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

Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

petapixel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 295 posts

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#261

Post by AnssiH »

nicolas_t wrote: post #90
milankragujevic wrote: post #33

Similar thing happened to me with PayPal, buyer got to keep the item, and got a refund (by doing a chargeback on their CC) and I got billed the amount + 15% of fees and punishment. I provided exhausting proof of delivery and that there was no contact or complaints from the buyer, but they didn't care. They said, since it's a chargeback, they HAVE to give them their money back. The buyer was a client of Commonwealth B…

Interestingly about chargeback, I've noticed the same. I tried to file a chargeback with my bank in France and got denied despite it being a valid claim and me providing all the documentation for it. But, when I used my US credit card to file a chargeback it went through fine and there was no issue. I wonder if some countries are more lax with charge backs?

> I tried to file a chargeback with my bank in France and got denied despite it being a valid claim and me providing all the documentation for it.

Was it a credit card or debit card?

Debit cards often only provide limited chargeback capability (e.g. if your card is fraudulently used).

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#262

Post by milankragujevic »

AnssiH wrote: post #259
milankragujevic wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it seems to me that USA (and in my case Australia) have extremely pro-customer payment protection. Europe, especially outside of the EEA, is very pro-bank and anti-customer in the specific niche of card payments. The explanation I get is that if a card payment was verified by the customer with 3D Secure, it is considered valid and cannot be challenged. Which is true, the customer did enter their personal passwor…

> The explanation I get is that if a card payment was verified by the customer with 3D Secure, it is considered valid and cannot be challenged. Was this with a credit card or a debit card? At least with my (European) bank the above is only true for debit cards, while credit card payments can also be chargebacked on contract disputes with the seller.

In Serbia it is the same, the protections fall under the card issuer (MasterCard/VISA). I then went ahead and read up on MasterCard's Zero Liability procedure, and asked the bank again. They again lied and pretended I misunderstood the document. So, yeah, protection is apparently the same for credit and debit cards, and it's basically none.

To submit a chargeback you physically have to go into the bank office, and write a statement, sign at least 5 papers, and wait 30 days for a REPLY. If they approve it, wait 15 days to get the money back, but they can extend it up to 45 days, for a total 75 days of agony and hell.

What is the worst thing to me is that MasterCard/VISA rules should be the same worldwide, and at least for MasterCard, the rules are the same on the Serbia-specific website (https://www.mastercard.rs/sr-rs.html), yet every bank lies it's way into non-compliants with hand-wavy statements about their own terms. Additionally, I pay for a MasterCard Gold which is 3x the price of the regular card, so I could evade this bullit, yet I'm in the same problem as everyone else.

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#263

Post by malka »

hackme1234 wrote: post #234
ikeboy wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, because the team that sets policy is different from the team that makes the buttons. The policy has lots of exceptions - e.g. some categories can't be returned, like groceries. To disable that button, they'd have to check for all the exceptions and constantly update it whenever a policy changed. They did change to automatically approving returns a few years ago, but with an opt-out ability. My guess is eithe…

The teams need to collaborate more then. This still seems like a design failure

seems like something done on purpose to fuck people.

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#264

Post by dannyw »

Paul-ish wrote: post #104
freepor wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A seller can absorb fraud when they’re doing hundreds or thousands of transactions. If each person is doing one transaction the people hit will have life altering consequences for some items.

I wonder if seller insurance is viable. Pay $50 for an item, company does a background check on the seller and maybe does escrow.

I sell on eBay, but I cancel purchases from buyers with dodgy reputations. If someone has been an eBay buyer since 2006 wih 240 positive buyer feedback and 0 negative; they're probably not going to defraud me.

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#265

Post by normalnorm »

ikeboy wrote: post #147

>I denied the return. And that's your problem. If you deny a return within the return period, you're in violation of Amazon policy, and the A-Z team will rightly rule against you. The correct response is to accept the return, then deny a refund after it comes back to you because it wasn't sent back with the same accessories you sent it with.

> If you deny a return within the return period, you're in violation of Amazon policy, and the A-Z team will rightly rule against you.

Amazon makes the laws and acts as a court now? I don't understand why people respect "company policy" so much. The laws of the land take precedence. We are not corporate slaves.

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#266

Post by OJFord »

normalnorm wrote: post #265
ikeboy wrote: post #147

>I denied the return. And that's your problem. If you deny a return within the return period, you're in violation of Amazon policy, and the A-Z team will rightly rule against you. The correct response is to accept the return, then deny a refund after it comes back to you because it wasn't sent back with the same accessories you sent it with.

> If you deny a return within the return period, you're in violation of Amazon policy, and the A-Z team will rightly rule against you. Amazon makes the laws and acts as a court now? I don't understand why people respect "company policy" so much. The laws of the land take precedence. We are not corporate slaves.

Amazon knows that though, so its return policy isn't going to be in conflict with any statutory distance selling legislation. E.g. it might require a longer return period, but it can't shorten it.

Also, people respect 'company policy' when they want to do business with that company.

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#267

Post by onetimemanytime »

Bottom line: the buyer can claim that a lot of things are missing, item is broken, scratched etc and since there's no definite proof (for example: you can video...but then remove items before shipping) Amazon has chosen to trust the buyers. As others pointed out an outside party might be needed to keep both sides honest, but otherwise Amazon has to trust one side...

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#268

Post by tiborsaas »

node1 wrote: post #37

I have heard many stories online where customers bought new graphic cards/cpus/camera gear from 'Sold by Amazon.com' but instead receive used ones. Or receive different cheaper (older generation) products. It does not seem to be a good place to buy or sell expensive items.

I had the opposite happen to me :)

I ordered a 2017 Dell XPS and got the 2018 model instead, didn't complain.

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#269

Post by dwnvoted2hell »

canada_dry wrote: post #56

This is such a basic issue that I don't understand why USPS or some other shipper w/ bricks-n-mortar haven't stepped up to offer some sort of package shipping certification. If I was the seller it could work as simply as me bringing the item to a shipper who would take their own photos and weigh the items being packaged up as well as some check that the item is as being described to the recipient. In turn the shipper…

Once again, it could be the post office to the rescue, if only the post office decided to do a basic extension of the services they already offer.

However, even if this came to pass, you would still have a new requirement - that is to show the product exactly as it was originally sold. And for highly technical products there is absolutely no way to efficiently do this without hiring technicians for specific product types. Most products would need some kind of established rubric for how close to original condition they currently are, and nothing like this exists that I know of. The amount of money to process and run a system like this would require approximately 10-20% of the cost which is not unfeasible, but most people already balk at sales fees of 5%.

Re: Amazon let a fraudster keep my Sony A74 IV and refunded him

#270

Post by [deleted] »

AnssiH wrote: post #261
nicolas_t wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly about chargeback, I've noticed the same. I tried to file a chargeback with my bank in France and got denied despite it being a valid claim and me providing all the documentation for it. But, when I used my US credit card to file a chargeback it went through fine and there was no issue. I wonder if some countries are more lax with charge backs?

> I tried to file a chargeback with my bank in France and got denied despite it being a valid claim and me providing all the documentation for it. Was it a credit card or debit card? Debit cards often only provide limited chargeback capability (e.g. if your card is fraudulently used).

[deleted]
Post reply on HN