3 ms·
I'd rather not live in a world where people can take money out of other people's bank accounts without going through due process first. In your example, due pro
by twblalock 9y ago
I'd rather not live in a world where people can take money out of other people's bank accounts without going through due process first. In your example, due process happens at the end of the dispute rather than at the beginning.
- captn3m0 9y agoThis would also mess badly with the economics of law. For a majority of the contracts, the cost will go up as they will need to be scrutinized more because the cost of a mistake is much higher (it is immediate and final).
- shkkmo 9y agoIn that case, don't read too much about how ACH actually works. You are supposed to obtain authorization first, but this is not generally verified at the time of the transaction (some accounts do white list specific accounts for outgoing ACH transfers). People can pull money out of your account with just your account and routing numbers. The only way to initial an ACH chargeback is to attest under penalty of perjury that you did not authorize the transfer. (Not receiving the product / fulfilling the terms of the contract is not a valid chargeback reason for ACH). So if you had indeed authorized the transfer (as maroperaza stipulates) then your only recourse is to sue them in court.