Xcal 1 Going Offline Discussion

[Trough Lolly]

Just got a response from the ACCC, first an email then a fellow called me up to further explain some things, He seems to agree that whats happening is very suss and he says that its very very iffy to breaching section 52 & 53 of the trade practices act.

Section 52 of the TPA prohibits corporations engaged in trade and commerce from engaging in behaviour that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.

Section 53© of the TPA prohibits corporation in trade or commerce from making false or misleading representations about the performance characteristics, accessories or uses or benefits of their goods or services. The conduct that you describe may be at risk of breaching these provisions of the TPA.

He says try take it further with Herrods themselves before any further action be taken by their dept, But if Herrods fail he says we have a strong case with Dept of fair trading, and at worse have to sit in a hearing in court and wear the costs of $63... woopee, id love to sit and argue with them over this!!

Ill try my luck with Herrods and see wtf happens, in the meantime IF YOUR KEEN ABOUT HELPING THIS MATTER GET FIXED, CONTACT THE ACCC AND LODGE A COMPLAINT!

The bloke I spoke to reckons every single complaint helps escalate the matter further up and deeper investigations will happen and theres already a couple of complaints on record against the people in question. So do yourselves a favour and take 5mins to Lodge an ACCC complaint on the website, or the link somewhere in this thread.

Keep you posted!

Edited 03/08/10 12:01 PM by Trough Lolly

[genebaby]

Excellent stuff. Here's the link again peoples. Create New Complaint

I still cannot believe tuners in business think this is acceptable behavior as it most certainly is not. It's completely unacceptable and we have every right to have our say and fight it or it will easily happen again and again.

I don't believe we'll get anywhere with Herrods save for the fact SCT may have their ability to trade in this country through them stopped until it's sorted out.

SCT have contravened our laws, and I'm sure the US would have something similar, and must face the consequences.

[arm79]

I wish you luck with it, and I'm happy to throw a few $$$ your way to help with the costs.

But I believe any action against SCT and Herrod will fail, as much as I seriously hope it wont.

I've pretty much given up, as they really haven't broken any laws. They screwed us, but its more moral than anything.

Edited 03/08/10 12:20 PM by arm79

[genebaby]

It's not a moral thing, it's illegal to remove functionality from a product someone has bought, especially when that's the primary function, let alone whatever it was that Sony tried removing from the PS3 the ACCC guy told me about. They were dirty on that and dirty on this.

Because they are in the US it may just be something like a sanction against trading here, which I would be happy with. Those yanks have treated us Australians like second class citizens from day one, dumping old stock on us and then wanting us to pay again for the same service. We deserve better.

[Vevapower]

Mate I just filled out the form. I would suggest that you wirte up a sort of cut and paste stlye blurb for all who are interested in submitting a complaint as this would encourage more ripped off T owners to submit their conplaints to the ACCC.

[arm79]

it's illegal to remove functionality from a product someone has bought, especially when that's the primary function,

And herein lies the problem with action against SCT.

Find me one bit of documentation anywhere on the web where it says the primary function of these tuning boxes is the ability to reprogram them over and over.

All you will find is that you can upload 3 tunes and swap between these tunes at anytime. It doesn't say we can reprogram any of those tunes after the inital load, nor does it say we can do it over and over again.

The same sales blub is used for the X3.

I quote this from an email from Charlie at SCT "The intended use (switching between calibrations) is still available. The unfortunate part is that we cannot continue with offering flashing capabilities."

Seeing as their marketings and sales blubs all say the intended use is to switch between tunes already on the box, then they haven't disabled the intended use of the box. The way we were using them is different than what was intended.

Therefore the statement that Herrod released was a very well worded "screw you". It too said its intended use was not compromised. But no where did it say a tuner will be able to tune them forever. The most we can be pissed with Herrod about is not specifically saying "SCT will disable the software that allows addition tunes sometime in the future, get ready". I think everyone, including me, has made an assumption that is in the end not correct.

I bought this up with one of the directors at work, an ex solicitor. He's basically said SCT's case is good and ours is weak. The only way for SCT to have breached any laws is to have advertised the use as being "to be able to tune over and over with no expiry". Omitting this little detail when discussing the issue on a legal level makes the whole difference. At this point, I'd pretty much given up.

Out of curiousity, did you mention this to the ACCC or Consumer Affairs when you made the complaint?

And should action continue against SCT or Herrod, I'm sure this the line they will fall back on.

Find something as advertised by SCT, Herrord or Capa about the retuning abilities, you'll win. I couldn't find anything though.

As I said, I'm happy to help fund something, and even lodge a complaint, against SCT to hopefully see a favourable outcome. I'm not trying to knock what you guys are doing, but in my job as an analyst, I'm paid to look at both sides, every variable and see what possible outcomes there are. My fingers are very lightly crossed.

Edited 03/08/10 12:50 PM by arm79

[gregor]

look back a few pages. I quoted CAPA's page about unlimited amounts of retunes and someone else took a screen shot.

