posted on January 1, 2001 10:25:15 AM newWrong! I had three charge backs made when I accepted credit cards directly. In all three cases, I received a letter from the company and responded. The charge backs were denied and the money was not taken from me or held even temporarilly.
yisgood it doesn't sound like you met a real chageback, which indeed results in the money being taken immediately from the merchant's account.
There is usually a "pre-chargeback" step, during which the merchant is invited to comment. This is when, for example, merchant can supply proof of shipping and put the ball back into buyer's court. Lots of chargeback requests are resolved during this period, but once the real chargeback occurs, the money is taken from the merchant.
This step does not always occur. If, for example, the card used was an invalid account, there is no response possible, and the chargeback is immediate. It happens.
Once the chargeback occurs, the merchant can then appeal, but the appeal goes to, for example, VISA, who ostensibly is not motivated to favor either the merchant or the buyer's credit card issuing bank, but in practice merchants don't win very many appeals; buyers are a more sympathetic lot than merchants, and are granted strong default protections.
posted on January 1, 2001 11:21:49 AM new
>>There is usually a "pre-chargeback" step, during which the merchant is invited to comment<<
This is my point, exactly, With PP, Paydirect and EP, there is no pre-chargeback step. As soon as a customer complains, you lose.
>>If, for example, the card used was an invalid account, there is no response possible, and the chargeback is immediate.<<
Again, I have only heard of this happening with PP, PD and EP. Moneyzap has a 2-day period during which they contact the cardholder and verify the payment. If I charged a CC directly, I would be able to verify the cardholder. It took PP about a year to realize that they should be sending sellers the cardholder's address. EP is still stupidly refusing to do this and there are lots of reports of fraud on EP. So EP is punishing sellers for their own incompetence in preventing fraud.
posted on January 1, 2001 11:52:03 AM new
>>How do you accept a credit card payments and eliminate the liability of them "reversing a deposit" should the customer dispute the charge and still be able to continue to use the service to accept credit card payments?<<
Because with other services except for the lousy three of Paypal, Paydirect and Exchangepath, you can protect yourself.
1) you verify the cardholder with address verification, which PP only recently implemented after a year of excuses and EP still refuses to do.
2) if you are suspicious of the charge, you dont put it through. But PP and EP refuse to give us an accept/reject method.
3) you keep proof of delivery should you be asked to produce it (but PP, PD and EP won't even ask, so what's the point?)
4) if worse comes to worse, you lose that payment, but you dont have your whole account frozen, as with PP and EP.
posted on January 1, 2001 12:17:39 PM new
yisgood, for once, just once, pretend this isn't about comparing PayPal, ExchangePath, PayDirect, PayPro, BillPoint, etc.!!!
Here is the same damn question.
How do you accept a credit card payments and eliminate the liability of them "reversing a deposit" should the customer dispute the charge and still be able to continue to use the service to accept credit card payments?
Please notice I do not use the term "reduce liability of reversing a deposit".
posted on January 1, 2001 02:24:26 PM new
>>How do you accept a credit card payments and eliminate the liability of them "reversing a deposit" should the customer dispute the charge<<
You can't completely eliminate the liability. It's one of the risks you take if you accept credit cards. You can't eliminate the possibility of bad checks or counterfeit money or someone breaking your item and then returning it, claiming he received it broken. These are all risks of doing business. So what's your point?
posted on January 1, 2001 05:32:16 PM newYou can't completely eliminate the liability. It's one of the risks you take if you accept credit cards... So what's your point?
My point is I tried to tell a poster exactly the same thing 10 posts back in this thread and you tried to tell me I was missing the point and started trying to tell me it was a 'service issue'.
posted on January 1, 2001 05:58:47 PM new
>>My point is I tried to tell a poster exactly the same thing 10 posts back in this thread and you tried to tell me I was missing the point and started trying to tell me it was a 'service issue'. <<
The poster stated that he was unable to stop Paypal from reversing a deposit. You replied that there is the same risk with all credit card services. That's when I proved that the risk was many times greater with Paypal, Paydirect and Exchangepath that with credit cards. So yes, it IS a service issue. If these services acted in a professional, businesslike manner, folks wouldn't be as worried about reversed payments.
So far, Paypal is the only one I have seen that charged back payments almost FIVE MONTHS after they were made (and they were made during the period that Paypal was promising "no chargebacks" and "reversed" an ACH payment a month after it was made, which (according to the officer I spoke to in a major bank) is a violation of banking law and possibly the reason why some banks won't do business with them. Again, these are service issues.
If I lose a charge back to a credit card I charged (which never happened to me) after they give me a chance to respond, I may be upset about it, but at least they were following the rules. PP, EP and PD do not even follow their own rules, even the ones that remain after all their changes. Again, a service issue.
posted on January 1, 2001 06:27:09 PM newyisgoodThe poster stated that he was unable to stop Paypal from reversing a deposit. You replied that there is the same risk with all credit card services.
No, No, No, I told the poster there was the same liability no matter who he used to accepted credit card payments. I was very clear on that, I made no comparison between the services. I leave it to you to try and tell others which services to use or avoid (even if you don't follow your own advice). Go back and look what I said.
Can you name a method of accepting credit cards electronically where you aren't liable for customer satisfaction?
posted on January 1, 2001 09:28:39 PM newMaybe BidPay but that isn't exactly what you'd call accepting credit cards, it's purchasing a money order....
None of these services equate to "accepting credit cards." They're all third-party payment services. They are the merchants of record. They accept credit cards.
It doesn't matter whether you receive the resulting proceeds in the form of a money order or an e-mail that says "You've got cash!"
BidPay is the only service that eliminates liability. It's just too darn expensive for use in most domestic transactions.
posted on January 4, 2001 05:21:38 PM new
>>Yeah, yeah, yeah! What the #$%$ happened to my contest?????<<
I think folks are finding the new Exchangepath contest more challenging. Post a nasty message in the exchangepath forum. If your message is chosen as the nastiest, Exchangepath will unrestrict your account. One unlucky winner chosen daily.
and "reversed" an ACH payment a month after it was made, which (according to the officer I spoke to in a major bank) is a violation of banking law and possibly the reason why some banks won't do business with them. Again, these are service issues.