Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 554 posts

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#351

Post by joering2 »

fragsworth wrote: post #348
flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #331

Thank god for that. I made the mistake of joining a Goodlife gym in Canada many moons ago... The place was disgusting. Always crowded. Mould growing in the bathrooms. Stunk very badly, etc... So I stopped going regularly... and one day I was in the area I decided to stop in and cancel my membership. "Oh sorry, you'll need to make an appointment with management in order to cancel." "OK, is a manager in right now?" "Ye…

The best thing to do is issue a chargeback. You tell the credit card company that you 1) tried to cancel, and they wouldn't do it; and 2) you did not get any service from them since you tried to cancel. They have to pay you back AND THEY GET CHARGED an additional $20-$30 that your credit card company takes from them as punishment. Please don't abuse chargebacks unless the merchant deserves it, though.

Maybe in Canada but in USA you have companies like "ABC Financing" (real name) that process majority of membership for most of the gyms I ever visited, including LA Fitness, Golds Gym, Balleys Total Fitness.

The way it works (cause I tried) is that you call (or in bank to dispute membership) and guess what? they made you wait on the line/ in the branch until they contact ABC customer support that knows exactly what membership you have when you have it etc. They were even able to fax over my photo (!!) to the banker to prove it wasn't a fraud. I was actually quite happy because I need that kind of chargeback service for my companies when anyone can call (and does) and usually says "my child ordered this". Unfortunately banks will only work this way with merchants pushing hundreds of millions of dollars in memberships, as I was told by a friend of mine who works for Bank of America.

I don't know in Canada, but in USA most membership programs are continue to be a cancer on our society (despite the fact its easier to dispute transaction than it was years ago) and most banks will help in this bad behavior because they don't want too many disputes for credit card companies they underwrite and represent.

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#352

Post by joering2 »

pandler wrote: post #346
flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #331

Thank god for that. I made the mistake of joining a Goodlife gym in Canada many moons ago... The place was disgusting. Always crowded. Mould growing in the bathrooms. Stunk very badly, etc... So I stopped going regularly... and one day I was in the area I decided to stop in and cancel my membership. "Oh sorry, you'll need to make an appointment with management in order to cancel." "OK, is a manager in right now?" "Ye…

> When my turn came... I just said "I'm moving to england and I don't know a single person here who might want to absorb my contract". I actually came here to say the same thing. I realized “I’m moving” was the best way to get results in these situations when I was actually moving out of the country for a bit. It’s like a magical incantation that immediately gets them to stop trying to upsell or retain you, no questi…

Recent renewal contract for LA Fitness has this cover. If you moving away you have to provide some sort of a proof, like new lease contract, job letter etc so that they still will try to find the gym within 15 miles and move you over. I was told in LA Fitness you cannot cancel without any sort of proof if you want to use "moving away" as a reason.

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#353

Post by jjeaff »

quest88 wrote: post #295
aphextron wrote: post #279

Honestly, the best way to handle these things is to forget even bothering with the company and file a charge-back with your bank or Visa/Mastercard. You have every right to call up your bank and deny a charge for a service you're not using, and didn't ask to renew. Plus it's guaranteed to get the charge removed immediately, and you'll be hurting the company by adding to their charge-back tally, increasing payment pro…

It is not guaranteed. The company has a chance to respond with the paperwork proving that you in fact received the item you paid for. It's then up to you to prove that you did not. I am not a lawyer, but this is what happened to me.

If you respond again reiterating your position, and deny that the "proof" in question is valid (assuming it is), you will almost certainly win.

Not only that, but the business will get an additional chargeback fee before losing the chargeback.

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#354

Post by pfarnsworth »

nuclear_eclipse wrote: post #196
docker_up wrote: post #28

Ring (the video doorbell) is exactly like this and I haven't gotten rid of my subscription because I keep forgetting and their hours are like 9 to 5pm. Hopefully this changes so that I can get rid of that crap.

I recently switched from Ring to the Nest Hello, and I was able to cancel my subscription directly from the Ring app on my phone.

