Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


When I asked Virmach for refund, they threatened to charge me more. - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

When I asked Virmach for refund, they threatened to charge me more.

2456710

Comments

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider

    Shady? That’s not shady. Had you
    Disputed / charged back a payment with us, you’d have debt collectors after you the next day, at your cost.

    To do a PayPal Dispute or Chargeback you need to commit fraud - as no bank nor PayPal will open any such thing when you tell them that you willingly paid or entered any subscription agreement. Fraud this side of the world is illegal. There’s no compassion for fraudsters, so yeah, own up to your mistake and learn from it.

    Thanked by 1bib
  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2017

    I accidentally gave someone £25 once.. oh wait, no I didn't, that would be ridiculous.

  • Never ever cancel a dispute. Once you've started a dispute you go through with it and accept all bridges between you and the provider are burned.

  • So paying something you didn’t want to pay is dumb, whichever way you cut it.

    Providers not refunding overpayments is bullshit though; by all means, they’re entitled to charge a handling fee for the work involved, but to refuse it outright is really the stuff of amateurs and shows a real lack of vision; you could easily loose plenty of good customers over something that equates to a couple of minutes work.

  • I have recently paid my annual subscription fees for a VPS on RamNode when invoiced. Completely forgetting that I already have a billing agreement in place with them (it was a year ago!). I asked for a refund and got it. Happy with the way I was treated. Perhaps this is something you could learn from that @virmach

  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Host Rep

    Nekki said: Providers not refunding overpayments is bullshit though; by all means, they’re entitled to charge a handling fee for the work involved,

    Generally speaking, I will process reasonable refund requests, but the number of people signing up for $7 services and then requesting a refund after a few days is just ridiculous, and for those I don't normally refund. The effort alone is just not worth it. And for any 'mistaken' payments that are then requested for a refund, a small handling fee may apply (<$20) depending on payment method and refund requested.

  • @Jameswxx If I was virmach, I would charge you the 25$ just for opening this thread. it is a clear try of you to bash them as a revenge, because you want a refund for something that is your and only your mistake.
    Chargeback and blackmail (opening threads like this) from you don't make you seem better. Apologize them and GTFO from here.

    Thanked by 2cece maverickp
  • I think this thread just goes to show you...

    If you have any trivial issues with @Clouvider 's Clouvider, @AnthonySmith 's InceptionHost or @virmach 's Virmach, expect attitude and hostility.

    If you want great service and good customer support, go with Ramnode or @Francisco 's BuyVM.

    Keep up the great customer bashing, @Clouvider and @AnthonySmith !

  • VirMachVirMach Member, Patron Provider

    Jameswxx said: Having already cancelled the dispute on PayPal, there's nothing I can do. So I want to share my experience here. I did make a mistake by clicking the damn button

    I think it's a little bit dishonest leaving out the rest of the ticket where you were clearly explained that we would go ahead and process your refund, but it was stuck in a pending state due to you opening the dispute.

    We have no intentions of keeping your $5.

    Weblogics said: OP mistakenly added funds to this account. Virmach won't refund because it is against their terms of service. How would Virmach feel if they mistakenly done the same to one of their own upstream providers and asked for a refund?

    Pretty slimy for Virmach to handle it this way and not worth the bad publicity just because they fall back to their terms of service wording to refuse a refund.

    Due to the way our billing system (WHMCS) works, we have certain policies in place. When customers add funds to their account, it goes to the credit balance. From the balance, funds can be auto-applied to some invoices, used, and sometimes, customers get SLA credits and other credits added there as well. If the credit is moved to an invoice, it has to be deleted from the credit balance and the invoice cancelled. This all takes additional support time to handle properly, and not all agents have access to client credits. We also use the credit system to bill some customers for non-refundable custom bulk orders.

    To save time & money on our end, as well as any complications, that's our standard policy.

    We do make exceptions from time to time. In this instance, the customer dealt with a lower-level agent who was just following our policies. He then began arguing that we do not warn people (we do) and continued making a large number of responses/arguments after opening a PayPal dispute.

    This takes up more staff time, and we have to deal with the dispute, etc.

    The ticket was escalated up to a higher agent, who instructed Matthew to process a courtesy refund, if the dispute is closed. The dispute was closed but PayPal has not released the funds for us to be able to provide the refund.

    The customer was informed of all this before this thread was created. The customer continued to make demands, even though we're just waiting for PayPal to release the funds.

