Chargeback rejected

Old Jul 29, 20, 7:48 pm
  #31  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 88,884
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
I don't think that's it at all. The suggestion was that if one disagrees with a negative chargeback decision, e.g., the amount charged is not credited (refunded) to the card account, that one simple does not pay the credit card bill. That is indeed poor advice and can lead as noted above to significant negative consequences.
Of course you can't just refuse to pay the bill.

I was responding to the idea that the airline tells the credit card (as a defense to the chargeback) that it is doing a refund.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old Jul 30, 20, 5:12 am
  #32  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PVG, FRA, SEA, HEL
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 4,035
You are just writting your card issueing bank that you are refusing to pay for a fraudulant representment charge. The bank may sue you, but I think it most jurisdictions you will prevail (esp. in Germany). Moreover, a disputed claim cannot just be reported to a credit rating agency.
andyptrav likes this.
warakorn is offline  
Old Jul 30, 20, 5:13 am
  #33  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PVG, FRA, SEA, HEL
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 4,035
Of course you can't just refuse to pay the bill.
Of course, you can. The bank has to adhere to the law. The representment charge is clearly fraudulant.
warakorn is offline  
Old Jul 30, 20, 6:11 am
  #34  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 47,223
Originally Posted by warakorn View Post
Of course, you can. The bank has to adhere to the law. The representment charge is clearly fraudulant.
Of course one may refuse to pay. Anyone can refuse to pay. But, the question is what happens if one does. Your advice is likely to end poorly for the consumer who follows it.

The customer does not make that decision unilaterally. If chargeback processes fail, then your options are to sue (either or both the vendor, e.g. air carrier or card issuer). The reason is simple. The card issuer could, without suing for the balance, cancel the account, report it as delinquent to applicable CRA's, and thus cause all manner of havoc for one's future access to credit.
Often1 is online now  
Old Jul 30, 20, 11:31 am
  #35  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PVG, FRA, SEA, HEL
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 4,035
The card issuer could, without suing for the balance, cancel the account, report it as delinquent to applicable CRA's, and thus cause all manner of havoc for one's future access to credit.
No! Did you hear about GDPR in the EU?
If a claim is disputed then the claimant (bank) cannot simply report this as a delinquent payment to a credit rating agency. That would be illegal and would result in fines and possibly financial damages, which the bank has to pay.
andyptrav likes this.
warakorn is offline  
Old Jul 30, 20, 12:26 pm
  #36  
Moderator, El Al and Marriott Bonvoy, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hyatt Contributor BadgeMarriott Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SIN
Programs: TG*G, Mar LTBT, Hyatt Glb, AA PLT-LTG, LY, HH, IC, BA, DL, UA SLV
Posts: 11,541
Is the OP in the EU?
yosithezet is offline  
Old Jul 30, 20, 8:29 pm
  #37  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BKK
Programs: SK EBG for Life (*G), BA Gold, HH DIA, IC Platinum Ambassador, Hertz President's Circle, Sixt Plat
Posts: 1,119
Originally Posted by warakorn View Post
No! Did you hear about GDPR in the EU?
If a claim is disputed then the claimant (bank) cannot simply report this as a delinquent payment to a credit rating agency. That would be illegal and would result in fines and possibly financial damages, which the bank has to pay.
Your statements are contradicting - first you say that if the dispute s unsuccessful, then simply the OP should not pay his credit card bill (which is ludicrous). Then, now you talk about an ongoing dispute process? You are right, during an ongoing dispute, they cannot report delinquency, but once the dispute is concluded as unsuccessful (as in the first statement you made) the credit card company has every right to pursue the payment during collections agencies if payment is not made as per the T&Cs of the agreement with the card holder.

Not sure what this has to do with GDPR anyway?
SKT-DK is offline  
Old Jul 31, 20, 6:28 pm
  #38  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: From LHR to SFO to LAS
Programs: None
Posts: 1,974
Originally Posted by yosithezet View Post
Is the OP in the EU?
I was wondering this.

Op where are you based and what country is your Revoult account registered to?
SgtRyan is offline  
Old Aug 2, 20, 8:44 pm
  #39  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Programs: Thai Royal Orchid Gold, Flying Blue Gold, Emirates Silver
Posts: 100
You are correct, I got my money back for now, but the chargeback is not finalized yet as far as I can see.

I do use Citibank Prestige, their highest current credit card and they are very accommodating.

My last experience with chargeback dates from a few months ago with Amazon, got a phone stuck at the Thai customs, asked for a chargeback, go the money, then Amazon confirmed they allowed the chargeback. Maybe I'll get an email from Thai once it is settled?
true1976 is offline  
Old Aug 3, 20, 2:54 pm
  #40  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PVG, FRA, SEA, HEL
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 4,035
Not sure what this has to do with GDPR anyway?
GDPR regulates when, how and which data (e.g. about a non-payment of a credit card balance) can be shared by a bank or collection agency to a credit rating agency.
If a bank or collection agency break these rules, it can get very expensive for them.

Your statements are contradicting - first you say that if the dispute s unsuccessful, then simply the OP should not pay his credit card bill (which is ludicrous). Then, now you talk about an ongoing dispute process? You are right, during an ongoing dispute, they cannot report delinquency, but once the dispute is concluded as unsuccessful (as in the first statement you made) the credit card company has every right to pursue the payment during collections agencies if payment is not made as per the T&Cs of the agreement with the card holder.
Is it really like that in Thailand -> that people adhere to everything that a bank may order them to do?

You are talking about the chargeback dispute process. That process is rather instransparent to the cardholder - and he or she has little influence on the outcome.
I am talking about an open legal dispute between the cardholder and the card-issueing bank.

Let me try again. Of course, the cardholder company is allowed to pursue the claim against the cardholder via collection agencies etc.
Still the cardholder has every right to dispute the claim (when I talk dispute, I am not narrowing it down to a chargeback process). In order to receive the money, the bank must sue the cardholder. During the court lawsuit each side may present their arguments.
However, - and here EU GDPR comes into play - if the cardholder has disputed the claim (and I am not talking about the chargback dispute here) and there has been no court judgement against the cardholder -> the bank or collection agency is not allowed to just report a delinquent customer to a credit rating agency.

Last edited by warakorn; Aug 3, 20 at 3:18 pm
warakorn is offline  
Old Aug 4, 20, 3:38 am
  #41  
Moderator, El Al and Marriott Bonvoy, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hyatt Contributor BadgeMarriott Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SIN
Programs: TG*G, Mar LTBT, Hyatt Glb, AA PLT-LTG, LY, HH, IC, BA, DL, UA SLV
Posts: 11,541
Thanks. Interesting information about GDPR.

Is the chargeback in discussion here covered by GDPR Rules?
yosithezet is offline  
Old Aug 4, 20, 6:41 am
  #42  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BKK
Programs: SK EBG for Life (*G), BA Gold, HH DIA, IC Platinum Ambassador, Hertz President's Circle, Sixt Plat
Posts: 1,119
I would hazard a guess that even if the OP is an EU citizen and covered by GDPR, there is a provision in the agreed upon T&Cs of the credit card allowing the sharing of data with collections agencies in case of delinquency. If not, that would mean GDPR precludes the usage of any such agencies and prevents banks and credit card companies from recovering debt owed to them.

As to the point of ‘is that how it is in Thailand’ - well, most people I know throughout the world follow the rules of whatever service they sign up for, and suggesting to do otherwise is just bad advice - unless you proactively take the provider to court, of course.
SKT-DK is offline  
Old Aug 4, 20, 11:23 am
  #43  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PVG, FRA, SEA, HEL
Programs: UA Premier Gold
Posts: 4,035
I would hazard a guess that even if the OP is an EU citizen and covered by GDPR, there is a provision in the agreed upon T&Cs of the credit card allowing the sharing of data with collections agencies in case of delinquency.
This is a good one. Do you really think a T&C can override EU GDPR rules? Of course, the answer is No. If we are talking about an EU card issueing bank, they are bound to GDPR. The EU is not Thailand. The law matters and in most cases can be enforced by ordinary citizens.

And yes, banks may share personal data with credit rating agencies. However, the bank may not just simply share "negative payment history" if the customer has disputed the claim by the bank. The bank has to adhere to a complicated and formal process to do so. In reality, about 95% of all claims are not disputed by customers, hence, the data is rightfully transferred to credit rating agencies.

If not, that would mean GDPR precludes the usage of any such agencies and prevents banks and credit card companies from recovering debt owed to them.
Please do not confuse a collection agency with a credit rating agency! These have to be separate entities. A collection agency is just a private company with no additional powers. If you are a delinquent customer and get letters from a collection agency, you can use it as free toilet paper. In the end the hiring of a collection agency is just wasted money - and it is the bank, who has to pay the collection agency first. And most cases the customer do not have to pay the so-called "collection agency fees", esp. if the claim had been disputed.

