This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.
New topic 
Printable Sti-i-i-ill waiting
Waiting for my re-fund Sti-i-i-ill waiting I wish I'd never joined  | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
|
unique said: AsylumUtopia said: Much confusion over semantics. What I have been referring to as a direct debit on a credit card is in fact a continuous authority transaction. As far as the card holder is concerned, there's little difference between a direct debit and a continuous authority transaction - of course the rules are different but they both allow multiple transactions of varying amounts without requirement for each transaction to be individually authorised by the card holder. I have no idea why continuous authority transactions are referred to (within the Irish banking system anyway) as direct debits, but they are. Perhaps it was thought that because (as far as the card holder is concerned) they operate similarly, it would avoid confusion, although knowing the way the Irish banks are run, it was probably done for the opposite reason. As you claim to know what you're talking about, you will have known that I was referring to continuous authority transactions, so I can't for the life of me figure out why you didn't just correct me instead of engaging in a pointless argument about direct debits. i know about direct debits, but not about CAT's nor about them being referred to as direct debits in ireland Fair enough, no reason you should do. Now that we know we're talking about continuous authority transactions what the call centre bloke said to me should make more sense - they would be powerless to stop a charge if it was CAT, even if you'd changed your card - the card number would change but your CC account number remains the same. I guess that makes sense, if you were using your credit card to pay monthly bills (I don't know why anyone chooses to do that, but plenty of people do) you wouldn't want to have to go through the hassle of setting up a new CAT just because you had to change your card or it expired. I'm still not sure about the rest of what he said though. I think it may roughly translate as either - 'my 3 hours of training didn't cover that and I've no idea what the procedure is so I'll make shit up' or - 'I know exactly what the procedure is and there's no way I'm doing that so I'll make shit up'. But then you say: the reason i say they are not the same is because direct debits relate to bank accounts specifically and the payment is requested by a manual process from the debtor/company in the same way as a payment run is made, but requesting money back instead of requesting money to be sent
And roughly translated what call centre blokey was trying to say is that they would be powerless to stop a one-off transaction either, that if they thought it was fraudulent they can only query it and attempt to recover the money after the fact. So if there is no checking/authorisation process with credit cards then the only way they would have of stopping a charge would be to cancel the card before the transaction comes through. That seems to make sense, but it still seems a bit daft that they wouldn't be able to flag certain merchant id's (or whatever they call them) or put a temporary block on a card.as far as i'm aware the credit card system is a more automated process and it affects credit and debit cards the main difference is that with direct debits your bank account holds a note of authorisation to release the funds, whereas there isn't such a thing with credit/debit cards, a request for funds automatically releases the funds as long as credit is available. there is no "checking/authorisation" process with the credit cards, however with a credit card you get a statement for checking before the funds leave your bank account, but it's dangerous for a debit card as the funds automatically leave your bank account, even if it's a fraudulent transation Lemmy, Bowie, Prince, Leonard. RIP. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
U been bamboozled, hoodwinked, took... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
 JERKIN' EVERYTHING IN SIGHT!!!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
johnart said: Sti-i-i-ill waiting
Waiting for my re-fund Sti-i-i-ill waiting I wish I'd never joined No no no!!! Don't ruin the song that got it all started for me!!!!  MyeternalgrattitudetoPhil&Val.Herman said "We want sweaty truckers at the truck stop! We want cigar puffing men that look like they wanna beat the living daylights out of us" Val"sporking is spooning with benefits" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
johnart said: Sti-i-i-ill waiting
Waiting for my re-fund Sti-i-i-ill waiting I wish I'd never joined LMAO!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MIGUELGOMEZ said: johnart said: Sti-i-i-ill waiting
Waiting for my re-fund Sti-i-i-ill waiting I wish I'd never joined No no no!!! Don't ruin the song that got it all started for me!!!!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Didn't these web designers win an award recently?