    Jameswxx said: I admit I wasn't aware of that. If they had explained to me instead of threatening to suspend my products I would have no problem with it.

    You were not threatened. Matthew only brought up the fact that we do charge a returned payment fee if you file a dispute/chargeback as we have to spend time dealing with the situation. This was only brought up after you mentioned responding to you on PayPal.

    We also cannot continue providing you support when you send 38 messages arguing against our policies. This takes up significant staff time. All your products come with limited support and this was one of the rare cases where we also reminded you that you have limited support and we can no longer continue to provide support for free in regards to this issue. I'm sorry, but that's just how it is when you have $1-6 per year special offer services with limited support, you open a dispute, and you continuously argue with our support for multiple weeks.

    Again, out of courtesy, we're already refunding your money, but we can no longer continue to respond to your daily messages. Please just message us when PayPal is done properly closing the dispute you opened.

    Jameswxx said: I truly feel unfairly treated with their response: "If any paypal disputes are submitted all of your products become suspended as well as a $25 charge-back fee ill be applied to your account ." that's why I started this post. I expect them to try to communicate with customers not give them ultimatums.

    To re-iterate, if anyone opens a dispute and owes us money, we're not obligated to continue providing services to them. That's not an ultimatum. That's a pretty common-sense policy.

    vpsGOD said: @virmach enables paypal agreement when you checkout first order.

    So when ever you place new order or pay for pending invoice or even adding fund their wont be any confirmation page shown in paypal.com. virmach process it without asking paypal login or paypal checkout page

    vpsGOD said: So i agree @Jameswxx made the amount without knowing the endpoint.

    This is just how our system operates. We do not code all the systems we use. In any case, customers are warned deposits are non-refundable, and I don't understand why anyone would click "Add funds" and except not to have the funds added to their account.

    Most customers are fine with the added convenience. We do not try to trick anyone into adding funds or making payments without knowing what they're doing. We include warnings in the e-mails a few days ahead of time that most payments methods recur automatically. People can contact us to remove recurring billing. People can cancel their own services. On our terms of service page, we have a quick summary on the side. Recently we also added this summary page on the final page of cart. For PayPal specifically, you are taken to a page where the account linkage is confirmed. For Credit/Debit, we have a warning on the page where you add your card. On the deposit page, there's a warning that it's non-refundable.

    I'll see if we can possibly code an additional warning that tells people they will be charged immediately.

    vpsGOD said: Subscription is different scenario if that done separately to each products. Virmach wont use subscription for individual products.

    Virmach make paypal agreement with user to process all payments invoiced automatically. But most of us think it may be subscription to particular service and fed wrong in end like Jameswxx.

    We used to have a subscription system, but that caused even more problems. If users upgraded, PayPal would still automatically send us the wrong total. If customers did not cancel their subscriptions, PayPal would auto-send funds even if we did not request it. Then there was also the problem of customers manually paying their bill, and then PayPal would still auto-send the monthly amount creating an over-payment.

    This used to be another reason we used to not provide refunds for deposits, as overpayments would be handled by our system as deposits and due to the reasons mentioned above, it would take a lot of support time dealing with all the requests for anyone that did not correctly use the system.

    We have since ditched the system to provide an overall better experience, but some customers will always prefer one thing over another.

    ikkizenho said: The message is clear: "This will generate an invoice that needs to be paid".

    There isn't any information about the payment being automatic, and provider really isn't helpful, refunding it wouldn't have any cost and would keep the customer happy with them, probably signing up for new services in any future date.

    That is the default system message. I do understand why this could be confusing. Usually an invoice is generated. For some payment methods, when customers set up billing agreements, it may process automatically.

    We will have the language changed to be more clear.

    kendid said: I have a 4 gb kvm with them... Just installed windows and it idled until they shut it down for cpu abuse... Maybe windows did an update or something... Dropping it this month...

    Sometimes (in rare cases) when clients "idle" on Windows, it gets stuck in a state where Windows ends up using maximum CPU for prolonged periods of time. To keep plans affordable, by default they come with a shared CPU. We do explain this the best we can in a tooltip next to the CPU amounts on Windows packages.

    You can always upgrade to a dedicated CPU if you're found to be using max CPU for prolonged periods of time, or you can reduce your usage.

    We provide multiple warnings in most cases. Our system is extremely generous in how in automatically handles these cases.

    sureiam said: But i will say i had considered virmach till i did a bit more research. I have no problem working with smaller companies but they gotta be professional in all regards. Sometimes when your working too hard to pick up customers you lose sight of what it takes to keep them.

