flowerseller March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 As someone (also a merchant) who looks at a lot credit card and paypal transactions, some of the "info" being presented in this thread is simply not accurate. At best it's what is thought to be an educated assumption. You look at your cc statement and then look at a merchants statement. Difference between a pico tank and my 400g system. I'm not disputing that a refund to the cc should have or could have taken place at this point, not sticking up for anyone or saying ethical or unethical*** practices have taken place. examples, merchants can charge your card account and "ask" for payment from the cc company clearing center when "they" choose. There is no rule that we have to charge the cc once it ships. NONE Just because you get an authorization code from the bank does not mean the card or card information is not stolen and the merchant will get paid. It could mean the cc has not been reported stolen yet. The merchant can be charged back as much as a year later. YESSIREE! When a merchant tells you they credited your account, they could have and it will show on "their" statement too. It could very well be a clearing house error or a transaction error. Debit cards and credit cards do not act the same, can act the same and the "hold time" can vary significantly. Sometimes based upon you repayment or dispute history. Credit cards act differently and now often similarly to debit cards if you view your statement online frequently. I HATE DEBIT CARDS and the idiots that look at them online several times a day. If your that paranoid someone has your number use a credit card - plus, you just made a case for MC and why he charges cards immediately for payment. now, again *** the post above, number 2 I think has a link to another dispute with MC, similar to this one and there are others. Most if not all issues were addressed and corrected prior to posting, it was** loaded with inaccuracies and has been edited, not by me, since I (moderator investgating it) spent multiple hours personally talking to, PMing, texting and viewing email attachments from both involved. **I know it was edited, the one who edited it knows it was edited, and I may still have the original screen shots I took of the entire thread somewhere*. *I may have deleted them because the whole thing was very inaccurate and unfair to begin with and made me sick the more I heard, read and saw. It continues to make me sick each time it's brought up. It has also spawned several other threads containing misconceptions at urgings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flowerseller March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 You've done the right thing, Guy, in going to your credit card company when this wasn't resolved quickly and amicably. Good luck on closing this matter out. This really is a facet of his e-commerce business or order processing that needs to be fixed. This is the step that should have been taken in this case after this much time has elasped. It then becomes a discussion between the vendor and the cc clearing house while it's investigated. You should have the monies placed back in your account during the process but can have it debited against you if it washes out by some fashion I may have touched on above. Obviously, there are many other instances and possible scenarios that I did not bring up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 *** the post above, number 2 I think has a link to another dispute with MC, similar to this one and there are others. Most if not all issues were addressed and corrected prior to posting, it was** loaded with inaccuracies and has been edited, not by me, since I (moderator investgating it) spent multiple hours personally talking to, PMing, texting and viewing email attachments from both involved. **I know it was edited, the one who edited it knows it was edited, and I may still have the original screen shots I took of the entire thread somewhere*. *I may have deleted them because the whole thing was very inaccurate and unfair to begin with and made me sick the more I heard, read and saw. It continues to make me sick each time it's brought up. It has also spawned several other threads containing misconceptions at urgings. I find these foot notes a little misleading. Sure everyone has their own version of reality so everyone is a little off. But how it's described here makes things sound a little disproportionate. Maybe I'm being a little over sensitive and reading too much into the footnotes. Maybe it would help clarify things if people knew the results of the WAMAS investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdah0414 March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 **Results of the WAMAS investigation** Someone tried to cheat the system. Was attempting to buy many limit one 10 dollar corals so he could turn around and sell them for a profit. Person was called on it. Person continues to take stab at vendor every chance he gets. **Investigation Closed** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 **Results of the WAMAS investigation** Someone tried to cheat the system. Was attempting to buy many limit one 10 dollar corals so he could turn around and sell them for a profit. Person was called on it. Person continues to take stab at vendor every chance he gets. **Investigation Closed** You're entitled to your opinion. Guess there are lots of people all over the country that would fall into this same category. It does however ignore the other "finding": Vendor takes money from customer without any intention to fulfill an order. Holds that money hostage over resolving disputes on unrelated transactions. Refuses to refund the money even after all disputes are resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flowerseller March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 **Results of the WAMAS investigation** Someone tried to cheat the system. Was attempting to buy many limit one 10 dollar corals so he could turn around and sell them for a profit. Person was called on it. Person continues to take stab at vendor every chance he gets. **Investigation Closed** Actually, That's not how the querry went but it is part of the entire catalyst that started the whole escape. I've not heard they were being bought for resale so that's probably not a fair assertion and I'm guessing mere speculation. The jist-- Compounded by misconceptions and misunderstandinsg of how CC/Debit card/paypal and the hold/pending transaction process led to more misconceptions after the order was cancelled for reason correctly stated above. Some wheeling and dealing of this for that amonst the two parties involved in an attempt to rectify it lead to further complications Then as the two bickered and ragged on each other it got totally out of control and a credit may have been with held because it was said purchaser was going to disputed thru the payment company . This was a classic example of how a dispute should NOT be handled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveS March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 (edited) Actually, That's not how the querry went but it is part of the entire catalyst that started the whole escape. I've not heard they were being bought for resale so that's probably not a fair assertion and I'm guessing mere speculation. The jist-- Compounded by misconceptions and misunderstandinsg of how CC/Debit card/paypal and the hold/pending transaction process led to more misconceptions after the order was cancelled for reason correctly stated above. Some wheeling and dealing of this for that amonst the two parties involved in an attempt to rectify it lead to further complications Then as the two bickered and ragged on each other it got totally out of control and a credit may have been with held because it was said purchaser was going to disputed thru the payment company . This was a classic example of how a dispute should NOT be handled Chip, thanks for the clarification (they were not bought for resale) and reasonable (as reasonable as possible in 3 sentences) explanation of your findings. Oh and sorry to get this thread off-topic.... Edited March 26, 2012 by DaveS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flowerseller March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 I find these foot notes a little misleading. Sure everyone has their own version of reality so everyone is a little off. But how it's described here makes things sound a little disproportionate. Maybe I'm being a little over sensitive and reading too much into the footnotes. Maybe it would help clarify things if people knew the results of the WAMAS investigation. It may appear that way but your original "vendor experience" thread a was not described completely accurately and was/is no longer a true source of an experience since it was been edited and parts removed and or changed . We have a "vendor experience" forum we hopes work to our advantage and we are all allowed to use it and are encouraged to do so. Unfortunately we do not have a "customer experience" forum and it does not work to the vendors advantage to have one for opposite reason. but wouldn't it be hilarious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowieReefer84 March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 It may appear that way but your original "vendor experience" thread a was not described completely accurately and was/is no longer a true source of an experience since it was been edited and parts removed and or changed . We have a "vendor experience" forum we hopes work to our advantage and we are all allowed to use it and are encouraged to do so. Unfortunately we do not have a "customer experience" forum and it does not work to the vendors advantage to have one for opposite reason. but wouldn't it be hilarious? How about a "member" experience? There are some strange folks on here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Origami March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 **Results of the WAMAS investigation** Someone tried to cheat the system. Was attempting to buy many limit one 10 dollar corals so he could turn around and sell them for a profit. Person was called on it. Person continues to take stab at vendor every chance he gets. **Investigation Closed** This is inaccurate and makes conclusions that were never arrived at. At best, we tried to "unwind" the dispute to understand better if we could bring the parties together for resolution, or keep them apart to maintain peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdah0414 March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 The only part of my post that MAY be inaccurate is the part about resale. The rest of it is completely true. I find it pretty sad that this same person has to chime in with his nonsense whenever there is a post about this vendor. It gets very old. It seems every month or so someone in this club gets a bug up their butt and bashes him. /End Rant and my thoughts on this topic (likely my membership as well) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Origami March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 My problem, SDAH0414, is that you framed your post as if you had special insight and information into any discussions, whether characterized as investigations or otherwise, that were any less than public, when, in fact, you were not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdah0414 March 26, 2012 Share March 26, 2012 Wasn't trying to say I was an insider. I was being a smart - you know what. I understand how it could have been misconstrued however. Apologize for that part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts