(05-12-2023, 12:17 PM)Equilibrium Wrote: This may be a question for @mothered then. Technically speaking if you was to MEB a apple watch ultra from apple/ amazon or wherever. Once they inevitably asK for the PR, if they refuse beyond that it would be a chargeback/paypal dispute and that would be the trick up your sleeve? Because realistically they have no evidence to disprove you and you've gone above and beyond to get the PR.

Side note whilst I have your expertise, is paypal as good as chargebacks or are chargebacks the gold Standard? I ask because you could rotate between chargebacks and disputes to space them out even more seen as they're different establishments.

(05-12-2023, 12:30 PM)TorUser827PlsNoBan Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 12:17 PM)Equilibrium Wrote: This may be a question for @mothered then. Technically speaking if you was to MEB a apple watch ultra from apple/ amazon or wherever. Once they inevitably asK for the PR, if they refuse beyond that it would be a chargeback/paypal dispute and that would be the trick up your sleeve? Because realistically they have no evidence to disprove you and you've gone above and beyond to get the PR.

Side note whilst I have your expertise, is paypal as good as chargebacks or are chargebacks the gold Standard? I ask because you could rotate between chargebacks and disputes to space them out even more seen as they're different establishments.

From my understanding you got it right, but iv never done it myself @mothered would know for sure.
I think charegacks are gold and paypal is silver from what iv read on here as well.
The thing is, SE works because Amazon can't see you did 10 other SE's to different stores, but the cr3dit c@rds see all that.

(05-12-2023, 02:40 PM)Gliggy Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 12:40 PM)Equilibrium Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 12:30 PM)TorUser827PlsNoBan Wrote: From my understanding you got it right, but iv never done it myself @mothered would know for sure.
I think charegacks are gold and paypal is silver from what iv read on here as well.
The thing is, SE works because Amazon can't see you did 10 other SE's to different stores, but the cr3dit c@rds see all that.

And that's where spacing everything out with legit purchases and not doing same method/item constantly would come Into play as a pattern would build. Would also be beneficial to know if like you said at the start, just your b@nk looks at it e.g. Halifax in the UK or if you do it with Halifax, lloyds and first direct then VISA could connect these dots as it is the c@rd supplier. If not it opens up the opportunity to have a few accounts that you run for different things like bills, purchases etc and then you could really space out chargebacks. Or better yet get an account with a different supplier or whatever they're called and get a Masterc@rd one. OR I'm just over thinking all this and @mothered will be rolling his eyes reading this

---

(05-12-2023, 02:40 PM)Gliggy Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 12:40 PM)Equilibrium Wrote: And that's where spacing everything out with legit purchases and not doing same method/item constantly would come Into play as a pattern would build. Would also be beneficial to know if like you said at the start, just your b@nk looks at it e.g. Halifax in the UK or if you do it with Halifax, lloyds and first direct then VISA could connect these dots as it is the c@rd supplier. If not it opens up the opportunity to have a few accounts that you run for different things like bills, purchases etc and then you could really space out chargebacks. Or better yet get an account with a different supplier or whatever they're called and get a Masterc@rd one. OR I'm just over thinking all this and @mothered will be rolling his eyes reading this

I think the amount of chargebacks used per bank/ institute counts to some degree, but I doubt the card supplier themselves have any direct say.

That said, chargebacks should only be used as a last resort, but they do require some effort on the SE's part, such as providing a strong case, records of communication and providing what's known as "compelling" evidence to the banking institution- this is usually what has the final say in a dispute. For DNA, this can be the proof of delivery and this is what the card issuer sees when making a final decision. I think this is why carriers especially in the UK want to take a photo in an open doorway to show that a package was delivered - this at its very final stage of the claims process would show the employee working on the dispute case compelling evidence that it's been delivered to the right property. The retailer, if they defend the case, could also back up their assertion that it was delivered to the right door, for example by sending across pictures of Google streetview that matches the door of the delivery. Whereas if you provide the bank/ credit card company a print out of the proof of delivery which shows it was left unattended, it would be in your favour and you would win the chargeback.

I don't think the Visa/ Mastercard gets involved with it - it's the bank/ credit card provider who apply their rules in the case, but this only applies to chargebacks under these schemes. I've never done a Paypal one as I have had personal issues with the company, but from reading posts on here they don't seem very consistent.

