Microsoft is struggling to meet customer demand for refunds related to its Copilot AI agent add-on to M365 after announcing the offer early yesterday.
“Customer support wait times were higher than expected following our refund offer yesterday. Our team has been working hard to respond to customers and the volume has now subsided,” a Microsoft spokesperson told iTnews.
Microsoft announced the offer in an attempt to mitigate reputation damage after Australia’s consumer regulator accused the company of misleading 2.7 million Australians about pricing options for its M365 plans in court filings last Tuesday.
At the heart of the issue is whether Microsoft concealed a “classic” subscription option, without Copilot, from view at the time of renewal, directing customers to more expensive plans with Copilot included.
Earlier this month, Microsoft apologised to customers and announced that it would offer a refund customers who did not want the additional Copilot features.
In addition to high volumes of refund seekers, iTnews has received reports from customers claiming that they have been denied refunds altogether.
One reader told this publication that Microsoft denied their application to revert their Family M365 plan to the “classic” version of their software subscription without AI in order to get the refund.
The reader said that the only option that they were were given was to contact Microsoft during US business hours.
Another reader shared an experience of the refund process with iTnews that suggested Microsoft might have missed the reason the ACCC took it to court.
“Is [Microsoft] being tricksy about this or are they just incompetent? I had a look and there is no way to downgrade. The revised link they sent yesterday just takes you to a Microsoft 365 page and when you log into your MS account and go to ‘manage subscription,’ like [its] chatbot suggests, there is no downgrade to classic option there,” the reader said.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission told iTnews that it is still pursuing a court ruling against the company, including “effective redress”, despite the refund program.
“Microsoft’s recent offer to its customers does not arise from a settlement of the ACCC’s court action,” the regulator said.
“We continue to seek penalties, injunctions, declarations, effective consumer redress, and costs in court.”
Under Federal Court rules, defendants can receive more favourable outcomes from the court when it comes to costs if they take steps to avoid expensive trials, including settlement offers on terms reflecting the remedies sought by applicants.