    We try our best to work with customers, where possible. Unfortunately, support is not free and with lower margin products (that specifically come with limited support) we cannot afford to continuously communicate with customers about our specific policies and make immediate exceptions.

    doughmanes said: My issue was I didn't get any notice that I was about to be charged and the service was meh so I was planning on leaving.

    I believe your situation occurred in the past, when we used PayPal's old subscription system. For a period of time we did not send out warnings/notices because it confused customers into manually paying their services, and then PayPal sent another payment automatically afterward resulting in a double payment.

    varunchopra said: Agreed. Virmach is shady as shit, focuses on picking up customers more than it does on leaving them.

    You shouldn't have cancelled the dispute, mate.

    alexjj said: They're terrible. I suggest finding a better provider and then go through the paypal chargeback.

    Tion said: Never ever cancel a dispute. Once you've started a dispute you go through with it and accept all bridges between you and the provider are burned.

    I think it's unfair to call us shady or terrible, unless you have some other experiences to share. I also do not believe you burn bridges when you open disputes, as long as it's de-escalated before it takes up support time to deal with the disputes. With chargebacks, it's a little more different as there's a fee involved as well.

    We have actually had a customer file a chargeback and then contact us about resolving it afterward as they wanted to de-escalate the situation.

    Nekki said: So paying something you didn’t want to pay is dumb, whichever way you cut it.

    Providers not refunding overpayments is bullshit though; by all means, they’re entitled to charge a handling fee for the work involved, but to refuse it outright is really the stuff of amateurs and shows a real lack of vision; you could easily loose plenty of good customers over something that equates to a couple of minutes work.

    I understand it's frustrating, but in most cases when we outright reject making an exception, it's when dealing with the situation costs more than the refund. We could make our policy a fee to handle overpayments/deposits but then it creates a weird situation where we have to tell customers we are charging them a processing fee, which usually makes them more upset. If we do a partial refund, we still have the risk of getting a dispute/chargeback on an even smaller payment especially when the customer is more upset. Then there's the fact that most customers undervalue the cost of support. If their product is $6 per year, and we tell them there's a $3 processing fee, they will think we're taking away half a year of the product rather than recouping support & PayPal fee costs. Then we have to also spend time explaining our policies to the customer, especially if they disagree (after agreeing to the terms) which takes up even more support time.

    We do have a portion of our terms, where there's a $25 fee in some situations where a customer is not eligible for a refund but they want to close their account and withdraw funds. At our discretion, we have handled some cases like this where a large customer withdrew several thousand dollars of store credits.

    Your idea works better if the payments are larger, but for the low-end market it would probably be worse in the customer's eye.

    wwabbit said: I have recently paid my annual subscription fees for a VPS on RamNode when invoiced. Completely forgetting that I already have a billing agreement in place with them (it was a year ago!). I asked for a refund and got it. Happy with the way I was treated. Perhaps this is something you could learn from that @virmach

    I actually personally used Ramnode once. I cancelled my service with them, but I forgot to cancel the PayPal subscription. This meant that my PayPal account sent them payments monthly, and this continued for about a year. Ramnode did not offer a refund, and it was understandable.

    jiggawattz said: I think this thread just goes to show you...

    If you have any trivial issues with @Clouvider 's Clouvider, @AnthonySmith 's InceptionHost or @virmach 's Virmach, expect attitude and hostility.

    If you want great service and good customer support, go with Ramnode or @Francisco 's BuyVM.

    Keep up the great customer bashing, @Clouvider and @AnthonySmith !

    We are never hostile to customers. Sometimes we may enforce policies where necessary, and defend our actions as I have done so today.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2017

    jiggawattz said: If you have any trivial issues with @Clouvider 's Clouvider, @AnthonySmith 's InceptionHost or @virmach 's Virmach, expect attitude and hostility.

    Well there is no need to be passive aggressive is there, I refund customers all the time, I just don't tolerate stupid.

    Call a spade a spade, I appreciate being a host you become an easy to target those that lack the ability to express themselves properly will always resort to the use of reductio ad absurdum or the one-liners that usually involve saying "unprofessional".

    I am a human, a person, a member of this forum before I am a 'host' and I am saying outright, accidentally paying someone £25 is ridiculous, especially without the context of how, sorry if you feel that makes me a bad aggressive person, if you do I think that makes you fairly petty, to be honest.