In the UK, if you are making a claim and it's by credit card for a purchase over £100, then the bank/ credit card provider is also liable and you can make a section 75 claim. But say you make an order for 4 items of clothing at £50 each totalling £200, then Section 75 protection would not apply and it would be referred for a chargeback under Visa/ Mastercard rules.  I think sometimes the credit card will reimburse you themselves without clawing back the money from the retailer but I'm not 100% sure on this, but in cases where I've won legitimate chargebacks it's gone on my statement as a credit from my credit card company.

There are a few websites (written by the "other side" of us SErs) which discuss chargebacks for retailers in more detail:

https://chargebacks911.com/compelling-evidence/#:~:text=Many%20different%20types%20of%20documentation%20are%20considered%20compelling%20evidence%20in,sales%20receipts%20are%20all%20admissible.

https://www.signifyd.com/resources/fraud-101/chargeback-process-in-depth/

https://www.adyen.com/blog/understanding-chargebacks#:~:text=The%20merchant%20reviews%20the%20chargeback,the%20scheme%20to%20the%20issuer.

(05-12-2023, 03:54 PM)Equilibrium Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 02:40 PM)Gliggy Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 12:40 PM)Equilibrium Wrote: And that's where spacing everything out with legit purchases and not doing same method/item constantly would come Into play as a pattern would build. Would also be beneficial to know if like you said at the start, just your b@nk looks at it e.g. Halifax in the UK or if you do it with Halifax, lloyds and first direct then VISA could connect these dots as it is the c@rd supplier. If not it opens up the opportunity to have a few accounts that you run for different things like bills, purchases etc and then you could really space out chargebacks. Or better yet get an account with a different supplier or whatever they're called and get a Masterc@rd one. OR I'm just over thinking all this and @mothered will be rolling his eyes reading this

---

I think the amount of chargebacks used per bank/ institute counts to some degree, but I doubt the card supplier themselves have any direct say.

That said, chargebacks should only be used as a last resort, but they do require some effort on the SE's part, such as providing a strong case, records of communication and providing what's known as "compelling" evidence to the banking institution- this is usually what has the final say in a dispute. For DNA, this can be the proof of delivery and this is what the card issuer sees when making a final decision. I think this is why carriers especially in the UK want to take a photo in an open doorway to show that a package was delivered - this at its very final stage of the claims process would show the employee working on the dispute case compelling evidence that it's been delivered to the right property. The retailer, if they defend the case, could also back up their assertion that it was delivered to the right door, for example by sending across pictures of Google streetview that matches the door of the delivery. Whereas if you provide the bank/ credit card company a print out of the proof of delivery which shows it was left unattended, it would be in your favour and you would win the chargeback.

I don't think the Visa/ Mastercard gets involved with it - it's the bank/ credit card provider who apply their rules in the case, but this only applies to chargebacks under these schemes. I've never done a Paypal one as I have had personal issues with the company, but from reading posts on here they don't seem very consistent.

In the UK, if you are making a claim and it's by credit card for a purchase over £100, then the bank/ credit card provider is also liable and you can make a section 75 claim. But say you make an order for 4 items of clothing at £50 each totalling £200, then Section 75 protection would not apply and it would be referred for a chargeback under Visa/ Mastercard rules.  I think sometimes the credit card will reimburse you themselves without clawing back the money from the retailer but I'm not 100% sure on this, but in cases where I've won legitimate chargebacks it's gone on my statement as a credit from my credit card company.

There are a few websites (written by the "other side" of us SErs) which discuss chargebacks for retailers in more detail:

https://chargebacks911.com/compelling-evidence/#:~:text=Many%20different%20types%20of%20documentation%20are%20considered%20compelling%20evidence%20in,sales%20receipts%20are%20all%20admissible.

https://www.signifyd.com/resources/fraud-101/chargeback-process-in-depth/

https://www.adyen.com/blog/understanding-chargebacks#:~:text=The%20merchant%20reviews%20the%20chargeback,the%20scheme%20to%20the%20issuer.

Thank you for the long write up it's explained exactly how it works now. As for a MEB claim surely there's nothing they can provide in a chargeback that would substantiate the claim. As you are agreeing it was delivered however they can't prove it was in their (if the MEB method is done correct). Also not using the product until its all over obviously.

(05-12-2023, 04:01 PM)Gliggy Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 03:54 PM)Equilibrium Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 02:40 PM)Gliggy Wrote:

---

I think the amount of chargebacks used per bank/ institute counts to some degree, but I doubt the card supplier themselves have any direct say.

