Refunds for 2015 Regular BCBS and 2015 Prop

Who are you talking to?

 

No reason to point fingers, but sort of disappointed at how hostile this thread has gotten (especially given the positive news today).

 

The problem is I do have a receipt, Prop 2015 which was only released in Chicago where laws are in favor of returns, and there was precedence set back in 2010 when Goose Island themselves issued a recall for infected Matilda and asked consumers to return the bottles for full refund at their retailers because of the off-flavors...

I'm not going to beat the point anymore. I'll take the refund from GI and find someone who wants to pay $8 for a slightly tart Prop 2015 without a neck label so I can recoup my cost.

 

C'mon man, your upset about an $8 difference? If I see you I'll give you the damn $8. Heck, even better I'll buy you an $8 beer.

 

Proof of purchase? Sure.

Best one? Not really, considering that a receipt doesn't prove that you bought a bottle for which a refund is actually being issued.

You glossed over that point the first time I mentioned it.

Case in point: I have 6 bottles of BCBS left. None of them are in the infected dates, a point which has been partially validated by the fact that none of the other bottles I have consumed in the "non-infected" dates have had flavor issues. But say I had a receipt for the 6 bottles I have left and the 3 I already drank--what would stop me from calling GI explaining my situation and getting a refund I didn't deserve?

I get that it sucks if you drank infected bottles then threw them away. But I think your displeasure is better directed at the assholes who abused the system the first time around, forcing GI's hand on more stringent requirements.

I can't answer that question, but I can say this:

I've gotten refunds and recall reimbursements for items at stores when I had the product and no receipt.

I've NEVER gotten a refund or recall credit without the actual product.

 

Just some food for thought. I was initially partial to the original 12oz bottles, but what a disaster it would have been if they stuck with that bottle format for 2015. Everyone would be trying to steam off the beer labels (or, worse, be required to send their bottles back)!

 

Proof of purchase? Sure.

Best one? Not really, considering that a receipt doesn't prove that you bought a bottle for which a refund is actually being issued.

You glossed over that point the first time I mentioned it.

Case in point: I have 6 bottles of BCBS left. None of them are in the infected dates, a point which has been partially validated by the fact that none of the other bottles I have consumed in the "non-infected" dates have had flavor issues. But say I had a receipt for the 6 bottles I have left and the 3 I already drank--what would stop me from calling GI explaining my situation and getting a refund I didn't deserve?

I get that it sucks if you drank infected bottles then threw them away. But I think your displeasure is better directed at the assholes who abused the system the first time around, forcing GI's hand on more stringent requirements.

I can't answer that question, but I can say this:

I've gotten refunds and recall reimbursements for items at stores when I had the product and no receipt.

I've NEVER gotten a refund or recall credit without the actual product.

 

And I too will let this rest after pointing out that it is doubtful that your state allows opened containers to be returned for refund, though there are so many different laws about it that I don't actually have a handle nor want to take the time to look through the list of all the different state laws. So you have a receipt, you could return your full bottles and legally receive a refund.

I still think the system they are using where you take the info off a full or empty bottle and without needing a receipt you receive a refund is much more inclusive in your state for folks, and doesn't need to be adapted to all the other states' laws, nor does it cut off from refunds those in other states who don't have receipts for Prop or regular, or have only empty bottles, or have no ability to return a full bottle to its store of purchase. Of course, in order to agree that this system is better you have to agree that a system that benefits many more purchasers of bad products, as this does, is a better system than one that benefits fewer folks.

 

Kudos to you Gator for having the guts to start the post. Your recent post is not only hilarious, but also incredibly ironic that no apologies have been given yet. Unfortunately I've read most of this, and you took a lot of flak. Since they're not going to, I'll apologize for the rabid d-bags rampant throughout this thread. Truly amazing. I can only close with the fact that we are all dumber for having read a significant majority of the posts from this day outside of actually breaking the new refund news. Time to go check my bottles, open and unopened. That's right, I saved my bottles to give to a friend that homebrews. Wanna fight about it?

 

And you glossed over my most recent point about Prop '15. They only list one date for bottling/off batches and I'm pretty certain it was the only day they bottled Prop '15. So taking BCBS out of the argument, why can't they offer the refund option for receipts for Prop '15 only? As I said before, my BCBS' are fine so that doesn't really affect me.

