9 ms·

Imagine being banned from Best Western, for example, because you disputed a charge! Having a dispute, especially one which is so reasonable like this, being gr

Imagine being banned from Best Western, for example, because you disputed a charge! Having a dispute, especially one which is so reasonable like this, being grounds for banning is insane to me. Companies as large as Airbnb cannot be just banning whoever they want. This whole notion of, we don't agree with you, so we'll just ban you thing has got to stop.

jeromegv 4y ago
Companies want you to file the dispute through their support system using their existing process. Once you file a dispute through the credit card company, the dispute process is moved to the credit card company and now the company has a LOT less power on what might be happening. They also get severely impacted from having a high amount of charge back and hurts them the next time they want to negotiate their credit card rate. So from a market perspective, it makes total sense for a company to ban you. You're causing them problems, refuse to follow procedure on how to handle the dispute, and hurt their bottom line in ways that could impact them at the rate of millions of dollar. They would rather not have you as a customer at all than deal with you again. Statistically, a customer that uses charge back is a lot likely to end up using it again, so they avoid themselves future trouble as well.
- tromp 4y ago
  He did follow BnB dispute procedure and gave them a chance to overrule the host's unreasonable stance. But BnB conspired with the host to screw him over and should bear the consequences.
  - vkou 4y ago
    Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. A chargeback is the burn-all-the-bridges, fuck-you-pay-me nuclear option, and you will be banned from any business that you use it against. You should not use it against any business you intend to patronize in the future.
    - ghaff 4y ago
      While a possibility given the weird nature of SV companies, it's also pretty much nonsense in general when company support systems break down. It's the sort of learned helplessness that some people promote relative to companies that seems pretty silly. I've certainly used chargebacks when something wasn't working and continued to deal with said companies, albeit rarely. Yes, sometimes you need to break relationships with certain companies as well. But that should be fine in general.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
      > Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. I struggle to think that a person should bear literally any consequences if they weren't in the wrong, which AIUI in this case he isn't.
      - vkou 4y ago
        Why do you think a non-monopoly business should be compelled to continue to serve a customer that does chargebacks against it? You can fire that business as a vendor, they can fire you as a customer.
        yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
        For the same reason we protect whistle-blowers; if a person has a reasonable problem with a business, we'd like to avoid the business retaliating because that creates incentives that protect bad actors.
- wruza 4y ago
  How can they avoid future trouble by not refunding a 1 hour cancel? The next person who makes a similar mistake will chargeback too, unless they aren’t aware of it. For a company, the only way out of it is to stay within common sense, because that’s what all their clients have in common.
  - vuln 4y ago
    Their clients are the Hosts.
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    Silicon Valley scum relies on a lot of people not knowing their rights to open a dispute/chargeback. Seems to be a winning strategy considering even on here most people don’t seem to be aware of this option.
- briHass 4y ago
  Not Home Depot. Their support representative was worthless for an online order that was never delivered (lost in transit). They advised me to do a charge back. Luckily, it was an online chat, so I screen capped that to add to the CC docs you have to submit. Blows my mind; reshipping the item would (given they sell it for a profit) cost HD less than me doing a 100% chargeback, and it would be better customer service. I guess they use the friction of doing a chargeback to be their fraud prevention.
  - ajbourg 4y ago
    Oh my goodness, I had the exact same experience with Home Depot. But then they responded to the chargeback and said it was delivered and no going back and forth with American Express would get them to help. I closed my AmEx card and am deeply skeptical of doing business with Home Depot.
    - karakot 4y ago
      Haha, same here. A package was never delivered (though the tracking number said that it was). Home depot representative couldn't resolve the issue, and recommended to make a charge back. After I made a chargeback, HD contacted the bank with a supporting package (receipt, tracking number, etc) and reversed the charge back. At this point I decided not to waste any more time for $50 item and moved on.
  - 77pt77 4y ago
    > to add to the CC docs you have to submit. The only time I made a charge back the CC company actively told me to not add any documentation.
- nixpulvis 4y ago
  So we need to externally regulate this market... cool.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago
  > You're causing them problems, refuse to follow procedure on how to handle the dispute It sounds to me like they refuse to follow the law.
- indymike 4y ago
  > So from a market perspective, it makes total sense for a company to ban you. From a contract point of view, merchants who ban consumers for charge backs are in violation of card association rules. > refuse to follow procedure on how to handle the dispute The merchant agreed to accept charge back rulings when they signed their merchant agreement. The chargeback process is a pain for consumers - they have to do a quite a bit of paperwork to file one. > Statistically, a customer that uses charge back is a lot likely to end up using it again A business that forces consumers into charge backs and loses deserves the charge back. Consumers don't automatically win. Source: owned an MSP for about a decade. BTW, Visa, MC, AMEX and others can fine and ban merchants who fail to comply with card association rules (including chargebacks). Likewise, card associations can also cancel cards on consumers who file abusive charge backs.
lotsofpulp 4y ago
Best Western hotels are individually owned and operated, and Best Western itself does not lose any money from chargebacks, the motel owner does. Best Western gets paid their 10% to 15% of gross revenue royalty either way from the hotel owner. Hotel owners, however, can and do ban individuals for chargebacks.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  Hotel owners will in general not screw a potential customer for an honest mistake like this, so maybe the chargebacks actual hotels get actually do warrant a ban compared to VC-funded scammers.
eli 4y ago
Uh yeah that absolutely can happen. Car rental companies are known to ban people who do chargebacks. If you refuse to pay a business what they think you owe then there’s a decent chance they won’t want future business from you.
- luckylion 4y ago
  Isn't the charge-back lower stakes than actually suing them? Because that would be the only alternative left, the charge-back is the third-party arbitration.
loeg 4y ago
You should not be issuing chargebacks all the time. Most businesses will resolve without resorting to that. Airbnb absolutely failed here.
kccqzy 4y ago
Generally, companies of any size can choose not to do business with you. What's wrong with that? If you disagree, you need to change the definition of "utility" then; a utility such as an electricity company can't just cut you off for no reason.
- yencabulator 4y ago
  And almost all the companies in the US can choose to not do business with you. That doesn't make it fair or just.