No I can't find out where I can cancel my subscription on the Ring app. Where in the app is it found?

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#355

Post by jjeaff »

Merad wrote: post #318
petilon wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PayPal tried to take money from my checking account because Consumer Reports "autorenewed" my subscription -- without my knowledge or explicit authorization. As soon as I saw this I reported this as an unauthorized transaction on PayPal. But PayPal failed to stop the payment in time, even though at the time of my flagging it was unpaid. I then called BofA and blocked PayPal and that worked. So at the moment I have a…

FYI anyone can dip into your checking account anytime they want to. AFAIK there is literally zero security, all you can do is dispute unauthorized transactions after the fact. Even with a paper check all the info on the check (including recipient and amount) is effectively just a paper trail to be referenced during a dispute.

Not only that, but you only have 60 days to dispute. So don't miss a bank statement or you could be eating the fraudulent charge.

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#357

Post by jrowley »

dizzant wrote: post #231
wepple wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify lost me as a customer when they forced me to use some ridiculous chat to explain why I was cancelling my account. I was actually cancelling to re-sign-up using a non-Facebook account as a paid subscriber.. Add silly friction and you get -1 customer.

When did this happen to you? I've been considering the same, but switching accounts hasn't yet been worth the hassle.

You should be able to just disconnect your facebook account, and login via email, no?

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#358

Post by jjeaff »

cm2187 wrote: post #224
brandonbloom wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done this several times with Comcast, but it failed with Time Warner when I moved out of NYC. They demand to know why you are canceling and have some sort of way to extract money out of you for every scenario, including moving out of their service area. In that case, they transfer you to another phone system that helps you find a provider at your new address and, presumably, nets them a referral fee of some kind…

Has anyone tried "none of your business" as an answer to why your are leaving?

I was helping my grandmother cancel her twc cable package since she doesn't watch it and only watches a few shows on Netflix.

I told the agent that same thing, and he said "Is that really what she wants, or is that just what you want?"

I kept things polite, but he really had me boiling by the end of the call, which took way too much time.

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#359

Post by toomuchtodo »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #344
toomuchtodo wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“However that doesn’t stop them from trying to collect payment directly from consumers. A review of some merchant agreements found online were silent on the issue of whether they can subsequently try to collect from consumers. And when we asked the major card companies whether their merchant agreements restrict this practice, only American Express responded, saying in an email that, “American Express has an establish…

Interesting. I guess it doesn't violate the merchant agreement... ...which makes sense in that a valid debt can't be invalidated by a chargeback. But it doesn't turn an invalid debt into a valid one either. And if you have a contract that you cancel in accordance with the contract (e.g. making the required request to the required phone number then limiting your call to a reasonable duration after doing so), charging…

Yes, if he merchant is not operating in good faith, it’s easy to outmaneuver their collections efforts provided you’ve kept good documentation.

If they are operating in good faith, and your chargeback is not legitimate, expect a blemish on your credit until you settle the debt (if sent to collections).

Re: California law requires businesses to let you cancel your subscription online

#360

Post by TomMckenny »

quest88 wrote: post #295
aphextron wrote: post #279

Honestly, the best way to handle these things is to forget even bothering with the company and file a charge-back with your bank or Visa/Mastercard. You have every right to call up your bank and deny a charge for a service you're not using, and didn't ask to renew. Plus it's guaranteed to get the charge removed immediately, and you'll be hurting the company by adding to their charge-back tally, increasing payment pro…

It is not guaranteed. The company has a chance to respond with the paperwork proving that you in fact received the item you paid for. It's then up to you to prove that you did not. I am not a lawyer, but this is what happened to me.

I honestly can not understand how a credit card company call center can claim to legally decide a civil matter like this. I know in the US they regularly do this just as I know of a couple of counties that absolutely don't allow it.

I honestly wonder what legal theory my bank or financial service is using to justify transferring my money or incurring debt under my name to pay someone I explicitly tell them not to simply because a guy at a call center making a snap judgement believes there is a valid contract and that the other party has honored it.

Post reply on HN