The more powerful tool for a bank to recover debt from a customer, who disputed the claim - is to sue the customer.
Once a court writ/judgement has been issued, the claim can be enforced through a court clerk/bailiff/sheriff.
However, a customer may fight a lawsuit and could win against the bank, if the bank cannot justify the claim (e.g. for a fraudulent credit card representment charge).

As to the point of ‘is that how it is in Thailand’ - well, most people I know throughout the world follow the rules of whatever service they sign up for, and suggesting to do otherwise is just bad advice - unless you proactively take the provider to court, of course.
I am not that young anymore, but if someone is trying to defraud me (through a fraudulent credit card representment charge), I am going to fight it. In that sense I am most likely not the only one willing to do so. Just because I am telling you to pay me EUR 500, you are not to going to pay that money to me, because you will say that you are legally not obliged in doing so.

unless you proactively take the provider to court, of course.
You got it wrong here. Usually the entity, who claims money (the bank) has to bring forward the lawsuit - not the other way around. I seriously doubt that a card issueing bank is interested in making the chargeback process too transparent - hence, the bank will hesitate sueing a customer if the claim has arisen from a fraudulent representment charge.

Last edited by warakorn; Aug 5, 20 at 1:09 am
warakorn is offline  
Old Aug 5, 20, 6:18 am
  #44  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: BKK
Programs: SK EBG for Life (*G), BA Gold, HH DIA, IC Platinum Ambassador, Hertz President's Circle, Sixt Plat
Posts: 1,119
Just because I am telling you to pay me EUR 500, you are not to going to pay that money to me, because you will say that you are legally not obliged in doing so.
That says it all about your arguments really... Let’s just agree to disagree - no point in wasting more time on this line of argumentation
SKT-DK is offline  
Old Aug 5, 20, 6:40 am
  #45  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 47,223
Originally Posted by warakorn View Post
This is a good one. Do you really think a T&C can override EU GDPR rules? Of course, the answer is No. If we are talking about an EU card issueing bank, they are bound to GDPR. The EU is not Thailand. The law matters and in most cases can be enforced by ordinary citizens.

And yes, banks may share personal data with credit rating agencies. However, the bank may not just simply share "negative payment history" if the customer has disputed the claim by the bank. The bank has to adhere to a complicated and formal process to do so. In reality, about 95% of all claims are not disputed by customers, hence, the data is rightfully transferred to credit rating agencies.



Please do not confuse a collection agency with a credit rating agency! These have to be separate entities. A collection agency is just a private company with no additional powers. If you are a delinquent customer and get letters from a collection agency, you can use it as free toilet paper. In the end the hiring of a collection agency is just wasted money - and it is the bank, who has to pay the collection agency first. And most cases the customer do not have to pay the so-called "collection agency fees", esp. if the claim had been disputed.

The more powerful tool for a bank to recover debt from a customer, who disputed the claim - is to sue the customer.
Once a court writ/judgement has been issued, the claim can be enforced through a court clerk/bailiff/sheriff.
However, a customer may fight a lawsuit and could win against the bank, if the bank cannot justify the claim (e.g. for a fraudulent credit card representment charge).



I am not that young anymore, but if someone is trying to defraud me (through a fraudulent credit card representment charge), I am going to fight it. In that sense I am most likely not the only one willing to do so. Just because I am telling you to pay me EUR 500, you are not to going to pay that money to me, because you will say that you are legally not obliged in doing so.



You got it wrong here. Usually the entity, who claims money (the bank) has to bring forward the lawsuit - not the other way around. I seriously doubt that a card issueing bank is interested in making the chargeback process too transparent - hence, the bank will hesitate sueing a customer if the claim has arisen from a fraudulent representment charge.
GDPR is not quite a red herring, but it is a red-tinted herring. Presuming for purposes of this discussion that it somehow applies to OPs account, it is true that GDPR would apply to processing the data related to this transaction for collections purposes such as outsourcing for routine collections or to a credit rating agency to warn others. The customer's consent ends the discussion and that is where this all ends presuming that OP's card issuer is GDPR-compliant. Surely it's contract *t&c" will expressly include the customer's consent toi the specific data processing. But, even if the card issuer is remiss, a legitimate, necessary & balanced approach passes muster, it being one of the primary reasons to collect the data in the first place.

The advice you have given has now run the gamut from advising not to pay to relying on GDPR in the hopes that the card issuer will not pursue you.
Often1 is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: