terms of use, since by filing a lawsuit she is in breach of her initial contract by renting with them and legal action could take place?
Even counter arguments about the after 9 blah blah blah. They can advertise anything they want, but if you READ the fine print, they can change the terms of use and pricing anytime once you have rented and by renting you agree that this is acceptable, so once Laurie rented, she gave up any ability to claim this is false because that is also in the terms of use. Did blockbuster set these items up specifically? That is likely where they failed in their battles.
The arguments you are using were used by Netflix and Blockbuster and they too believed they had airtight agreements.
Strangely enough, they decided to settle because they would have likely lost if they went to court.
Redbox will lose too if it goes to court. Their advertising was misleading regardless of the fine print. The court will see it that way as well.
Did you read the post John? Did you understand it? Why don’t you try again and see if you can do better than that, you made yourself sound unintelligent (I’d prefer the word stupid but I’ll refrain from personal attacks, we don’t want you avoiding being wrong again).
I noticed on your vacation week, you rolled out your own kiosks, which you plan to have at Pizza Hut in Pennsylvania. I wish you luck on your endeavors, say $9.00 a night a disc, sounds like a great business plan according to your previous posts. I won’t use your service, but I’ll support your efforts. Good day.
Read it. You are wrong in it. Need more?
Well I guess I was wrong, you are only going to charge $7.00 a night for those rentals huh?
Hey John Small- what kinda kiosk is situation referring to? Are you a video store owner?
The Sitch is talking out his abs Yepper.
He is just attempting smear me rather than make rational arguments.
Anyone who has read my posts knows that I am retired and do not have a stake in the disc rental business.
‘…do not have a stake in the disc rental business’
I did not have sexual relations with that women…
Stake in lotion of the month for sure though.
Wow- John S- these people don’t seem to be able to let you have a normal conversation without jumping on you. How do you keep your cool with these…people?
It helps that they are consistently proven wrong.
I liked when the administrator called you out for deceptive statements and not answering direct questions posed to you. That happened only to you thus far.
John, no one who has ever commented on this website, has been proven more consistently wrong than you. You just convince yourself in your crazy head that you are better than everyone, and it humors everyone here that you think that your “opinions” (because that’s what they are just like the rest of us) are valid facts.
You ignore posts, (paramount, reservations, business success) and claim you have no stake in the industry. Thanks for the compliment of the abs, ironically here in the northeast, some people like to call them “The Situation”.
FLON, you mean the owner of the site who happens to have a financial stake in how well Redbox does? I took that with the grain of salt it deserved.
Sitch. I admitted that I was incorrect on the Paramount call. Although I still believe that most major studios will be going to a 28 day window sooner rather than later.
I am still correct on the reservations issue regardless of what you think. None of your arguments were relevant or disproved anything I said.
As for business success? If you call what Redbox just experienced success then I now truly understand where you are coming from.
And no, I don’t avoid questions or posts, I just don’t go hunting down month old conversations to pick up where things left off if I happen to have something else to do with my life for a period of time.
‘FLON, you mean the owner of the site who happens to have a financial stake in how well Redbox does?’
Yeah that guy. It was a smackdown of biblical proportions.
Here’s the way I see it, above in this very article you say that anyone who has read your posts knows you don’t have a stake in the industry. Yet you say that I’m hunting down month old conversations. I don’t look for them, I just remember you avoiding them. You want people to look those up to prove you have no stake oh but not to prove you wrong. Theres yet another example of how you contradict your own statements. No one is better at proving John Small wrong than John Small.
The rest of what you posted translated into this, “My name is John Small, basically when I am wrong, which is almost always, I avoid the topic, then after a month it’s like it never happened.” The reservation thing was right on, the dictionary even told you that you were wrong. No where anywhere, does it mention that in order for it to be a “reservation” there does/doesn’t have to be a financial stake, again just you making that up in your head.
If I recall correctly, the administrator didn’t call you out for being wrong, he called you out for making bold statements that you couldn’t back up with any facts or links, really just running your mouth. Then comes FLON, someone smart enough to challenge your statements and prove you wrong often with facts and links, and then you start being passive-aggressive and evading responding. I think everyone in here is a winner who hasn’t stalked elderly widowed women to gain access to their attic and steal their dead husbands comic books to sell for profit. (This is how John made his living).
Hey RB, I agree with you yet again. Rent-to-own is exactly how it works. I used the word late, but I didn’t imply it should be used legally by the rb legal people and am sorry if it came off that way.
FLON, you have a very sad definition of biblical. I suspect lightning might be in order for you soon.
Sitch, seriously, all those words and nothing to say?
You remember wrongly. Go back and look if you need to refresh your memory.
In regards to reservations: I specifically pointed out that other businesses, where reservations are used, allow you to cancel said reservation without financial penalty within a specified timeframe. I then pointed out that was not what Redbox was doing and by not allowing a cancellation or by not changing their use of the “Reservation” that they were opening themself up to yet another lawsuit. No wrongness from my side there.
Michael claimed that my statement of Redbox having decreasing profit levels on a per unit basis was not provable. I have stated that until Coinstar splits out ALL of their expenses then you cannot know what the actual costs of their Redbox side of things is. The latest quarter shows yet again that Redbox is having difficulty generating profit from their kiosks. If people who have a financial stake in Coinstar succeeding want to whine and complain that I am pointing the truth, they can go right ahead. And when the numbers come out proving me correct yet again, well….
‘I have stated that until Coinstar splits out ALL of their expenses then you cannot know what the actual costs of their Redbox side of things is.’
This makes no sense. Your only possible claim is that they are allocating overhead improperly (to coin counting away from redbox). The combined P&L wouldn’t be helped by this and there is no particular benefit for doing so. You ignore all my points about cash flow versus GAAP earnings. Your claim that it is impossible to analyze redbox is utterly wrong.
Then you will be happy, FLON, to state what percentage of the Income from continuing operations comes from the Coinstar coin counting machines and what comes from Redbox DVD rentals.
I did this many moons ago. With the data from the release one is able to calculate operating income after depreciation and overhead for redbox. Unless you want to accuse coinstar of issuing false releases, one can easily conclude that redbox produces positive operating income. The fact that some small amount of overhead is shared by multiple businesses and un-allocatable should not hold you back from any conclusion you may wish to draw.
Oh FLON, must we dance this dance yet again?
You know the numbers you like to claim tell the truth do nothing of the sort.
They do not reflect the bottom line of Coinstar at all.
It is a shame you continue to self-delude yourself.
Dance would imply some form of synchronized movement. You fell flat on your face with this argument. Now you switch back to the ‘bottom line of Coinstar’. You mean gaap net income of Coinstar which is after interest expense and other items that have nothing to do with the operating performance of Redbox. The bottom line is that you can calculate Redbox’s operating income. No and, ifs or buts about it.
I said plenty, but the response you gave it just further proof that you can’t back up any of the garbage you like to spread on this site. Passive-aggressive, it speaks volumes of your character, I can’t imagine you would ever be able to have a decent argument in person without assuming the fetal position in the corner when things heat up. Redbox is here to stay and nobody in this whole world likes John Small!!!!!!!!!
Situation, the only thing I disagree with you is when you state ,”anything after that (the 25 day rental period) is considered “Late”. If you end up keeping (your choice to keep)the dvd 25 days or more, I don’t consider any day after the 25th day as ‘late’ since there was no agreed upon day you MUST return the dvd. In fact, if you choose to rent the dvd for 25 days, then you have chosen to KEEP the dvd forever. You now own it. Nothing ‘late’ about it.
rb, I think that’s what situation was getting at. I think he/she worded it that way to make the point that if excess of 25 days is “late” then due to the fact you are not charged beyond 25 days, then there is no late fee. I agree with both of you.
I can agree with that rb, and in some ways I could be wrong, because I am a man, and I can admit when I am wrong. I just feel like if a customer has a movie 25 days, and then they want to return it, they shouldn’t because it is past the rental period, making it late, but luckily there aren’t late fees. I think it is still late, but there aren’t penalties or it, because redbox is awesome.
Just my thought, but I don’t think Redbox defense should use the word ‘late’ in any way describing anything that might have to possibly do with their dvd rentals/fees while fighting this lawsuit– even using the word ‘late’ to describe days after the 25 day rental period. If anything, I think it would be better to liken their 25 day rental period as a choice of ‘rent to own’. When you ‘rent to own’ say a bluray player, you might agree to pay a rental fee of $5 a day, and if you keep it for an agreed ‘to own’ period of say total 60 days ($300 total rental fees) then you legally own it. If you rent the bluray player for say 15 days and choose not to keep it any longer, then you have paid $75 in rental fees–not late fees. Again, if I were on the defense side, I’d discourage the Redbox team from using/connecting the word ‘late’ in any way to their rental agreement with their customers. :-)
You are correct RB. Using the word late is at the root of the problem.
If Redbox had not used the phrase “No Late Fees” in their advertising they would not be in this lawsuit.
Considering they had previous lawsuits to learn from it is a shame that Redbox even has to deal with this situation.
Because of frivolous lawsuits like this one, companies are forced to do things they shouldn’t have to: oversimplify the offering, dumb out the conditions, fill their products with tons of disclaimers, etc., thus missing on lots of opportunities, spending too much on useless “protection”, ultimately, making their product cost more to all of us. This also makes the whole world a “playground” for greedy lawyers as everything is now defined by legal mumbo-jumbo, taking away our liberties as the normal person is forced to deal with a “foreign language” (legalese) in all aspects of our lives. When you are forced to agree to some stupid multi-page legal agreement to get the simplest thing, you end up not reading it and, thus, giving away your rights. This has become ridiculous. RedBox has a very strong case as it never charged late fees, as any sane person would define it, and I sure hope they go ahead with this case and win it for the sake of all of us.
Any sane person? So when I brought my movie late at 10pm instead of 9pm they didn’t charge me a late fee? Strange, I am pretty sure I had to pay that extra $1 for being an hour late with my return.
No. You paid the additional $1 because the agreement shown to you when you rented the movie (and to which you agreed by pressing the button) clearly stated that if you returned your movie after 9PM, you would be renting it for an additional day. Not because you were late. There is no “late” with RedBox just as there is no late with any recurring service. Pretty clear for the majority of (unprejudiced) people.