    Thanked by 1Clouvider
  • VirMachVirMach Member, Patron Provider

    Edmond said: This is probably Virmach's fault now, since it's not clear on it's methods for payment collection. Invoice is generated right? I can have it canceled by them or let it expire three days later. It's payment collection method is wrong. You can automatically charge for only the service I agree to, not everything I ever order with you...

    This image has been resized to fit in the page. Click to enlarge.

    This image has been resized to fit in the page. Click to enlarge.

    They're billing panel said the complete opposite of what they're doing...

    I believe if a customer only uses the deposit feature, their PayPal account is not linked permanently for recurring payments. However, in this case, the customer most likely first used the subscription, and then later deposited. Once this happens, the account linked to their VirMach account is used.

    However, as I stated above, I can see how the default WHMCS message could be confusing. This has been modified.

    If anyone made a mistake as a result of this default message, please contact us and request your ticket be escalated to management. We will honor refunds in these instances.


    For anyone wondering what happened, here's a summary:

    • Customer added funds to his account, and since he had a PayPal account attached to his VirMach account, the payment went through immediately.
    • Customer requested a refund, and per our policy, our billing agent rejected the refund.
    • Customer opened a PayPal dispute, and was reminded of our policy for returned payments.
    • After the situation was escalated, customer was given a chance to resolve the dispute outside of PayPal, and as a courtesy we would make an exception and provide the refund.
    • Customer closed the dispute, but PayPal held the funds in a pending state.
    • Refund is currently not physically possible, and customer must wait for PayPal to permit we refund the money.

    Some other notes:

    • Customer's services all have limited support.
    • Our system may have been misleading due to a default message displayed by our billing system that implied an invoice would be generated (or an older message) however it did display that deposits are non-refundable. While an invoice is generated and the message is not incorrect, we (at the time) failed to mention that if a PayPal account is linked, our billing system auto-pays the invoice without directing users to PayPal again. (However, this is mentioned when setting up the billing agreement with PayPal.)

    Please let me know if you guys have any other suggestions or feedback.

  • VirMach said: I understand it's frustrating, but in most cases when we outright reject making an exception, it's when dealing with the situation costs more than the refund. We could make our policy a fee to handle overpayments/deposits but then it creates a weird situation where we have to tell customers we are charging them a processing fee, which usually makes them more upset.

    If we do a partial refund, we still have the risk of getting a dispute/chargeback on an even smaller payment especially when the customer is more upset.

    Surely in those cases, the value is so little that it's not worth the aggravation that not refunding brings? I bet very people walk away from a 'no' for such low amounts, so I'm not sure where the economy is in arguing the toss.

    VirMach said: Then there's the fact that most customers undervalue the cost of support. If their product is $6 per year, and we tell them there's a $3 processing fee, they will think we're taking away half a year of the product rather than recouping support & PayPal fee costs. Then we have to also spend time explaining our policies to the customer, especially if they disagree (after agreeing to the terms) which takes up even more support time.

    You can't blame customers for undervaluing support when you do exactly that with some of your insane pricing. If you think a plan (which you do not mark out as 'zero support') is worth $6 which has got to be barely covering your costs, what value would you expect them to apportion to the support element? Got to be next to nothing. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

    Gotta be honest mate, sounds like these all things you should have thought of before burying yourself so deep in the low-end.

    Thanked by 1doughmanes
  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    VirMach said: However, as I stated above, I can see how the default WHMCS message could be confusing. This has been modified.

    Because people don't take responsibility for anything anymore, and they do not want any accountability, too many online professional cry bullies or others that are professionally offended at anything they don't agree with are the problem of the modern age, the loud minority.

    It was not confusing because clearly they did not read it or did not understand it, but now it is your problem apparently.

    You have done nothing wrong, I can say that with 100% confidence because the power and ability to prevent any of this from ever happening was with the OP, there is absolutely nothing you could have done to prevent the catalyst.

    Somehow people think it is ok to join the mob and get the pitchforks and call you slimy, shady, dishonest, etc etc.

    LET seems to be turning so extream left wing its almost palpable now.

    Thanked by 2AuroraZ Plioser
  • VirMachVirMach Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2017

    Nekki said: Surely in those cases, the value is so little that it's not worth the aggravation that not refunding brings? I bet very people walk away from a 'no' for such low amounts, so I'm not sure where the economy is in arguing the toss.