Edit: Its page 8. And they state loading to and from the flash box can be done an infinite number of times. If it only said loading from I would interpret that as switching tunes, but saying loading to would indicate sending data to the xcal box - meaning updating a tune.

Edited 03/08/10 10:32 PM by gregor

[arm79]

Yep, I saw that and read that... So playing devils advocate again, where does it say retune and therefore loading new tunes to the box?

To me that says there is no limit on how many times data can be transferred back and forth, so its not finite like the number of cars it can be used on.

One can argue that line means we can upload whatever tunes the tuners have saved for us right now as many times as we require. Or remove one of the custom tunes from the box and replace it with one from a library of tunes you or your tuner may have. Its forcing a leading and unqualified assumption on our part.

If you read further, that same line appears on the X3 sales blurb on the CAPA site... BUT NOT on the Herrod or SCT site. Does that mean that CAPA has made a sales promise that the manufacturer and their current distributor don't support?

SCT have always maintained to me via email that how we are using these devices is not the intended use. If CAPA have lead us to believe otherwise, and every X1 box sold in Australia came via CAPA, then our beef really is with CAPA.

[nathen]

And herein lies the problem with action against SCT.

Find me one bit of documentation anywhere on the web where it says the primary function of these tuning boxes is the ability to reprogram them over and over.

All you will find is that you can upload 3 tunes and swap between these tunes at anytime. It doesn't say we can reprogram any of those tunes after the inital load, nor does it say we can do it over and over again.

The same sales blub is used for the X3.

I quote this from an email from Charlie at SCT "The intended use (switching between calibrations) is still available. The unfortunate part is that we cannot continue with offering flashing capabilities."

Seeing as their marketings and sales blubs all say the intended use is to switch between tunes already on the box, then they haven't disabled the intended use of the box. The way we were using them is different than what was intended.

Therefore the statement that Herrod released was a very well worded "screw you". It too said its intended use was not compromised. But no where did it say a tuner will be able to tune them forever. The most we can be pissed with Herrod about is not specifically saying "SCT will disable the software that allows addition tunes sometime in the future, get ready". I think everyone, including me, has made an assumption that is in the end not correct.

I bought this up with one of the directors at work, an ex solicitor. He's basically said SCT's case is good and ours is weak. The only way for SCT to have breached any laws is to have advertised the use as being "to be able to tune over and over with no expiry". Omitting this little detail when discussing the issue on a legal level makes the whole difference. At this point, I'd pretty much given up.

Out of curiousity, did you mention this to the ACCC or Consumer Affairs when you made the complaint?

And should action continue against SCT or Herrod, I'm sure this the line they will fall back on.

Find something as advertised by SCT, Herrord or Capa about the retuning abilities, you'll win. I couldn't find anything though.

As I said, I'm happy to help fund something, and even lodge a complaint, against SCT to hopefully see a favourable outcome. I'm not trying to knock what you guys are doing, but in my job as an analyst, I'm paid to look at both sides, every variable and see what possible outcomes there are. My fingers are very lightly crossed.

So if I had a engine failure due to a generic sct/cappa/herrod tune can I sew them for supplying me wth a dud tune?

could we sew for the fact that we have been mislead into believing that a 6 speed tune was available?

and herrods /sct/capa case would fall on its arse.

why is it sct sells or changed dongles to tuners in the tuner package?

as for advertisng does that mean that the xcl 3 will also be blocked?

why can the xcal3 be tuned by a tuner?

somebody post up the letter to accc im over this sh*t

[arm79]

So if I had a engine failure due to a generic sct/cappa/herrod tune can I sew them for supplying me wth a dud tune?

No, as I'd guess each box came with a big disclaimer saying "All care but no responsibility if you use this. Get a dyno tune immediately after to see if it suits your car"

could we sew for the fact that we have been mislead into believing that a 6 speed tune was available?

No, because I don't believe it was ever said one was available. It's always been "on the way". At the moment its nothing more than a tease.

and herrods /sct/capa case would fall on its arse.

Dont be silly. 50 random emotive non core issue sooks is not a legal case for getting your way. How does your above comments make SCT liable for switching off the X1? Got to be realistic and not emotive, as the ACCC doesn't run on emotions or morals. Just facts and law.

as for advertisng does that mean that the xcl 3 will also be blocked?

If you read back, this was already discussed. And yes, there is a potential for this to happen. But because of the extra security built into the X3 devices, then SCT are unlikely to do the same thing.

why can the xcal3 be tuned by a tuner?

It's pretty simple, because SCT have decided not to turn off tuning capabilities for the X3 in their software. You're confusing the way we used these devices for what the advertised and documented INTENDED USE is. And that's the line that SCT will fall back on. Just because we are using them to tune many times over, doesn't mean that's what SCT envisioned their use for. If you read back to some of the quote from SCT, then you will see.