3 ms·
If the linked post is truthful, the issue here is the absolute opacity of the process and the fact that this "assessment" by the credit card network (I notice y
by wyager 4y ago
If the linked post is truthful, the issue here is the absolute opacity of the process and the fact that this "assessment" by the credit card network (I notice you used the passive voice "been assessed" - why?) seems very questionable.
I would certainly not trust stripe to effectively "dispute the issue on behalf of their client", based on experiences some of my friends have had with stripe. More likely, stripe just folded instantly upon receiving some automated nastygram from the CC issuer.
- ryeguy 4y agoIt's in stripe's best interest to fight the fine. Why would you think they would prefer to pay the networks and collect the fine from a merchant?
- ywain 4y agoThe opacity is by design. Fraudsters will use every bit of available information to make their businesses appear legit. Having worked at Stripe (though not in risk), I'd wager that Stripe did not "fold instantly" for a 425k fine. It's unfortunate, but the OP is the one who made a costly mistake when they grandfathered existing accounts into a setup they knew had liabilities.