    A very large quantity (but small portion of revenue) of orders are these low-cost services. A large portion of our customer-base (especially from China) have services with a value of a few dollars per year. This means we also get a lot of these requests (not exactly like this situation, but where support time is used), especially (again, from China) where customers may have connectivity issues.

    So yes, the value is so little it's not worth the aggravation, but it's also not worth encouraging.

    Nekki said: You can't blame customers for undervaluing support when you do exactly that with some of your insane pricing. If you think a plan (which you do not mark out as 'zero support') is worth $6 which has got to be barely covering your costs, what value would you expect them to apportion to the support element? Got to be next to nothing. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

    Gotta be honest mate, sounds like these all things you should have thought of before burying yourself so deep in the low-end.

    It's not a huge problem. Our policies allow us to do what we do, and sometimes we just have to enforce them. In this case, the policy wasn't even enforced in the end. You have to remember that these packages are an extremely small part of our normal operation. We just love the community and want to provide the best prices possible.

    If a plan doesn't come with "limited support" then we will of course provide the same level of support as any product, even if it's insanely low pricing. But when customers begin abusing the support by continuously arguing our policies, and they have limited support, we have to draw the line somewhere. We provided limited support packages as a means of providing extremely cheap pricing. We don't force anyone into accepting limited support, and we do advertise it clearly on the packages that do not have full support.


    (edit) We have also gone ahead and added another warning on the checkout page as well.

  • jiggawattjiggawatt Member
    edited November 2017

    AnthonySmith said: Because people don't take responsibility for anything anymore, and they do not want any accountability, too many online professional cry bullies or others that are professionally offended at anything they don't agree with are the problem of the modern age, the loud minority.

    Customer service is a concept that puts empathy with the customer first - no matter what your human instincts are.

    @VirMach actually gave a solid response, though I don't know if she is actually going to refund the OP as she should. She's looking at how WHMCS is confusing and taking feedback on how to fix it. Much improved.

    Blame can be thrown either way, but I think the potential customers reading this thread for as long as it shows up in Google results can tell who they want to do business with.

    Thanked by 1vmp32k
  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2017

    jiggawattz said: Customer service is a concept that puts empathy with the customer first - no matter what your human instincts are.

    I agree to some degree, it is for sure up there as highly important, but not at the detriment of other customers, company morals, and ethics or just because it is a common belief that the customer is always right even when they are being ridiculous.

    However, he is not my customer and I am not talking to him or about him as one, this is what I mean by being a person, human, forum member before a host, its all to easy when someone does not agree just to play the 'host' card rather than make a real counterpoint or have a conversation about why they disagree.

    Anyhoo, its Sunday, I am not 'at work' I might go for another walk with my dog :)

  • @jiggawattz said: @VirMach actually gave a solid response, though I don't know if she is actually going to refund the OP as she should. She's looking at how WHMCS is confusing and taking feedback on how to fix it. Much improved.

    I also find that @VirMach's response is very thorough.

    (I still don't understand how the OP "accidentally" added funds to his account, but I don't think that I'm going to succeed in understanding this.)

  • @AnthonySmith said:

    jiggawattz said: If you have any trivial issues with @Clouvider 's Clouvider, @AnthonySmith 's InceptionHost or @virmach 's Virmach, expect attitude and hostility.

    Well there is no need to be passive aggressive is there, I refund customers all the time, I just don't tolerate stupid.

    Call a spade a spade, I appreciate being a host you become an easy to target those that lack the ability to express themselves properly will always resort to the use of reductio ad absurdum or the one-liners that usually involve saying "unprofessional".

    I am a human, a person, a member of this forum before I am a 'host' and I am saying outright, accidentally paying someone £25 is ridiculous, especially without the context of how, sorry if you feel that makes me a bad aggressive person, if you do I think that makes you fairly petty, to be honest.

    I would like to point out that all of your posts are signed off as a representative of the business you're running, right down to the provider tag. That would put you, in the forum's context, a provider's representative before a person, that's how it is.

    When things start getting personal..... it just doesn't sound professional, that's all.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    dahartigan said: I would like to point out that all of your posts are signed off as a representative of the business you're running, right down to the provider tag. That would put you, in the forum's context, a provider's representative before a person, that's how it is.

    So do you think I should register another account with just a 'member' tag?

  • No god please no again...

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2017

    @jiggawattz said:
    I think this thread just goes to show you...

    If you have any trivial issues with @Clouvider 's Clouvider, @AnthonySmith 's InceptionHost or @virmach 's Virmach, expect attitude and hostility.