I wonder if the awarding body knows what a collosal fuck up they made of lotusflow3r...  I'm not stopping. I haven't even taken my coat off
C'mon and dance while you, while you still have your cherry babe, cherry babe.. www.KerrysCakes.org.uk | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AsylumUtopia said:[quote] unique said: Fair enough, no reason you should do. Now that we know we're talking about continuous authority transactions what the call centre bloke said to me should make more sense - they would be powerless to stop a charge if it was CAT, even if you'd changed your card - the card number would change but your CC account number remains the same. I guess that makes sense, if you were using your credit card to pay monthly bills (I don't know why anyone chooses to do that, but plenty of people do) you wouldn't want to have to go through the hassle of setting up a new CAT just because you had to change your card or it expired. I'm still not sure about the rest of what he said though. I think it may roughly translate as either - 'my 3 hours of training didn't cover that and I've no idea what the procedure is so I'll make shit up' or - 'I know exactly what the procedure is and there's no way I'm doing that so I'll make shit up'. But then you say: the reason i say they are not the same is because direct debits relate to bank accounts specifically and the payment is requested by a manual process from the debtor/company in the same way as a payment run is made, but requesting money back instead of requesting money to be sent
And roughly translated what call centre blokey was trying to say is that they would be powerless to stop a one-off transaction either, that if they thought it was fraudulent they can only query it and attempt to recover the money after the fact. So if there is no checking/authorisation process with credit cards then the only way they would have of stopping a charge would be to cancel the card before the transaction comes through. That seems to make sense, but it still seems a bit daft that they wouldn't be able to flag certain merchant id's (or whatever they call them) or put a temporary block on a card.as far as i'm aware the credit card system is a more automated process and it affects credit and debit cards the main difference is that with direct debits your bank account holds a note of authorisation to release the funds, whereas there isn't such a thing with credit/debit cards, a request for funds automatically releases the funds as long as credit is available. there is no "checking/authorisation" process with the credit cards, however with a credit card you get a statement for checking before the funds leave your bank account, but it's dangerous for a debit card as the funds automatically leave your bank account, even if it's a fraudulent transation the thing is, i do have a monthly recurring charge with a company onto a credit card, and from what i understand, each month they just charge my fee to my credit card using whatever CURRENT card data is held on my internet profile. if i changed the details to something else that was wrong, they wouldn't be able to charge me, and my services would stop until i paid the bill with a valid card. this is in a similar way to amazon holding your card details so when you want to buy something you don't have to enter all your details again, you just log in and checkout, confirming the details are correct thus from my understanding, lotusflower should have worked the same, when the charges came up, the take whatever data is in the system at the time and apply the charge. think about it this way, what if i had maxed out my mastercard and changed the details to my barclaycard. the system should have charged to my barclaycard, not my mastercard, as if i was charged to my mastercard i would get a £15 charge for the bank sending a letter that's most definately not a fine and completely in line with the law (cough) do you see what i mean? there should be no way that charges should have been applied to "old" card details if someone had updated the profile to junk. i would say that charging continously to whatever details is held on file could be called CAT, in other words you've made an agreement for a sum to be charged to your card each week/month/year/etc, but the agreement relates to whatever details are held on your profile, and not a charge to the exact same card with no reasonably available option for changing your card i didn't get charged actually. the card i used was compromised not long before the t shirts were shipped. i updated the profile with the replacement card as i was expecting the £7 shipping charge (which i think i didn't get), and only the day before the charges were applied i changed my details to 1234678912345 or something, so if they did try with the original details the charge would not have applied. i called the card company last week and nothing was pending, so it seems i was lucky as the charge might have pushed me over the limit and gave me an overlimit charge | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I had the 77 bucks pending, then it was actually charged. This morning I was refunded the 77 bucks.
He should really release a song to make it up to use. He should release a 5 cd set for that joke of a website he charged 77 bucks for. I'll never join another site. If he is so against file sharing he should manage his online world a little better than this. Wow! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I am so glad that I did not have enough money 2 consider joining year 1 of that site. & I am a Prince supporter of Prince supporters. I don't think he's directly responsible. I believe it's his handlers. Yes, Prince is the owner and CEO, but, when U hire people 2 do administrative work, U're putting your trust in their hands. He is responsible 2 a degree, but, not totally. Give him a break. Don't just attack him, get on his handlers' cases as well & call the banks 2 let them know that U decided not 2 continue your membership with LotusFlow3r. If U have a good bank, they'll put a stop payment on your card and refund your money within 2-3 business days. That's Y I'm with CHASE (shameless plug). | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
fantasylandmusic said: I am so glad that I did not have enough money 2 consider joining year 1 of that site. & I am a Prince supporter of Prince supporters. I don't think he's directly responsible. I believe it's his handlers. Yes, Prince is the owner and CEO, but, when U hire people 2 do administrative work, U're putting your trust in their hands. He is responsible 2 a degree, but, not totally. Give him a break. Don't just attack him, get on his handlers' cases as well & call the banks 2 let them know that U decided not 2 continue your membership with LotusFlow3r. If U have a good bank, they'll put a stop payment on your card and refund your money within 2-3 business days. That's Y I'm with CHASE (shameless plug).
prince doesn't have a handler. he might be named after a dog, but he isn't one. all the shit that goes on is all directly related to prince and his wishes. he just hides behind the curtain like the wizard of oz and sticks his fingers in his ears and goes "la, la, la, (eye can't hear u)" (that's probably a name of a song in the vaults that you aren't going to hear) | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
They did good on the refund. Glad for that. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I received this e-mail late this evening...