jeromegv 4y ago

Companies want you to file the dispute through their support system using their existing process. Once you file a dispute through the credit card company, the dispute process is moved to the credit card company and now the company has a LOT less power on what might be happening. They also get severely impacted from having a high amount of charge back and hurts them the next time they want to negotiate their credit card rate. So from a market perspective, it makes total sense for a company to ban you. You're causing them problems, refuse to follow procedure on how to handle the dispute, and hurt their bottom line in ways that could impact them at the rate of millions of dollar. They would rather not have you as a customer at all than deal with you again. Statistically, a customer that uses charge back is a lot likely to end up using it again, so they avoid themselves future trouble as well.

tromp 4y ago
He did follow BnB dispute procedure and gave them a chance to overrule the host's unreasonable stance. But BnB conspired with the host to screw him over and should bear the consequences.
- vkou 4y ago
  Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. A chargeback is the burn-all-the-bridges, fuck-you-pay-me nuclear option, and you will be banned from any business that you use it against. You should not use it against any business you intend to patronize in the future.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    While a possibility given the weird nature of SV companies, it's also pretty much nonsense in general when company support systems break down. It's the sort of learned helplessness that some people promote relative to companies that seems pretty silly. I've certainly used chargebacks when something wasn't working and continued to deal with said companies, albeit rarely. Yes, sometimes you need to break relationships with certain companies as well. But that should be fine in general.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
    > Yes, and he should issue a chargeback, and then bear the consequences of AirBnB no longer doing any business with him in response. I struggle to think that a person should bear literally any consequences if they weren't in the wrong, which AIUI in this case he isn't.
    - vkou 4y ago
      Why do you think a non-monopoly business should be compelled to continue to serve a customer that does chargebacks against it? You can fire that business as a vendor, they can fire you as a customer.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
        For the same reason we protect whistle-blowers; if a person has a reasonable problem with a business, we'd like to avoid the business retaliating because that creates incentives that protect bad actors.
wruza 4y ago
How can they avoid future trouble by not refunding a 1 hour cancel? The next person who makes a similar mistake will chargeback too, unless they aren’t aware of it. For a company, the only way out of it is to stay within common sense, because that’s what all their clients have in common.
- vuln 4y ago
  Their clients are the Hosts.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  Silicon Valley scum relies on a lot of people not knowing their rights to open a dispute/chargeback. Seems to be a winning strategy considering even on here most people don’t seem to be aware of this option.
briHass 4y ago
Not Home Depot. Their support representative was worthless for an online order that was never delivered (lost in transit). They advised me to do a charge back. Luckily, it was an online chat, so I screen capped that to add to the CC docs you have to submit. Blows my mind; reshipping the item would (given they sell it for a profit) cost HD less than me doing a 100% chargeback, and it would be better customer service. I guess they use the friction of doing a chargeback to be their fraud prevention.
- ajbourg 4y ago
  Oh my goodness, I had the exact same experience with Home Depot. But then they responded to the chargeback and said it was delivered and no going back and forth with American Express would get them to help. I closed my AmEx card and am deeply skeptical of doing business with Home Depot.
  - karakot 4y ago
    Haha, same here. A package was never delivered (though the tracking number said that it was). Home depot representative couldn't resolve the issue, and recommended to make a charge back. After I made a chargeback, HD contacted the bank with a supporting package (receipt, tracking number, etc) and reversed the charge back. At this point I decided not to waste any more time for $50 item and moved on.
- 77pt77 4y ago
  > to add to the CC docs you have to submit. The only time I made a charge back the CC company actively told me to not add any documentation.
nixpulvis 4y ago
So we need to externally regulate this market... cool.
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
> You're causing them problems, refuse to follow procedure on how to handle the dispute It sounds to me like they refuse to follow the law.
indymike 4y ago
> So from a market perspective, it makes total sense for a company to ban you. From a contract point of view, merchants who ban consumers for charge backs are in violation of card association rules. > refuse to follow procedure on how to handle the dispute The merchant agreed to accept charge back rulings when they signed their merchant agreement. The chargeback process is a pain for consumers - they have to do a quite a bit of paperwork to file one. > Statistically, a customer that uses charge back is a lot likely to end up using it again A business that forces consumers into charge backs and loses deserves the charge back. Consumers don't automatically win. Source: owned an MSP for about a decade. BTW, Visa, MC, AMEX and others can fine and ban merchants who fail to comply with card association rules (including chargebacks). Likewise, card associations can also cancel cards on consumers who file abusive charge backs.

lotsofpulp 4y ago

Best Western hotels are individually owned and operated, and Best Western itself does not lose any money from chargebacks, the motel owner does. Best Western gets paid their 10% to 15% of gross revenue royalty either way from the hotel owner. Hotel owners, however, can and do ban individuals for chargebacks.

Nextgrid 4y ago
Hotel owners will in general not screw a potential customer for an honest mistake like this, so maybe the chargebacks actual hotels get actually do warrant a ban compared to VC-funded scammers.

eli 4y ago

Uh yeah that absolutely can happen. Car rental companies are known to ban people who do chargebacks. If you refuse to pay a business what they think you owe then there’s a decent chance they won’t want future business from you.

luckylion 4y ago
Isn't the charge-back lower stakes than actually suing them? Because that would be the only alternative left, the charge-back is the third-party arbitration.

loeg 4y ago

You should not be issuing chargebacks all the time. Most businesses will resolve without resorting to that. Airbnb absolutely failed here.

kccqzy 4y ago

Generally, companies of any size can choose not to do business with you. What's wrong with that? If you disagree, you need to change the definition of "utility" then; a utility such as an electricity company can't just cut you off for no reason.

yencabulator 4y ago
And almost all the companies in the US can choose to not do business with you. That doesn't make it fair or just.