4 ms·

This is now pretty standard across the industry. PayPal made the same change last year.

by sparrish 4y ago

brianwawok 4y ago
Sadly users still expect refunds for any reason. Charging a 3% fee on a refund is a cause for a shtfit.
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  Why sadly? This is basic consumer protection stuff. It seems like currently this fee ends up being paid by the vendor or some middleman, but that seems like BS too. Visa/whoever should be returning the fee and folding it into their business model as the cost of doing business.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
    Our businesses should be doing more to prevent refunds. The sheer amount of trash every large company makes is sickening.
    - crote 4y ago
      Even if you do everything you can to prevent it, you still incur refunds. It is simply impossible to get everything right 100% of the time - not in the least because people keep buying the wrong items. Things like cancelled or modified orders happen all the time, and you can't really do anything to prevent those.
      - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
        And that sounds like the cost of doing business to me. For especially egregious cases the companies should reserve the right to charge customers for being stupid and wasteful.
    - brianwawok 4y ago
      The sheer amount of stupid reasons a user wants a refund is staggering. “I didn’t want to use that credit card. Refund and recharge this other card” Or 500 other silly things
      - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
        Pick your poison. Refund or chargeback and negative WoM.
- jrochkind1 4y ago
  I wonder how consumers developed that expectation? I don't think that expectation is actually more than 20 years old...
  - rocqua 4y ago
    Where I live, that expectation is enshirined in a law created in 2001. The reasoning is, with remote buying you can't physically inspect the item. Hence you can decide to return an item at no cost, provided you have only handled it the way you would have been allowed in a physical store. I believe the law was originally created due to massive over-promising of results by tele-marketers. (I live in the Netherlands, but similar laws are common in Europe I believe)
gowld 4y ago
> last year. I see we're still not counting the pandemic in this timeline. It was October 2019.

This is now pretty standard across the industry. PayPal made the same change last year.

brianwawok 4y ago

Sadly users still expect refunds for any reason. Charging a 3% fee on a refund is a cause for a shtfit.

AlexandrB 4y ago
Why sadly? This is basic consumer protection stuff. It seems like currently this fee ends up being paid by the vendor or some middleman, but that seems like BS too. Visa/whoever should be returning the fee and folding it into their business model as the cost of doing business.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
  Our businesses should be doing more to prevent refunds. The sheer amount of trash every large company makes is sickening.
  - crote 4y ago
    Even if you do everything you can to prevent it, you still incur refunds. It is simply impossible to get everything right 100% of the time - not in the least because people keep buying the wrong items. Things like cancelled or modified orders happen all the time, and you can't really do anything to prevent those.
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
      And that sounds like the cost of doing business to me. For especially egregious cases the companies should reserve the right to charge customers for being stupid and wasteful.
  - brianwawok 4y ago
    The sheer amount of stupid reasons a user wants a refund is staggering. “I didn’t want to use that credit card. Refund and recharge this other card” Or 500 other silly things
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
      Pick your poison. Refund or chargeback and negative WoM.
jrochkind1 4y ago
I wonder how consumers developed that expectation? I don't think that expectation is actually more than 20 years old...
- rocqua 4y ago
  Where I live, that expectation is enshirined in a law created in 2001. The reasoning is, with remote buying you can't physically inspect the item. Hence you can decide to return an item at no cost, provided you have only handled it the way you would have been allowed in a physical store. I believe the law was originally created due to massive over-promising of results by tele-marketers. (I live in the Netherlands, but similar laws are common in Europe I believe)

gowld 4y ago

> last year. I see we're still not counting the pandemic in this timeline. It was October 2019.