7 ms·

Honestly, the best way to handle these things is to forget even bothering with the company and file a charge-back with your bank or Visa/Mastercard. You have ev

Honestly, the best way to handle these things is to forget even bothering with the company and file a charge-back with your bank or Visa/Mastercard. You have every right to call up your bank and deny a charge for a service you're not using, and didn't ask to renew. Plus it's guaranteed to get the charge removed immediately, and you'll be hurting the company by adding to their charge-back tally, increasing payment processing costs for them and potentially completely cutting them off.

TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
Ultimately the solution is to let the customer manage their subscriptions via their payment service provider. PayPal does this.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- petilon 8y ago
  PayPal tried to take money from my checking account because Consumer Reports "autorenewed" my subscription -- without my knowledge or explicit authorization. As soon as I saw this I reported this as an unauthorized transaction on PayPal. But PayPal failed to stop the payment in time, even though at the time of my flagging it was unpaid. I then called BofA and blocked PayPal and that worked. So at the moment I have a negative balance on PayPal. PayPal called me to try and collect it from me, but I told them to fsck off: I had not explicitly authorized either Consumer Reports or PayPal. I didn't realize PayPal could dip into my checking account any time they wanted to. I thought it required my manual action. No more PayPal for me. This is a standard procedure for many merchants these days: Offer an attractive initial price, then add fine print that states your account will autorenew at "then current" rates, and you have to make a phone call (where you have to hold for 20 to 30 minutes for the next available representative) if you want to cancel. I am glad California is taking action. They still have a for-the-people government in California.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    "I didn't realize PayPal could dip into my checking account any time they wanted to." EBay did this to me once, I think this is an American thing, doesn't happen here in Canada like that.
    - olliej 8y ago
      Oh yeah, this was one of the most insane things I experienced moving to the US. If someone has your bank account number they can withdraw money from it. For example the errands bank account authentication mechanism is to withdraw some money from your account, and then ask you how much they took. I honestly could not believe it. It gets better: if you have someone’s bank account number you still cannot transfer money to them. It would literally be easier to tell your bank (say etrade or whatever) that it was your bank account. That’s why all these absurd abank payment systems exist in America. The act of just giving someone money is incredibly hard.
      - smsm42 8y ago
        Yes, though they must be a bank or have an agreement with a bank. Random person can't just do it by just having the numbers. And a bank can get in trouble if it allows shady clients access to ACH. > bank account authentication mechanism is to withdraw some money from your account, and then ask you how much they took In my experience, it is usually the reverse - they put a small sum there, and then withdraw it back after auth. But the end result is the same, of course (except if you have less than $1 on your account). > if you have someone’s bank account number you still cannot transfer money to them That's indeed weird, because I see no technical reason (at least with my knowledge about ACH - btw HN had recently a couple of nice articles about it) why that would not be possible, but my bank only allows me to transfer money to my accounts. No idea why. Maybe some legal stuff? OTOH there are apps like venmo which make it easier.
        olliej 8y ago
        Nope no requirement that they be a bank. Plenty of places allow you to pay online by “direct deposit”, which in every country other than the US involves them providing you with their bank a/c details. In the US you give them /your/ bank account, and /they/ initiate the withdrawal. Anyone with your account details can pay for something from your account, including to a service they can withdraw from. Better yet fraud insurance covers credit cards, not debit or “cheque”. Specifically: if someone uses your bank a/c# you are responsible for recovering the money.
quest88 8y ago
It is not guaranteed. The company has a chance to respond with the paperwork proving that you in fact received the item you paid for. It's then up to you to prove that you did not. I am not a lawyer, but this is what happened to me.
- jakobegger 8y ago
  You can send the company a written cancellation letter before you file the chargeback, and get a confirmation from the post office (is that called a registered letter?) Then you can prove that you cancelled the contract.
- jjeaff 8y ago
  If you respond again reiterating your position, and deny that the "proof" in question is valid (assuming it is), you will almost certainly win. Not only that, but the business will get an additional chargeback fee before losing the chargeback.
- TomMckenny 8y ago
  I honestly can not understand how a credit card company call center can claim to legally decide a civil matter like this. I know in the US they regularly do this just as I know of a couple of counties that absolutely don't allow it. I honestly wonder what legal theory my bank or financial service is using to justify transferring my money or incurring debt under my name to pay someone I explicitly tell them not to simply because a guy at a call center making a snap judgement believes there is a valid contract and that the other party has honored it.
  - jessriedel 8y ago
    The "legal theory" is that you signed up for the credit card company to be a trusted middle man and to ajudicate exactly these sorts of disputes. This is part of value they provide.
    - TomMckenny 8y ago
      It turns out you can not put anything you want in a contract. You can't contract away fundamental rights, for example you can't contract to vote a certain way. But perhaps rather than suggesting that everything in a contract is always valid, maybe you are referring to DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia. And somehow that decision can be stretched to cover this case. Even so, it is clear that the call center is not acing as remotely as an arbitration court in any definition of the term because arbitration courts do have to meet some minimal legal set criterion. So I have a counter theory: the legal theory they're using is they can do whatever they want because the consumer could never afford the legal fees to challenge them on it. And pooling resources by class action is explicitly prohibited by the above decision. So I contend no, it's not legal but it is conveniently un-enforceable now.
Matheus28 8y ago
I wouldn't advise telling people to do chargebacks often. They're meant to be used when venues of negotiation with the company are exhausted and you still believe they're in the wrong. If your bank suspects you're being too liberal with them, they will cut you off, as they'll suspect you're the fraudster.
- gre 8y ago
  Do like 5 chargebacks a decade and you’re good.
- naibafo 8y ago
  I mean how often do you have to cancel gym memberships and newspapers?
- coryfklein 8y ago
  The disparity between fraudsters and the average person with respect to chargebacks is probably pretty large. You'd need to be cancelling multiple subscriptions per month to start showing up on the fraud radar. And If you are cancelling multiple subscriptions per month with regularity, then you may want to reflect and consider if you actually are committing fraud.

TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago

Ultimately the solution is to let the customer manage their subscriptions via their payment service provider. PayPal does this.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
petilon 8y ago
PayPal tried to take money from my checking account because Consumer Reports "autorenewed" my subscription -- without my knowledge or explicit authorization. As soon as I saw this I reported this as an unauthorized transaction on PayPal. But PayPal failed to stop the payment in time, even though at the time of my flagging it was unpaid. I then called BofA and blocked PayPal and that worked. So at the moment I have a negative balance on PayPal. PayPal called me to try and collect it from me, but I told them to fsck off: I had not explicitly authorized either Consumer Reports or PayPal. I didn't realize PayPal could dip into my checking account any time they wanted to. I thought it required my manual action. No more PayPal for me. This is a standard procedure for many merchants these days: Offer an attractive initial price, then add fine print that states your account will autorenew at "then current" rates, and you have to make a phone call (where you have to hold for 20 to 30 minutes for the next available representative) if you want to cancel. I am glad California is taking action. They still have a for-the-people government in California.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  "I didn't realize PayPal could dip into my checking account any time they wanted to." EBay did this to me once, I think this is an American thing, doesn't happen here in Canada like that.
  - olliej 8y ago
    Oh yeah, this was one of the most insane things I experienced moving to the US. If someone has your bank account number they can withdraw money from it. For example the errands bank account authentication mechanism is to withdraw some money from your account, and then ask you how much they took. I honestly could not believe it. It gets better: if you have someone’s bank account number you still cannot transfer money to them. It would literally be easier to tell your bank (say etrade or whatever) that it was your bank account. That’s why all these absurd abank payment systems exist in America. The act of just giving someone money is incredibly hard.
    - smsm42 8y ago
      Yes, though they must be a bank or have an agreement with a bank. Random person can't just do it by just having the numbers. And a bank can get in trouble if it allows shady clients access to ACH. > bank account authentication mechanism is to withdraw some money from your account, and then ask you how much they took In my experience, it is usually the reverse - they put a small sum there, and then withdraw it back after auth. But the end result is the same, of course (except if you have less than $1 on your account). > if you have someone’s bank account number you still cannot transfer money to them That's indeed weird, because I see no technical reason (at least with my knowledge about ACH - btw HN had recently a couple of nice articles about it) why that would not be possible, but my bank only allows me to transfer money to my accounts. No idea why. Maybe some legal stuff? OTOH there are apps like venmo which make it easier.
      - olliej 8y ago
        Nope no requirement that they be a bank. Plenty of places allow you to pay online by “direct deposit”, which in every country other than the US involves them providing you with their bank a/c details. In the US you give them /your/ bank account, and /they/ initiate the withdrawal. Anyone with your account details can pay for something from your account, including to a service they can withdraw from. Better yet fraud insurance covers credit cards, not debit or “cheque”. Specifically: if someone uses your bank a/c# you are responsible for recovering the money.

quest88 8y ago

It is not guaranteed. The company has a chance to respond with the paperwork proving that you in fact received the item you paid for. It's then up to you to prove that you did not. I am not a lawyer, but this is what happened to me.

jakobegger 8y ago
You can send the company a written cancellation letter before you file the chargeback, and get a confirmation from the post office (is that called a registered letter?) Then you can prove that you cancelled the contract.
jjeaff 8y ago
If you respond again reiterating your position, and deny that the "proof" in question is valid (assuming it is), you will almost certainly win. Not only that, but the business will get an additional chargeback fee before losing the chargeback.
TomMckenny 8y ago
I honestly can not understand how a credit card company call center can claim to legally decide a civil matter like this. I know in the US they regularly do this just as I know of a couple of counties that absolutely don't allow it. I honestly wonder what legal theory my bank or financial service is using to justify transferring my money or incurring debt under my name to pay someone I explicitly tell them not to simply because a guy at a call center making a snap judgement believes there is a valid contract and that the other party has honored it.
- jessriedel 8y ago
  The "legal theory" is that you signed up for the credit card company to be a trusted middle man and to ajudicate exactly these sorts of disputes. This is part of value they provide.
  - TomMckenny 8y ago
    It turns out you can not put anything you want in a contract. You can't contract away fundamental rights, for example you can't contract to vote a certain way. But perhaps rather than suggesting that everything in a contract is always valid, maybe you are referring to DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia. And somehow that decision can be stretched to cover this case. Even so, it is clear that the call center is not acing as remotely as an arbitration court in any definition of the term because arbitration courts do have to meet some minimal legal set criterion. So I have a counter theory: the legal theory they're using is they can do whatever they want because the consumer could never afford the legal fees to challenge them on it. And pooling resources by class action is explicitly prohibited by the above decision. So I contend no, it's not legal but it is conveniently un-enforceable now.

Matheus28 8y ago

I wouldn't advise telling people to do chargebacks often. They're meant to be used when venues of negotiation with the company are exhausted and you still believe they're in the wrong. If your bank suspects you're being too liberal with them, they will cut you off, as they'll suspect you're the fraudster.

gre 8y ago
Do like 5 chargebacks a decade and you’re good.
naibafo 8y ago
I mean how often do you have to cancel gym memberships and newspapers?
coryfklein 8y ago
The disparity between fraudsters and the average person with respect to chargebacks is probably pretty large. You'd need to be cancelling multiple subscriptions per month to start showing up on the fraud radar. And If you are cancelling multiple subscriptions per month with regularity, then you may want to reflect and consider if you actually are committing fraud.