Yes, but they had to convince the issuing bank that there was cause.
When push comes to shove, under Visa and Mastercard rules, the issuing
bank has the *final* authority in chargebacks.
Friday, December 08, 2000, 8:29:10 AM, you wrote:
> This isn't quite true. The merchant account provider can dispute the charge
> back and refuse to honor it if they believe adequate proof exists that the
> charge was made. Signature is one method of proof, but it is not the only
> one.
> We have had this happen in a couple of cases where we provided sufficient
> proof that the person making the charge back claim had possession of the
> product, i.e. domain name, and refused to return the username and password,
> giving up the ownership. We also provided proof that the email address from
> which the order came belonged to the person making the charge back. It also
> helped in both cases that the thief was using the domain name that they then
> tried to claim they did not order.
> Since we no longer use OpenSRS for new domain registrations, we are not
> having as many problems with charge backs. The customer quickly "remembers"
> the transaction when we disable the domain name on them.
> But then again, Domain Direct also report the same thing months ago when
> this issue was first discussed. They stated in one message that when they
> disabled the domain name so the client could not use it, the client would
> retract the charge back.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William X. Walsh
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:57 PM
> To: Merlin
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re[2]: deleting a ca domain
> Hello Merlin,
> For US consumers anyway, the merchant's bank has no control over it.
> The "chargeback" policies are set by the consumer's bank who issued
> the card, and your merchant bank has no influence or effect on that.
> Thursday, December 07, 2000, 4:47:59 PM, you wrote:
>>> You left out the fourth step!
>>>
>>> 4. The client receives their credit card statement, claims not to have
>>> authorized the charge, and the credit card company charges it back to
> you.
>>> You provide documentation to the credit card company, but the credit card
>>> company doesn't know what a domain name is, and since you have so
> signature
>>> they rule against you.
>> not a problem here, because I'm using an eCommerce interface specifically
> set up by the Bank+eSecure (the security company), that
>> doesn't require a signature because it is specifically designed for online
> commerce, so in the rare event that a charge is
>> contested, they actually sort it out, and not me.
>> The mechanics of the online transaction generates a really solid paper
> trail with the bank and the eCommerce company, so it's nearly
>> impossible for the customer to "forget" they made the purchase. The excuse
> doesn't wash in other words.
>> If the 'forgetful' customer is actually insisting that they didn't buy the
> domain - then it's just too bad. They now own it and can
>> just let it expire or sell it or do what ever they like with it.
>> Either way, I'm not out of pocket because the eCommerce company guarentees
> the transaction. (their fees are enough to cover it
>> anyway :-) )
>> ---
>> Robert Chalmers
>> http://www.quantum-radio.net.au Quantum Radio
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://www.inexpensivewebsites.com Domain Name Registrations
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --
> Best regards,
> William mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Best regards,
William mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