Refund Fulfillment Dear Bryan K, We have now requested refunds for those of you who were charged for a second year. If you were charged on March 24th or 25th, a refund should be coming back to you. If you do not receive notification of the refund within the next few days, let us know at sales@lotusflow3r.com. Please note - this address is for refund issues only. Thanks for your understanding. Sincerely, LotusFlow3r.com | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Refund received. Got the^^^same e-mail. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I was charged signing in when the site opened. But my registration didn´t work. I send a supportmail. And the answer from the site was that they had not registrated any payments. Well, on my bankaccount the charge with Visa was made in full. I even send them a copy. No answer after that. Same thing happend to me with npgmc years ago. They charged me twice before I got access. This time I didn´t bother to pay twice and have not bin able to access the lotusflow. Hope I haven´t missed too much. Anyway, going to check if they charged me for another year without access now after reading about this auto-renewal!
PC | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
catpark said: Brofie said: Blaming this on Prince is so stupid
To blame the web designing company is stupid too. Prince has to take responsibility for this. If he's not been keeping track at whats going on behind the scenes of his own site then thats his fault regardless. He's the boss. The reason why I decided not the join was the way this website was managed. I'm a webdesigner and I'm specialized in E-commerce and certain business practices of Lotusflow3r made me conclude that this was not a serious business venture. These were alarming signs : 1) The website launch went completely wrong. There were strong indications that the registration and credit card authorization process was not tested well enough and still contained bugs. Also the download process still contained bugs. 2) E-mails to support got replied by the webdesigner himself. Imagine that ! Normally an e-business should have a separate support department or a helpdesk handlings these complaints. It looked like this was a one man project from the start. 3) Totally swamped by the number of complaints, the webdesigner stopped replying all together. Especially when it came down to complaints about the lack of content, he simply denied those. Worse business practice ever is to deny your customers basic support or not taking into account their grievances. 4) The promised T-shirts not being sent. If they couldn't even handle a small task of sending a few thousand shirts (I'm being optimistic here), they sure wouldn't be able to run a download club properly. This automatic renewel disaster doesn't suprise me at all. They obviously have configured their merchant account wrong from the start and they simply forget to correct it afterwards. I say "they", but it's probably "he". From a professional view one must conclude that so many mistakes can only be made because of one reason : UTTER INCOMPETENCE | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ernestsewell said: StevenAnthony said: I posted an "open letter" to Prince on my site:
I'm putting it on my Prince blog. PS You should call it "The Dick CURRENTLY Known As Prince" [Edited 3/25/10 13:47pm] How about the Prince CURRENTLY known as "dick"????? Seems more fitting. Ok..... someone who cares about the Prince onlne fiascos more than I, can you fill in the blanks, PLEASE..... 1. Prince has opened _____ sites. 2. Prince has released _____ songs/videos on the internet which were UNOBTAINABLE any other way. 3. Of ALL of Prince's onine business practices, (including Crystal Ball), how many have went flawlessly without a fan or two, or thousands being screwed? 4. I paid $11 at Target, got the other songs online. Never recieved a t-shirt because I didn't pay $77. But seems most good folks that DID pay TOO MUCH didn't get their shirts either. Well, at $11, I still got a shirt on my back. I feel for ALL who fell into this web, but this is the end of the pity. If any of you out there (and I'm on your side and love you all dearly), but if you give this man your credit card information ONE MORE TIME, IT'S YOUR FAULT from this point on. Fool me once, shame on you.... Fool me twice shame on ME. Keep fooling you over and over, well that's just the Paisley way!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
"I'm still number 1 at the bank."
Fools, all of ya. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
unique said: AsylumUtopia said: Much confusion over semantics. What I have been referring to as a direct debit on a credit card is in fact a continuous authority transaction. As far as the card holder is concerned, there's little difference between a direct debit and a continuous authority transaction - of course the rules are different but they both allow multiple transactions of varying amounts without requirement for each transaction to be individually authorised by the card holder. I have no idea why continuous authority transactions are referred to (within the Irish banking system anyway) as direct debits, but they are. Perhaps it was thought that because (as far as the card holder is concerned) they operate similarly, it would avoid confusion, although knowing the way the Irish banks are run, it was probably done for the opposite reason. As you claim to know what you're talking about, you will have known that I was referring to continuous authority transactions, so I can't for the life of me figure out why you didn't just correct me instead of engaging in a pointless argument about direct debits. i know about direct debits, but not about CAT's nor about them being referred to as direct debits in ireland the reason i say they are not the same is because direct debits relate to bank accounts specifically and the payment is requested by a manual process from the debtor/company in the same way as a payment run is made, but requesting money back instead of requesting money to be sent as far as i'm aware the credit card system is a more automated process and it affects credit and debit cards the main difference is that with direct debits your bank account holds a note of authorisation to release the funds, whereas there isn't such a thing with credit/debit cards, a request for funds automatically releases the funds as long as credit is available. there is no "checking/authorisation" process with the credit cards, however with a credit card you get a statement for checking before the funds leave your bank account, but it's dangerous for a debit card as the funds automatically leave your bank account, even if it's a fraudulent transation I don't know where you live, but there is absolutely a checking/authorization process for credit cards. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
New topic Printable This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.