3 ms·

I suspect the argument here is simply "we refunded the exact amount we received!" and that they bear no responsibility for the foreign transaction fees, which w

I suspect the argument here is simply "we refunded the exact amount we received!" and that they bear no responsibility for the foreign transaction fees, which were probably from the owners' bank. It sucks but it makes sense for the merchant. The bank should return the fees but the exchange rate difference is likely lost. Also another good reason not to use a debit card for any online transaction. At least with a credit card, no one can take your money while they're settling the dispute.

doughj3 9y ago
> It sucks but it makes sense for the merchant. It's the merchant fault the card was not protected, we shouldn't really be concerned with what makes sense for the merchant.
- boredpudding 9y ago
  The merchant can't 'return' things it never got. The fees are billed by the bank to the user. That's none of Uber's business, and (more importantly): Uber has no way to verify if the user had those fees, and if the users screenshots are correct. As Uber said: They have no control of this. The user should go to their bank, because they provided the service of currency conversion.
  - thaumasiotes 9y ago
    > The merchant can't 'return' things it never got. Consider the following scenario: 1. I borrow your thing. 2. I break your thing. 3. Oh well, there's literally nothing that can be done about this.
thaumasiotes 9y ago
That's not really how torts work. If I cause you a loss, your recovery from me is not limited to the amount I gained by so doing. Compare, say, a suit for wrongful death. The principle you describe would in general cap damages at $0. Similarly, if Uber is responsible for stealing $430 from my bank account, that fact that they gave $20 of it away is not a reason for them to return only $410.
- caseysoftware 9y ago
  Yes, but a "tort" is not a "refund." Should they make the person whole? Absolutely. Do they have to? Probably not based on their merchant/banking agreements.
  - throwaway76543 9y ago
    A refund is a settlement to avoid a tort.
  - thaumasiotes 9y ago
    You don't get to choose whether you're liable for a tort. Nor will your merchant/banking agreements protect you.
tlb 9y ago
The fact that the charges were in a foreign currency isn't the author's fault. He wasn't traveling. Currency exchange to RU is relatively stable, but you could imagine being scammed from a country with hyperinflation, where a refund 3 months later denominated in the local currency is worth much less. So in general, it's not adequate to be compensated for international fraud in the fraudster's currency.
- caseysoftware 9y ago
  Yes, that's probably the exact scenario their merchant/banking agreements are protecting them from.

doughj3 9y ago

> It sucks but it makes sense for the merchant. It's the merchant fault the card was not protected, we shouldn't really be concerned with what makes sense for the merchant.

boredpudding 9y ago
The merchant can't 'return' things it never got. The fees are billed by the bank to the user. That's none of Uber's business, and (more importantly): Uber has no way to verify if the user had those fees, and if the users screenshots are correct. As Uber said: They have no control of this. The user should go to their bank, because they provided the service of currency conversion.
- thaumasiotes 9y ago
  > The merchant can't 'return' things it never got. Consider the following scenario: 1. I borrow your thing. 2. I break your thing. 3. Oh well, there's literally nothing that can be done about this.

thaumasiotes 9y ago

That's not really how torts work. If I cause you a loss, your recovery from me is not limited to the amount I gained by so doing. Compare, say, a suit for wrongful death. The principle you describe would in general cap damages at $0. Similarly, if Uber is responsible for stealing $430 from my bank account, that fact that they gave $20 of it away is not a reason for them to return only $410.

caseysoftware 9y ago
Yes, but a "tort" is not a "refund." Should they make the person whole? Absolutely. Do they have to? Probably not based on their merchant/banking agreements.
- throwaway76543 9y ago
  A refund is a settlement to avoid a tort.
- thaumasiotes 9y ago
  You don't get to choose whether you're liable for a tort. Nor will your merchant/banking agreements protect you.

tlb 9y ago

The fact that the charges were in a foreign currency isn't the author's fault. He wasn't traveling. Currency exchange to RU is relatively stable, but you could imagine being scammed from a country with hyperinflation, where a refund 3 months later denominated in the local currency is worth much less. So in general, it's not adequate to be compensated for international fraud in the fraudster's currency.

caseysoftware 9y ago
Yes, that's probably the exact scenario their merchant/banking agreements are protecting them from.