Of course I hate that dishonest people took advantage of the system. But they choose that system the first go around. I actually had all of my bottles then and the receipts. I could've provided them happily then.

Also, you're also missing the point that Goose Island denied that Prop '15/BCBS (some) was off for quite some time. So who saves their bottles given that information? In fact, after their denial, there was a mad rush of people who went to drink their beers hoping they would be fine. GI finally after a while said they were looking into it, but at no point did they say, "Save your bottles and sit tight." Poor communication.

You can defend them at your leisure, but they didn't go above and beyond this round. They were terrible.

 

Reasonable people would agree with you on this.

 

I have 5 eligible bottles, 4 with identical bottle dates and times, and one with a different time, same date. I don't have a cell phone or a camera. I took a lot of time and peeled off the 5 labels they wanted photographed, plus the 5 neck labels. I called to ask how I should send them in, and was told they wouldn't accept the original labels, only a photo of the original labels. But if one has neck labels from any batch, and multiple photos of one eligible bottle, they will approve them. If I only had a brain.

 

Terrible: "extremely or distressingly bad or serious" You really think that them providing refunds to so many people falls into that category? I get that their refund policy doesn't line up for your exact situation, but you really think this refund process qualifies as terrible? Really?

Also, if I EVER have a bottle that is bad/off from what I expect, you can be sure that I keep the bottle or take a picture as proof of it.

The obvious solution would have been to buy a camera and cell phone to take pictures, and expect reimbursement for the camera and cell phone.

 

You purchased at least $120 of regular BCBS which were all fine. And you're incredibly upset about missing out on a $25 refund for a bottle of Prop which you bought when you traveled to Chicago? Craft beer problems.

 

This is what bothers me. I drank a few hoping they'd be okay, they were not. After the first round it seemed from all communication that nothing would be done further. If there was a chance on their part for further refunds they should've been more open about what they were looking into, such as bottle dates and what not.

Saving onto bottles because they tasted bad is simply not an option all the time. Yes, let me hold on to that bottle I brought to a concert tail gate. Or, sure at the end of the night drinking at a buddies house I'll just quietly remove my bottle from the recycling at 2 in the morning. Anyone who attempted to enjoy their beer quickly are screwed, and those who prefer to age it or have an abundance of it are fine. If you bought a case somehow you would actually be making money if you never touched them.

 

I believe that the communication once people alerted them to the problem and then the refund process after for this round was terrible, yes.

Also, I don't think my situation is completely unique. I haven't read through all of the comments here on BA, but I have read a lot on GI's Facebook page. A lot of people are pretty unhappy with the system.

 

I'm big on principle. If it's no big deal to you, send me $25 and I'll let it go. I won't hold my breath on that.

 

I can speak from my experience from alerting to them to it was pretty reasonable. I started opening bottles after hearing of the issues - the first few were delicious, then I tried a few from different dates and they were terribly off. After that, I contacted them and they said they were researching it. I thought that made sense.

As far as your second paragraph about reading comments on a Facebook page...I think we all know the type of people/comments that come out in that forum. In general, the people that complain come out in that type of forum (and here, even)...people that are happy and content don't seem to create as much noise about their positive experience.

 

I'm not sure at what point in time you contacted them initially, but a lot of folks, myself included, contacted GI early on when the first reports were coming out and they were dismissive. They said there were no issues with BCBS/Prop and that it was only in BCBBW/BCBCS (there are posts on BA that validate this). They didn't even acknowledge a possible problem until later after many complaints.

Also, I don't think it's fair to necessarily discount people who post on their Facebook page. If anything, those folk are actually attaching their name, photo, and probably the city they live in among other personal information. Personally, I'd be much more reluctant to complain there unless it was legitimate.

 

Ok if you're big on principle, how about this? You will not purchase or consume another Goose Island Bourbon County beer (or variant) until such time you get your $25 check for your bottle of Prop '15 when you traveled to Chicago. Sounds pretty reasonable for a principled man, yeah? Except it will never happen for you or anyone on BA complaining about this refund process. My goodness, GI makes an unprecedented gesture in the beer world (at this scale certainly) and there will always be people who find reason to complain. Meanwhile these same people spend hundreds, if not thousands of dollars a year on beer and a $25 refund seems to be such a big issue for them.