Generally refunding money for TOS violations should be mandatory, and failing to do so should have a default assumption of fraud on the part of the provider. L

Generally refunding money for TOS violations should be mandatory, and failing to do so should have a default assumption of fraud on the part of the provider. Let me explain why. Imagine that Alice purports to run a service where you can send people greeting cards. Bob decides that he's going to use this service to send greeting cards. Alice takes Bob's money, and never sends any greeting cards. When Bob asks why the greeting cards weren't sent, Alice claims a TOS violation and cancels Bob's account. In some cases, Alice may not even provide sufficient information to dispute a claim, such as when Alice's own proprietary anti-fraud or anti-cheat algorithms have a false positive. Should Bob get a refund? If he doesn't, Alice has no incentive to provide the actual service or to avoid false-positives. She's costing Bob the subscription fees, but can unilaterally decide whether or not to provide the agreed-upon service. That's why TOS violations should always trigger a refund.