    If you want great service and good customer support, go with Ramnode or @Francisco 's BuyVM.

    Keep up the great customer bashing, @Clouvider and @AnthonySmith !

    Did you even read my message ? Please re-read because either you’re severely misinterpreting, or there’s something else wrong here.

    Chargeback or PayPal dispute is not a trivial issue. In order to even get there with a legitimate purchase in our industry you have to commit fraud by misrepresentation of facts to your card issuer or PayPal in order for such dispute/claim/chargeback to even happen. This is criminal. Criminal != trivial. Completely opposite. We pursue fraudsters to the very end.

    There are other methods of resolving disputes and they are regulated in a contract with your host.

  • AnthonySmith said: So do you think I should register another account with just a 'member' tag?

    Don't feed the troll.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider

    Nekki said: Don't feed the troll.

    :)

  • jiggawattjiggawatt Member
    edited November 2017

    Clouvider said: Chargeback or PayPal dispute is not a trivial issue. In order to even get there with a legitimate purchase in our industry you have to commit fraud by misrepresentation of facts to your card issuer or PayPal in order for such dispute/claim/chargeback to even happen. This is criminal. Criminal != trivial. Completely opposite. We pursue fraudsters to the very end.

    The original post wasn't about a chargeback, though. It was about a refund of an accidental overpayment, which is indeed proper. Even @VirMach admitted that their billing system is confusing.

    This wasn't a situation of a dumb user pushing buttons. It was a situation where the customer didn't know the peculiarity of how WHMCS does PayPal invoicing and made a reasonable mistake that can be quickly rectified by the provider at no loss.

    There are other methods of resolving disputes and they are regulated in a contract with your host.

    Yes, but the OP did that (opened a support ticket) and didn't get a proper response.

    Also, if you want to be strict and hard about terms, nobody has mentioned that @VirMach is actually violating PayPal's terms by charging a lesser price for Bitcoin. I think @VirMach should do the right thing in regards to OP, otherwise we should probably contact PayPal about this pricing infringement.

    Thanked by 1doughmanes
  • Clouvider said: Shady? That’s not shady. Had you Disputed / charged back a payment with us, you’d have debt collectors after you the next day, at your cost.

    HAHAHAHAHAHA, spend $$$ to recoup $. Brilliant business plan or the most hilarious attempt at puffing your chest out.

  • AnthonySmithAnthonySmith Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2017

    What I don't quite understand though, having just read the tickets again, how did the user add funds, genuinely I cant make that out?

    Click billing, click add finds, enter the amount, get invoice, select payment method, get directed to paypal, login to paypal, confirm the transaction.

    That is 7 or 8 steps.

    Maybe I missed something?

    During that the user is also notified it is not refundable but continues anyway.

    Then before the host gives fair warning about paypal claims, the OP has already asked them to respond to the paypal message which suggests that the paypal claim was put in before support was requested or concluded one way or another from the host.

    Do I have that wrong, or are people generally accepting that is the order of things and still accepting that this was an accident and that the host is in the wrong?

    As a side note, forget the refund morality when considering the above, that comes in to play after the fact.

  • doughmanes said: HAHAHAHAHAHA, spend $$$ to recoup $. Brilliant business plan or the most hilarious attempt at puffing your chest out.

    Wat? That's not how it works, at least not in the UK.

    Thanked by 1Clouvider
  • For such profiteers, you do not need kindness, you should paypal dispute in the end, I bought a vps, ip is gfw sealed off, I change the ip also asked to pay fees, I asked for a refund.

  • kvm said: For such profiteers, you do not need kindness, you should paypal dispute in the end, I bought a vps, ip is gfw sealed off, I change the ip also asked to pay fees, I asked for a refund.

    If you asked upfront if your specific requirements for an IP could be met (or the offer implied they would be) and you were told they were, you'd be entitled to a refund. If not, you're in no-way entitled to a refund; it's like picking a sandwich up off the shelf without checking it, taking a bite, then asking for a refund because it didn't have cheese in it.

  • @vpsGOD said:
    @Edmond who knows as a first time user to such agreement process.

    Subscription is different scenario if that done separately to each products. Virmach wont use subscription for individual products.

    Virmach make paypal agreement with user to process all payments invoiced automatically. But most of us think it may be subscription to particular service and fed wrong in end like Jameswxx.

    are you his lawyer or smh?

Sign In or Register to comment.