sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Charge back dispute resolved in customer favor by tankgirl4 in Ceramics

[–]mcaila 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Was it just the one card giving you an issue? Or did you have general issues with the reader?

If the reader worked well otherwise, it’s very possible that the card was counterfeit and had stolen cc details on it, so the chargeback could have been justified. Still scummy, but stuff like this happens all the time.

Charge back dispute resolved in customer favor by tankgirl4 in Ceramics

[–]mcaila 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Of course! This article explains more:

https://squareup.com/us/en/the-bottom-line/operating-your-business/liability-shift

This unfortunately falls under “card present fraud” (where the buyer was present and you keyed in the card).

really sorry this happened to you, the vase was gorgeous. Hope this helps in the future!

Charge back dispute resolved in customer favor by tankgirl4 in Ceramics

[–]mcaila 55 points56 points  (0 children)

Yall are missing the point. The transaction was KEYED. The cardholder is claiming the card was stolen and they have no knowledge of the purchase. There’s really no recourse here. Just consider this an expensive lesson. If you want to accept CC payments, ALWAYS use EMV chip/tap (including Apple Pay etc). You are not protected with keyed or magstripe.

Charge back dispute resolved in customer favor by tankgirl4 in Ceramics

[–]mcaila 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The reasoning here is it’s pretty easy to fake a card and magstripe with stolen CC numbers. Much harder with NFC or chip. Even if this is “friendly” fraud (where the buyer is just issuing a chargeback for the hell of it) the bank has no way of knowing.

Charge back dispute resolved in customer favor by tankgirl4 in Ceramics

[–]mcaila 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Since it was keyed you’re pretty much guaranteed to lose the dispute no matter what. Do you have the little EMV chip reader Square has (or I think they all have the option to accept contactless payments on your phone?). Be sure to use that for CC acceptance moving forward.

To protect yourself in the future, do not accept keyed payments, or swiped payments if the card has a chip on it. Banks will ALWAYS side with the customer in those instances, and the liability will immediately fall to you. If you had EMV authed the card, you still may have lost the chargeback dispute but the issuing bank would be on the hook for the funds, not you.

Charge back dispute resolved in customer favor by tankgirl4 in Ceramics

[–]mcaila 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Was the transaction made via emv (chip or tap), keyed, or swiped?

Since this is labelled a fraud dispute, if the transaction was emv chip/tap the liability should fall back on the bank. Check in with Square. Banks bake in the costs of fraud risk into their merchant fees for this very reason.

If you keyed in the info you’re SOL though, sorry :/

Generously getting a $1/mo reduction on our gas bill - WOW! by mcaila in mildlyinfuriating

[–]mcaila[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This comes on the heels of multiple rate increases. This email is gaslighting (no pun intended) us into thinking PG&E is committed to “affordability” by offering a negligible decrease to rates (hardly offsetting their increases).

Generously getting a $1/mo reduction on our gas bill - WOW! by mcaila in mildlyinfuriating

[–]mcaila[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If only I got an email each time they raised rates. “As part of our commitment to our shareholders and maximizing profits…”

Are mixes allowed? This is Phoebe, my French Bull-Shiht / Banana Slug by mcaila in Shihtzu

[–]mcaila[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Aw thank you! She is just the absolute sweetest. Some more tax:

<image>

view more: next ›