That said, chargebacks should only be used as a last resort, but they do require some effort on the SE's part, such as providing a strong case, records of communication and providing what's known as "compelling" evidence to the banking institution- this is usually what has the final say in a dispute. For DNA, this can be the proof of delivery and this is what the card issuer sees when making a final decision. I think this is why carriers especially in the UK want to take a photo in an open doorway to show that a package was delivered - this at its very final stage of the claims process would show the employee working on the dispute case compelling evidence that it's been delivered to the right property. The retailer, if they defend the case, could also back up their assertion that it was delivered to the right door, for example by sending across pictures of Google streetview that matches the door of the delivery. Whereas if you provide the bank/ credit card company a print out of the proof of delivery which shows it was left unattended, it would be in your favour and you would win the chargeback.

I don't think the Visa/ Mastercard gets involved with it - it's the bank/ credit card provider who apply their rules in the case, but this only applies to chargebacks under these schemes. I've never done a Paypal one as I have had personal issues with the company, but from reading posts on here they don't seem very consistent.

In the UK, if you are making a claim and it's by credit card for a purchase over £100, then the bank/ credit card provider is also liable and you can make a section 75 claim. But say you make an order for 4 items of clothing at £50 each totalling £200, then Section 75 protection would not apply and it would be referred for a chargeback under Visa/ Mastercard rules.  I think sometimes the credit card will reimburse you themselves without clawing back the money from the retailer but I'm not 100% sure on this, but in cases where I've won legitimate chargebacks it's gone on my statement as a credit from my credit card company.

There are a few websites (written by the "other side" of us SErs) which discuss chargebacks for retailers in more detail:

https://chargebacks911.com/compelling-evidence/#:~:text=Many%20different%20types%20of%20documentation%20are%20considered%20compelling%20evidence%20in,sales%20receipts%20are%20all%20admissible.

https://www.signifyd.com/resources/fraud-101/chargeback-process-in-depth/

https://www.adyen.com/blog/understanding-chargebacks#:~:text=The%20merchant%20reviews%20the%20chargeback,the%20scheme%20to%20the%20issuer.

Thank you for the long write up it's explained exactly how it works now. As for a MEB claim surely there's nothing they can provide in a chargeback that would substantiate the claim. As you are agreeing it was delivered however they can't prove it was in their (if the MEB method is done correct). Also not using the product until its all over obviously.

Yes, but then they could send across evidence of the shipping weight if they have it. Same idea if the company uses CCTV for a PEB, footage of is more than likely to be emailed to the bank dealing with the chargeback at this stage.

(05-12-2023, 04:13 PM)Equilibrium Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 04:01 PM)Gliggy Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 03:54 PM)Equilibrium Wrote: Thank you for the long write up it's explained exactly how it works now. As for a MEB claim surely there's nothing they can provide in a chargeback that would substantiate the claim. As you are agreeing it was delivered however they can't prove it was in their (if the MEB method is done correct). Also not using the product until its all over obviously.

Yes, but then they could send across evidence of the shipping weight if they have it. Same idea if the company uses CCTV for a PEB, footage of is more than likely to be emailed to the bank dealing with the chargeback at this stage.

That's where if done correct the shipping weight should mean nothing as its being mentioned anything under 150 grams doesn't register so if you MEB a apple watch it should be inconclusive. All this is obviously hopefully not needed if I can SE the company but as a just in case.

(05-12-2023, 04:24 PM)Gliggy Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 04:13 PM)Equilibrium Wrote:

(05-12-2023, 04:01 PM)Gliggy Wrote: Yes, but then they could send across evidence of the shipping weight if they have it. Same idea if the company uses CCTV for a PEB, footage of is more than likely to be emailed to the bank dealing with the chargeback at this stage.

That's where if done correct the shipping weight should mean nothing as its being mentioned anything under 150 grams doesn't register so if you MEB a apple watch it should be inconclusive. All this is obviously hopefully not needed if I can SE the company but as a just in case.

Yeah should be okay, if they can't prove it was in the box then they can't win it in their favour. If it's a cellular Apple Watch though as with a lot of tech items they may be able to find out if it's been registered on the network, but best thing to do is to wait a few weeks till claim is settled (depends how deep the company wants to go into it). Or you could just use the watch on wifi if you really don't want to wait that long, but you just wanna cover yourself in case they do find out its being used, which could be presented to the bank and you losing the chargeback, which can take weeks. I recently had one with Zalando for DNA and that took like 4 months lol.

(05-12-2023, 11:41 AM)TorUser827PlsNoBan Wrote: I guess if you do to many chargebacks on American Express, you would be banned from using all credit cards with American Express

(05-12-2023, 11:41 AM)TorUser827PlsNoBan Wrote: but that should not effect the other 3, unless it somehow goes on the credit score or something.