> Customers don't want to {blah blah blah}

If this is the way it works and the result are chargebacks it just means things cost more in general (cost of business will be factored in).

It's not a good thing.

▲

infecto 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

If chargebacks are a significant issue for your business then you are doing something wrong.

▲

evermike 2 days ago | parent [-]

As I mentioned in the article, this is extremely rare for us, but it has happened a couple of times. And that’s where I start having questions and frustration about the process itself.

I’ve shared examples in the article.

▲

JumpCrisscross a day ago | parent [-]

> this is extremely rare for us, but it has happened a couple of times

Put punitive terms into your SLA. (Though check with a lawyer about adhering to your merchant agreement.)

Charging back doesn’t cancel a contract. If you want to be vindictive, you could sell the debt to a collector.

▲

singleshot_ a day ago | parent [-]

Restatement (Second) Contracts sec. 356 would seem directed squarely at this bad idea.

▲

JumpCrisscross a day ago | parent | next [-]

It constrains liquidated damages to a reasonable figure. But it doesn’t prevent them. As for selling a debt to a collector, that seems perfectly reasonable, particularly if the customer made no effort to cancel.

▲

singleshot_ a day ago | parent [-]

I am acutely aware that it constrains liquidated damages to a reasonable figure. Conveyance to a collector is, of course, customary in the trade.

The problem is that a “punitive” amount of liquidated damages is neither reasonable, nor would it typically be found to have been the product of an actual estimate of the damages. See, 356 cmt. a.

If you didn’t say “punitive” in the LD provision, you’d have the “reasonable estimate” conversation but GP straight up called it a punitive clause, which is not going to fly (in many jurisdictions, ianyl, etc. etc.)

▲

JumpCrisscross a day ago | parent [-]

> a “punitive” amount of liquidated damages is neither reasonable, nor would it typically be found to have been the product of an actual estimate of the damages

Would note that the Restatement isn’t law, but an influential guideline. As long as the punitive terms are clearly agreed to, they ought to be able to fly. (Particularly if made in exchange for money, e.g. pay a premium to opt out of punitive cancellation.)

	▲	11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

llm_nerd 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yet the majority of businesses use dark patterns to avoid cancellations because it's hugely profitable to do so. Chargebacks are expensive, but the truth is that the majority of customers never leverage it, and often just endure years of paying for products they don't use. Maybe they tried to cancel to find that while they could sign up in seconds online, cancelling invariably requires a call (to a number that, wouldn't you believe it, has higher than normal call volumes!) into some maze of retention garbage.

What a world we would be if companies didn't want to bill customers that don't use their product. Imagine if companies automatically paused billing if you stopped using their product? Panacea.

Apple is a hugely greedy company, but it's one thing I like about subscribing to things in there -- I can cancel at any time with minimal effort.

	▲	danillonunes 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Imagine if companies automatically paused billing if you stopped using their product? Panacea. Beeminder does exactly that! https://blog.beeminder.com/autocancel

▲

ta1243 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> the result are chargebacks it just means things cost more in general

shrug. That's just the way it works.

Make it easier to unsubscribe than doing a chargeback. Your competitors who do that will have a lower cost and be able to undercut you and you'll go out of business.

That is a good thing.

▲

re-thc a day ago | parent [-]

> Make it easier to unsubscribe than doing a chargeback. Your competitors who do that will have a lower cost and be able to undercut you and you'll go out of business.

How do you know people aren't already doing so? It's not about the competitors but the industry in general.

Have you not read the post I was replying to?

I quote:

> People don't remember they signed up.

> They can't remember how to log in from a different device to cancel.

> It's easier to use their credit card app to dispute the charge.

> The company name is different than the product name

> A worker or family member signed up using someone else's card

> People expected one thing from your SaaS product

> They rarely check or read their email

Sure there were other points, but more than 50% of the list is about the customer having their own problems. It's like having a bad actor in the system making it worse for everyone.

▲

ta1243 a day ago | parent [-]

Send an email saying "you're about to be charged, click here to cancel your membership"

▲

porridgeraisin a day ago | parent [-]

Exactly. This is what I want all my subscriptions to do.

In UPI (I know I know...) there is an autopay system. Your single UPI app has a single page with all your subscriptions. You can cancel or do whatever there and it's all handled in one place. My openai, streaming services, youtube premium, amazon prime, everything is on there. It gives me notifications before a charge is about to occur. No dark patterns.

This is the standard I expect.

Since credit cards don't provide a centralised thing like that, it's up to the SaaS provider to give the equivalent experience.

Cancelling should be _exactly_ as easy as signing up. If that means your MAU doesn't increase as fast, maybe you have a shit product. Case in point: amazon prime can have cancel buttons littered all across every page and I'm still not gonna cancel it.

Here's the simplest implementation: Few days before and on the day of charging, some infobox on the app's most attention-requiring screen, and an email telling me I'm gonna be charged. In all those communications, the main CTA should be a cancel button, that without further ado, let's me confirm and cancel the thing.

Anything even one step more complicated is a dark pattern.

Someone downthread mentioned - what if they want to change their subscription level instead of cancelling? In that case, two CTAs: change plan, and cancel. Both equally sized and right next to each other with good color contrast - important! None of that greyed out cancel button bullshit.

	▲	ta1243 16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I don't want to be messing around with "forget my password", or having to remember what email I set up for it. > some infobox on the app's most attention-requiring screen, and an email telling me I'm gonna be charged Nope, I no longer log in (because your app was crap, or because I accomplished my goal). Fine I lost $10 If I log in every day or two chances are I want to keep it going. It has to be an out-of-band communication with the ability to cancel in a frictionless way, which means no account hijinks