266
HP says I should have known its £399 laptop bargain was too good to be true
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
266 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
34795 readers
339 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Parcelforce then rang me and the agent acknowledged a delivery had not been attempted and that the tracking information was false.
If you hadn’t attached all the emails from HP and Parcelforce inventing and reinventing the story of your failed delivery, I’d have struggled to believe it.
HP’s terms and conditions state that the contract is formed once the order confirmation is sent.
In 2002 Kodak was forced to honour its contract with more than 2,000 customers after erroneously advertising a £329 camera at £100.
HP’s behaviour sent you on a week-long wild goose chase and unleashed chaos at the Parcelforce depot.
HP ignored my questions about how many customers were affected and why it repeatedly gave you false information.
The original article contains 541 words, the summary contains 120 words. Saved 78%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
One of the worst summaries I have seen. The article writing is bad but the summary is missing almost the whole story.
I really wouldn't blame it. Garbage in, garbage out...
This is a truly impressively terrible summary. I mean just the fact that the second word is "then" is something to behold. But then the second paragraph switches perspective without any warning so nobody has any idea who "you" refers to.
Also, I mean, the fact that it literally cut out everything that happened.
So what did it miss?