| |
| ▲ | MostlyStable 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's important to remember that a chargeback should be considered the nuclear option, and, when using it, one should be comfortable with the possibility that one might never do business with this company again, since it could result in being blacklisted (even if one is, in fact, in the right). I'm not saying not to do it, but one should keep in mind the potential repercussions. | | |
| ▲ | yadaeno 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If a business attempts to steal from me I instantly charge back and the onus is on them to prove that I owe them money. I do this all the time and have never been blacklisted. | | |
| ▲ | alpaca128 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Some companies like Activision clearly state in their terms that chargeback means you will be permanently banned, no exceptions. You'll lose your account and access to all digital "purchases" forever. They don't need to prove anything to stop doing business with you. | |
| ▲ | BeetleB 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | With some of the large companies, blacklisted is a real concern. eBay is one known example. I've heard the same for Amazon (forget if it was retail or AWS). It's cheaper to lose your business than to have a proper human review every complaint. | | |
| ▲ | saintfire an hour ago | parent [-] | | I've charged back amazon over retail issues that they did not deem worthy of providing me a human to interact with. It whined about it for a bit on their site but eventually just gave up. Works normal again. |
| |
| ▲ | stavros 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I have a few customers like that. They sign up, forget about it, then they see it on their statement and issue a chargeback. Not only do they get their $20 back (that they very willingly signed up for), but I have to pay another $35 to Stripe for the privilege of having a forgetful customer who couldn't even be bothered to email me for a refund. | | |
| ▲ | ValentineC 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I have to pay another $35 to Stripe for the privilege of having a forgetful customer who couldn't even be bothered to email me for a refund. I've seen some businesses send a pre-billing email telling customers that they'll be charged on a certain date, so that customers have time to cancel if they want. Cloudflare does that for domain renewals, sending out emails 30 and 60 days before. Of course, there are also some businesses that hope that customers forget that they're subscribed, so that there's breakage. | | |
| ▲ | markdown an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > Cloudflare does that for domain renewals That's just standard. Every domain registrar/vendor does this. | |
| ▲ | stavros 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Mine is a one-off payment :( They just forget they paid for it, plus the company name isn't the same as the app name, so they just go "welp, someone must be stealing from me!" and request a chargeback. | | |
| ▲ | mootothemax 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Completely by accident, I have a setup that sends a pdf invoice to customers a couple of days after the sale. I’m pretty sure it’s a stripe option I must’ve misclicked. Anyway- turns out that on the rare occasion someone’s had an issue, this gives them a really easy mechanism to write to me and tell me about it. They let off their steam in the email and then we make things good together. (Yet another reason why I always oppose noreply email addresses) I still don’t know what or where the setting is, mind. | | |
| ▲ | stavros an hour ago | parent [-] | | That's a great idea, thanks! I've found and enabled a few emails, though I think the actual invoice email is a checkout parameter. This should help, thanks! |
| |
| ▲ | xyzzy_plugh 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Anecdotally I helped a client entirely eliminate their chargeback rate by creating a new subsidiary named directly after their product, so that the billing line item was obviously the product. They also saw a slight increase in inbound sales, which surprised me. | | |
| ▲ | ValentineC 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Were you dealing with some other payment processor or bank that didn't allow custom statement descriptors? Stripe and PayPal let me write whatever I want there. | |
| ▲ | stavros 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's a great idea, but it's only helpful above a certain sales volume, which I don't really have. It's just disappointing when the charge back happens, but the economics of the business don't really warrant doing anything about it. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | butlike 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yeah that kind of seems like antiquated fear-mongering. Next they should call the BBB and leave a strongly-worded review! | | |
| ▲ | collingreen 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You joke but I got bbb involved with a scammy business insurance company that is easy to sign up for but you can't cancel or stop renewal or change billing info. Company has an infinite hold line and never responds to anything. Filed a complaint on BBB and it was responded to next business day. | |
| ▲ | nekusar 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | wait, int the BBB just boomer yelp? | | |
| ▲ | sonofhans 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Believe it or not, back in the mists of time we had these things called “public institutions” which were at least notionally chartered to, and in fact somewhat did, act in the public benefit. The BBB was one of those — not always perfect, but consumer-friendly and not out to scam or profit. Yelp is just another VC-backed money play. They do not now or have they ever claimed or intended to make the world a better place without regard for their own profit. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mort96 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't think it's helpful to think about this as the company "trying to steal from you". There is no intention here. It's just something that got lost in a bad IT system. You gain nothing from issuing a chargeback. You imperceptibly nudge some statistic and a "banned for life" flag might automatically get flipped in a database. There's no righteous comeuppance here. You try to contact support, pester them a bit, call someone if possible, and eventually, you may get your money back. If you don't, then you issue the chargeback. | | |
| ▲ | DANmode 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | > There is no intention here. You don’t think it’s funny how the mechanism for taking the money is never broken? Work with a large company who won’t pay your 30 or 45 day invoice for 90 days before you broadly decide this. |
|
| |
| ▲ | nitwit005 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is, yes you were robbed, but what if you want to partner with the bandit later? They'll just rob you in your future interactions too. | | |
| ▲ | malfist 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | But what if the robber becomes a monopoly and you have to partner with them in the future? Who's gonna save you? Government? |
| |
| ▲ | barkingcat 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | waiting for month for a refund (and having lost access to the pro plan immediately but no immediate refund) is definite grounds for chargeback. there is no human on the other end of the chain, and I bet that chargebacks are how they issue refunds (ie relying on the "nuclear" option as the standard practice of how refunds fundamentally works at their company. ie "don't need to answer emails about refunds, because if they really wanted their money back, they'd issue a chargeback" as part of the regular procedure. a lot of companies do this, and it's a common way of minimizing customer support budgets. | | |
| ▲ | b112 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Unless you're big cheese, too many disputes can get a company cut off. Disputes aren't free to mediate, there's a cost to handle each one. Visa/MC can block a company, happens for lots of reasons. | | |
| ▲ | philipov 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | The more people use chargebacks to get around black hole customer service the better, because it is difficult for companies to blacklist everyone. If they don't want to pay the mediation fee, they should provide customer service in the first place. |
|
| |
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | master_crab 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I always wondered about this. Do companies tie the credit card to an identity to block or do they just block the cc number? If the latter, seems like a small friction point for a consumer. Given how often cc numbers change and how many an (American) consumer has, this won’t block anything unless you are charging back more than once every few months. | | |
| ▲ | SyneRyder 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's up to the company, but since many companies don't want to keep card numbers around (and some processors don't let you see the card number anyway), they're probably more likely to block on identity. Maybe flag the IP address of the transaction for "additional screening" on all future transactions, etc. | | |
| ▲ | master_crab 30 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | IPs are notoriously unreliable for identity pinning, particularly in this age of CGNAT. If they can’t or don’t want cc numbers (makes sense considering how painful PCI guidelines are anyway) does that mean they need to rely on more tools from the processors or user accounts maintained by the merchant themselves? | |
| ▲ | nubinetwork 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | CC numbers are also bound to get recycled eventually as cards expire and/or get replaced... even if you block a card, it might have a new owner 6 months or so later. | | |
| ▲ | ValentineC 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | The number space between the first 6 digits (BIN) and the Luhn check digit is 9 digits — that's 1 billion numbers that issuers can give out before a collision happens. |
|
| |
| ▲ | FireBeyond 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Except the banks have "helpfully" provided a service to merchants to tell them, "this card has expired, here is the new number to charge" (or expiry/CVV). I remember getting into an argument with a bank teller about me wanting to block/dispute transactions and how they kept approving transactions. "But you have an agreement with the gym..." That's between me and the gym, not for you to facilitate on their behalf. |
| |
| ▲ | ssl-3 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's also important to remember that chargebacks aren't under our control. As cardholders, we can't issue them directly. All we can do is submit a dispute to the bank. The bank will then investigate (however they do that), and eventually act (in whatever way they choose -- which may include a chargeback). It may seem pedantic, but it's an important detail. Chargebacks are ugly. They constitute red flags on merchant accounts, and with enough of those red flags their own rates are affected (or worse). Nobody wants chargebacks. Banks don't want them (they take time, and therefore money, to deal with). Vendors certainly don't want them. And consumers don't want them, either -- they just want to be made financially whole, however that happens. --- I had a problem once with a local record store where I got charged twice for one purchase. I loved that store very much (I grew up buying my music there), and at no point did I think that they would ever deliberately rip anyone off. But somehow after repeated phone calls and at least one visit, nobody I talked was able to either fix the problem or hand it over to someone who could. So, in desperation: I called the bank and asked for help. I told them what had happened, and what I'd tried to do to resolve it, and they told me I could file a dispute and they would investigate. So that's what I did. The next afternoon, I got a phone call from the store's very apologetic bookkeeper. He informed me that he'd received a call from my bank, and that he'd fixed the problem by refunding both of the charges, asked if that made me satisfied, apologized profusely again, and thanked me for my business. That was a little bit above-and-beyond on the humbleness scale, but whatever. My problem was more than fixed and my fondness for the business was completely restored. --- Anyway, back to the point about being pedantic with nomenclature: All I did was file a dispute, all the bank did was make a phone call to the right person, and all the vendor did was fix the problem. No chargeback took place. | | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The fact that the record store could have easily handled your issue, but chose not to (and chose to not empower any of their employees to) until a bank got involved, should give a clue about what kind of company they actually were. | | |
| ▲ | ssl-3 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, good point. I'll just forget about the fact that I'd spent thousands of dollars there over the course of decades, and they knew what I liked and would order inventory hoping that I'd buy it, and hold onto some of the tchotchke when it was time to take down some release date posters and put up new, just in case I wanted to take some, and I still kept giving them money until they eventually closed their doors forever because the owner was old and the building got ruined in a flood. You're right. None of that was important. I'll just focus on that one incident when the kid at the counter of a record store couldn't figure out a financial problem on their own. That's all I need to know about the place. Those fuckin' scumbags! Thank you very much. Your insight is very rewarding to me. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mannanj 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | So the Anthropic company would blacklist you for taking your money back by force that they owe you? Ok sounds like evil should be labeled and not tolerated as anything else. | | |
| ▲ | throwanem 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | More like, you don't sue a vendor and then expect the relationship to go back to status quo ante. A chargeback is essentially binding arbitration and it can be existentially costly for small businesses, especially those unable effectively to advocate for themselves in a fairly complex and little-known process. Excess chargeback initiations - even of failed chargebacks - will also get acquirer accounts closed, meaning the business formerly a client of that acquirer can now no longer accept credit cards. (Modern acquirers like Stripe also do this, because the card issuers and payment networks will eventually cut them off if they don't: Stripe is not "too big to fail" according to Visa, which is why you may not sell sex or porn via Stripe.) Anthropic doesn't need to care, of course. No one is going to fire them as a customer over excess chargebacks, and a hundred such fees are still cheaper than one hire. Anthropic has a burn rate. Chargebacks impinge much more heavily on businesses that need to earn money selling goods or services. It's important not to confuse one with the other. |
|
|
|