4 ms·

This sounds too bizarre to be easily believable, two different risk teams freezing your account within 24 hours? Is there any way you could supply some proof o

This sounds too bizarre to be easily believable, two different risk teams freezing your account within 24 hours? Is there any way you could supply some proof of their behaviour?

Reubend 4y ago
What on earth is unbelievable about that? There are many similar stories here on HN. After 1 minute of searching, I found this example of an account which was deactivated, reactivated, and then deactivated again. Then poster doesn't specify that it was within 24 hours, but it seems like it may have been the same week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32854528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32854528
- MichaelZuo 4y ago
  It seems like your linked example is of a 'high-risk' business similar in risk to pornhub, casino websites, etc. It doesn't seem like the OP's business falls into that category.
  - Reubend 4y ago
    Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't seem to be the case. When the OP was asked what why the post didn't mention the business' category, he/she said that > This is more a function of the fact that I don't want my business to be identifiable from this post than that it's a sketchy business. You'll have to take my word for it, but it's exceedingly benign.
  - hairofadog 4y ago
    In terms of "proof", I can't imagine what you'd accept as proof that I'd want to post here. In terms of risk, benign is a pretty good word for it, and we've been using another processor for years and years without any issues on that front. I think Stripe is well within their rights to do all the due diligence they feel they need to do; I just wish they had done it before we signed a contract and started taking payments, and it does feel like we dodged a bullet by not agreeing to the Minimum Fee Commitment.
    - MichaelZuo 4y ago
      Linking to a real identity at least will make it easier to accept. Using a pseudonym simply adds an extra layer of doubt.
    - eaenki 4y ago
      would you share that other payment processor?
      - hairofadog 4y ago
        We’re currently using Cybersource, owned by Visa. I argued for moving us over to Stripe because Stripe offered a better rate, and their UI, APIs, reporting, and documentation are much nicer than Cybersource’s. I had also argued for and worked with Stripe at my previous job in a much riskier sector — event ticketing — for years, and never had a problem, so it felt like a no-brainer.
hairofadog 4y ago
I find your description of the things that happened as "too bizarre to be easily believable" to be somewhat comforting, as it lets me know I'm not nuts to be frustrated by the process.
Sevii 4y ago
I find it totally believable after having to work through multiple internal risk teams to get my test accounts past automated flaggers.

This sounds too bizarre to be easily believable, two different risk teams freezing your account within 24 hours? Is there any way you could supply some proof of their behaviour?

Reubend 4y ago

What on earth is unbelievable about that? There are many similar stories here on HN. After 1 minute of searching, I found this example of an account which was deactivated, reactivated, and then deactivated again. Then poster doesn't specify that it was within 24 hours, but it seems like it may have been the same week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32854528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32854528

MichaelZuo 4y ago
It seems like your linked example is of a 'high-risk' business similar in risk to pornhub, casino websites, etc. It doesn't seem like the OP's business falls into that category.
- Reubend 4y ago
  Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't seem to be the case. When the OP was asked what why the post didn't mention the business' category, he/she said that > This is more a function of the fact that I don't want my business to be identifiable from this post than that it's a sketchy business. You'll have to take my word for it, but it's exceedingly benign.
- hairofadog 4y ago
  In terms of "proof", I can't imagine what you'd accept as proof that I'd want to post here. In terms of risk, benign is a pretty good word for it, and we've been using another processor for years and years without any issues on that front. I think Stripe is well within their rights to do all the due diligence they feel they need to do; I just wish they had done it before we signed a contract and started taking payments, and it does feel like we dodged a bullet by not agreeing to the Minimum Fee Commitment.
  - MichaelZuo 4y ago
    Linking to a real identity at least will make it easier to accept. Using a pseudonym simply adds an extra layer of doubt.
  - eaenki 4y ago
    would you share that other payment processor?
    - hairofadog 4y ago
      We’re currently using Cybersource, owned by Visa. I argued for moving us over to Stripe because Stripe offered a better rate, and their UI, APIs, reporting, and documentation are much nicer than Cybersource’s. I had also argued for and worked with Stripe at my previous job in a much riskier sector — event ticketing — for years, and never had a problem, so it felt like a no-brainer.

hairofadog 4y ago

I find your description of the things that happened as "too bizarre to be easily believable" to be somewhat comforting, as it lets me know I'm not nuts to be frustrated by the process.

Sevii 4y ago

I find it totally believable after having to work through multiple internal risk teams to get my test accounts past automated flaggers.