2 hours is not enough time for the refund!!

[DOOM]

Ok gamers please tell Steam that the 2 hour refund limit is ridiculous. I feel like the 2 weeks is good but 2 hours??? Let's get them to change this! OK OK I GET IT NOW LOL!! I know what the refund is for but please feel the need to tell me over and over again.....wrong answers only

[Boblin the Goblin]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

Because a charge back is you saying "This company committed fraud." and actually launches an investigation from your bank. If you keep submitting charge backs, it shows bad spending and untrustworthy behavior with finances. This is what your credit score reflects to companies when they look at it.

It gets even better if a company disputes the chargeback with your bank.

is it not fraud to falsely advertise what you're selling?

edit: kinda like how yall argued that valve could totally sell games that say they work on windows 7 because there's some fineprint in their TOS that says blablabla w.e... but they still put a disclaimer on all the games that says "you need windows 10+ to use steam tho." because it was false advertising.

and if someone went and made a steam account and bought the game through the browser and couldn't install steam they'd be totally justified in issuing a chargeback.

They don't set the requirements for each game, the developer does.

If someone did do that, they could simply request a refund. One which is 99% probably going to be granted.

Steam requiring Windows 10 does not mean a game saying it works in Windows 7 is false advertising. The game can very well work on Windows 7. Steam itself is what requires Windows 10.

[Brian9824]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Nope, but again your free to do what you want, just remember a business can legally come after you for charge backs and you can face criminal prosecution over it

under what charge? "we don't agree with your not agreeing with us" isn't a charge.

the funds would be taken back by the credit card company... so if they deem your claim valid valve would have to deal with them.

you're concocting some sort of like "what if" scenario where someone literally files a false claim on a chargeback, and even then it would be the credit card company you'd be in trouble with.

like actually what law would a 3rd party company be able to prosecute for issuing a chargeback?

It would be considered fraud and can result in criminal charges, fines or even jail time. A chargeback is not a way to get a refund if you are denied one.

[kingjames488]

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

under what charge? "we don't agree with your not agreeing with us" isn't a charge.

the funds would be taken back by the credit card company... so if they deem your claim valid valve would have to deal with them.

you're concocting some sort of like "what if" scenario where someone literally files a false claim on a chargeback, and even then it would be the credit card company you'd be in trouble with.

like actually what law would a 3rd party company be able to prosecute for issuing a chargeback?

It would be considered fraud and can result in criminal charges, fines or even jail time. A chargeback is not a way to get a refund if you are denied one.

again, under what law could you be charged?

you keep claiming that you could be fined and jailed for issuing a chargeback.. well I think no. so name the law.

[Tito Shivan]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

what are you looking at for your definition of false advertising?

Last time people over here largely agreed on something being false advertising and went that far as do go to the tribunals it resulted they were wrong.

But hey, I'm not a lawyer. Just something advising caution.

[Brian9824]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

It would be considered fraud and can result in criminal charges, fines or even jail time. A chargeback is not a way to get a refund if you are denied one.

again, under what law could you be charged?

you keep claiming that you could be fined and jailed for issuing a chargeback.. well I think no. so name the law.

Already did, its classified as fraud.

https://www.bhlawfirm.com/blog/2022/04/are-there-consequences-for-filing-false-chargebacks/
https://www.hostmerchantservices.com/articles/false-chargeback-claim/
https://chargebacks911.com/false-chargeback-claims/
https://www.chargebackgurus.com/blog/chargeback-fraud

Etc. The entire point is that a consumer cannot unilaterally declare something is false advertising. It has to go thru the courts. You can't just skip that, declare a company guilty, and file a chargeback to get your money back because you FEEL something should be illegal.

Publicado originalmente por Tito Shivan:

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

what are you looking at for your definition of false advertising?

Last time people over here largely agreed on something being false advertising and went that far as do go to the tribunals it resulted they were wrong.

But hey, I'm not a lawyer. Just something advising caution.

It really is amazing how people think they can bypass the entire legal system, due process, etc and just unilaterally declare a company guilty and don't realize that false advertising requires a judgement against a company, not one person's opinion...

[kingjames488]

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

again, under what law could you be charged?

you keep claiming that you could be fined and jailed for issuing a chargeback.. well I think no. so name the law.

Already did, its classified as fraud.

https://www.bhlawfirm.com/blog/2022/04/are-there-consequences-for-filing-false-chargebacks/
https://www.hostmerchantservices.com/articles/false-chargeback-claim/
https://chargebacks911.com/false-chargeback-claims/
https://www.chargebackgurus.com/blog/chargeback-fraud

Etc. The entire point is that a consumer cannot unilaterally declare something is false advertising. It has to go thru the courts. You can't just skip that, declare a company guilty, and file a chargeback to get your money back because you FEEL something should be illegal.

like I said... don't file false chargebacks >.>

and it's not based upon a consumers feelings, it's checked by the credit card company... so if they deem it as a legitimate chargeback how can someone else sue you for filing a false chargeback? lmao!

edit for your edit: the chargeback system is not a legal process... it's entirely up to the credit card company and between you and them.

edit upon reviewing your link:
seems to state

A percentage of these chargebacks are issued fraudulently when consumers plan to receive a product or service without making a legitimate payment.

so this pertains to obvious fraud, not just "you might get sued if you issue a chargeback!!"

you're being highly disingenuous.

[Brian9824]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Already did, its classified as fraud.

https://www.bhlawfirm.com/blog/2022/04/are-there-consequences-for-filing-false-chargebacks/
https://www.hostmerchantservices.com/articles/false-chargeback-claim/
https://chargebacks911.com/false-chargeback-claims/
https://www.chargebackgurus.com/blog/chargeback-fraud

Etc. The entire point is that a consumer cannot unilaterally declare something is false advertising. It has to go thru the courts. You can't just skip that, declare a company guilty, and file a chargeback to get your money back because you FEEL something should be illegal.

like I said... don't file false chargebacks >.>

and it's not based upon a consumers feelings, it's checked by the credit card company... so if they deem it as a legitimate chargeback how can someone else sue you for filing a false chargeback? lmao!

edit for your edit: the chargeback system is not a legal process... it's entirely up to the credit card company and between you and them.

Your refusing to read. You can't declare a company guilty of false advertising. That requires a court order. Also never said its a legal process. I said they can go after you for filing a false one because you can't declare something false advertising.

Again, do what you will, if you want to ignore it and file chargebacks don't be surprised if it bites you in the butt down the road. The credit card companies will almost unilaterally side with the consumer. Then the business can appeal and take legal action against the person who filed it if it was false.

[kingjames488]

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Your refusing to read.

edit upon reviewing your link:
seems to state

A percentage of these chargebacks are issued fraudulently when consumers plan to receive a product or service without making a legitimate payment.

so this pertains to obvious fraud, not just "you might get sued if you issue a chargeback!!"

you're being highly disingenuous.

[Brian9824]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Your refusing to read.

edit upon reviewing your link:
seems to state

so this pertains to obvious fraud, not just "you might get sued if you issue a chargeback!!"

you're being highly disingenuous.

The irony in that you failed to read it is astounding. Yes a percentage is premeditated, just like some murder is pre-meditated. That doesn't mean if you kill someone without planning it you get off scott free.....

Again, you've been told the answer by numerous people now. If you want to ignore everyone else feel free, arguing anymore over this is pointless and doing nothing but derailing the subject, so rather then going in circles i'll stick to ignoring you.,

[kingjames488]

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

The irony in that you failed to read it is astounding. Yes a percentage is premeditated, just like some murder is pre-meditated. That doesn't mean if you kill someone without planning it you get off scott free.....

Again, you've been told the answer by numerous people now. If you want to ignore everyone else feel free, arguing anymore over this is pointless and doing nothing but derailing the subject, so rather then going in circles i'll stick to ignoring you.,

I wonder how I would know what it says had I not read it?

I stopped reading it at the point where it explicitly stated it's reasoning which made it clear it did not pertain to the situations I'm describing.

can you not comprehend the words I'm conveying?

[Boblin the Goblin]

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

The irony in that you failed to read it is astounding. Yes a percentage is premeditated, just like some murder is pre-meditated. That doesn't mean if you kill someone without planning it you get off scott free.....

Again, you've been told the answer by numerous people now. If you want to ignore everyone else feel free, arguing anymore over this is pointless and doing nothing but derailing the subject, so rather then going in circles i'll stick to ignoring you.,

I mean, remember the "My box says windows 7." argument that was repeated?

[Boblin the Goblin]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

The irony in that you failed to read it is astounding. Yes a percentage is premeditated, just like some murder is pre-meditated. That doesn't mean if you kill someone without planning it you get off scott free.....

Again, you've been told the answer by numerous people now. If you want to ignore everyone else feel free, arguing anymore over this is pointless and doing nothing but derailing the subject, so rather then going in circles i'll stick to ignoring you.,

I wonder how I would know what it says had I not read it?

I stopped reading it at the point where it explicitly stated it's reasoning which made it clear it did not pertain to the situations I'm describing.

can you not comprehend the words I'm conveying?

Like the statement that you(as a consumer) do not dictate what is false advertising and that by using charge backs as a refund method, you are dictating something is false advertising every time you do so?

[kingjames488]

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

Publicado originalmente por brian9824:

The irony in that you failed to read it is astounding. Yes a percentage is premeditated, just like some murder is pre-meditated. That doesn't mean if you kill someone without planning it you get off scott free.....

Again, you've been told the answer by numerous people now. If you want to ignore everyone else feel free, arguing anymore over this is pointless and doing nothing but derailing the subject, so rather then going in circles i'll stick to ignoring you.,

I mean, remember the "My box says windows 7." argument that was repeated?

I seem to recall everyone insisting that everything on steam was "steam content"... funny how that changes to "the developers product" when you want to oppose issuing a chargeback?

[Boblin the Goblin]

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

I mean, remember the "My box says windows 7." argument that was repeated?

I seem to recall everyone insisting that everything on steam was "steam content"... funny how that changes to "the developers product" when you want to defend issuing a chargeback?

You recall incorrectly.

[kingjames488]

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

I wonder how I would know what it says had I not read it?

I stopped reading it at the point where it explicitly stated it's reasoning which made it clear it did not pertain to the situations I'm describing.

can you not comprehend the words I'm conveying?

Like the statement that you(as a consumer) do not dictate what is false advertising and that by using charge backs as a refund method, you are dictating something is false advertising every time you do so?

except you as a consumer can not dictate a chargeback? you make a chargeback claim with your credit card that is then reviewed by them and they then proceed to interact with the seller who then proceeds to interact with the producer? aka supply chains?

Publicado originalmente por SlowMango:

Publicado originalmente por kingjames488:

I seem to recall everyone insisting that everything on steam was "steam content"... funny how that changes to "the developers product" when you want to defend issuing a chargeback?

You recall incorrectly.

you're remember the ridiculous arguments you tried to make better than !...