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.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Perhaps dull would have been a better choice of words, dull 100% of the time is a bad thing I think.
I'm just impressed to read the extent of VirMach's answers.
I've read the whole thing and I've yet to find where the customer is threatened. Different people have different views on this, this customer compares the fact that if he initiates a chargeback he will incur in a fee to "someone threatening to break his legs" (...)
There's the usual "cultural barrier". For a Chinese, the customer is the absolute king even if he pays only a few bucks. A customer shall demand any level of support they may require and if a mistake has been made on customer' side, the provider have to disregard ToS, contract, policies and whatnot to "be sympathetic" with the customer. For a westerner, everything has been defined in ToS, contract and AUP; what has not been covered there has to be deducted according to "good faith" and consolidated customary law or standard, common practices in the industry. Both parties try to be polite during the execution of the contract and their demand for "sympathy" is proportioned to their investment.
VirMach's take on this issue seems just fine from a western PoV; their no-refund stance is totally understandable and possibly legit. If they were to transform a refund exception into a new rule this could be detrimental for their business. They seem to strive to be sympathetic anyway and they seem to care about "narrowing" this cultural gap, adopting a tool more used by these Asian customers, possibly a tool where they couldn't make the mistake to add funds if they didn't intend to. It would be pretty hard to argue that VirMach ever attempted to "steal" few bucks from inexperienced customers due to paypal' quirks, the commitment they showed in this thread to prevent something like this in the future is remarkable.
It would be very nice to see inexperienced Chinese customers sympathetic for their providers too; understanding why the refund rule is an exception, why a fee has to be applied if a chargeback is initiated, what is the cost of customer support in the west and what is the cost to refund few bucks (way more than those 30 cents in paypal fees). It would be nice not going ballistic over a rather gentle memo that a chargeback fee may exist
Technically, it's not. You're accusing your peer of non-delivering something you requested. That would be the case if funds were withdrawn from your paypal account and not added in your provider's panel.
I can confirm that refund is not received.
That's a gross exaggeration.
No, I have not got the refund.
How many times has Virmach mentioned limited support? I think Virmach shows only complacency by constantly bringing up limited support like a shield to defend deficiencies in their attitudes. It's not as if I had asked for complicated technical issues to be solved that would've required hours of work by IT professionals.
Exactly
It might be a cultural thing. But what did they want to achieve by sending me this "gentle memo"? That I'll be cowed and back down?
You must learn to live with your choices, man, buyer remorse, OP remorse... I bet you didnt expect it to backfire and virmach not to drop the ball, you probably thought you can provoke them enough to behave unprofessionally but didn't work.
Better luck next time!
Like I mentioned before, I'm quite satisfied with their services. In fact, I recommend it.
The only problem I have is with their support. I don't mean they should cave in to customers every whim. From my point of view, they could be more cordial, and less arrogant, at least that's how I perceive it.
Then it is perfect, you made up an advertising thread for them, people know in some detail what to expect, everyone is happy. This is why we have LET.
Yeah, I don't disagree with this statement.
dicks?
So what's the deal @VirMach ? I was under the impression that PayPal lets the provider close the dispute by just refunding. There should be no "freeze" here.
Yep, click refund and it usually automatically closes the dispute as resolved.
Go to billing, click add funds, get invoice, select payment method, get redirected to payment processor, login, make agreement to pay, confirm payment.
Why is that a gross exaggeration? Genuine question.
Sorry I thought you had agreed to a refund with the host.
This does not seem to be the case for us.
If someone opens a dispute, it is almost always the case we lose about $20 or $25 in charge-back fees. The option to 'refund' disappears and the only thing I can do is challenge or accept liability, and in every single case where we have 'accepted liability', a charge-back fee was applied. We normally challenge now since there is no benefit to 'accept liability'.
This is the case for us any way.
Read what I posted, IIRC tagging you a few pages back.
So you are happy to apply "innocent until proven otherwise" to the OP who broke the ToS and potentially committed fraud but not to the provider who was following his ToS as agreed to (several times no doubt) by the OP?
"innocent until proven otherwise" places the burden on the accuser - in this case the accuser is the OP and he has failed to prove that Virmach was dishonest or threatening.
Not sure there will be any refund.
And did I mention they also emptied my account of the money I deposited?
@Virmach probably want me to keep this thread alive, otherwise they would have gave my money back so I could push off.
Give it a rest.
Palpay doesn't provide the appropriate options. Besides, Paypal still need to investigate.
@jameswxx You are still making excuses for your own stupidity. You give it a rest!
They have to cover their bases, if there will be a chargeback fee, have to be sure they have where to recover it from. I am sure they will refund the rest if they agreed to it if there is anything left after the chargeback.
No. Whoever provides a service that someone is looking for, is always right as much as the competitors and the market allows it.
* Except in the United States, where you are expected to bend over backwards and lick someones' ass for the privilege of giving them a service at a loss.
never ending drama, but already bored since page 3. need for a plot twist, maybe paypal the real antagonist.
Not really, you need to investigate what you click when you accept contracts. "Palpay" has all the relevant options for a payment preprocessor. If you feel that Paypal lacks an appropriate option, file a ticket @ Paypal. If you feel that Paypal is a "deceptive" site, file a ticket @ Paypal. Self-entitling a non-existent option is not a good reason to commit fraud.
Other providers, rather than giving their users an option to add non refundable funds, give the option to buy credits. I.e. a user may buy 50 credits for $50. Such an approach maybe vehiculates better the idea that the user bought something already, they got something already, and it's there, delivered.
No, because they were not threatening you in any way. Maybe a different phrasing, pointing out how they feel sorry for you leaving and that they're really forced to suspend your service and bill you for the ongoing costs of your fraud, even if they really didn't intend to, would have been more of your liking. Still there's no hostility on their side in any of their replies.
without wanting to enter the fight, as far as I understood that exactly is the problem here.
he clicked 'add funds' and got charged immediately, especially without any further steps involved.
and that's because of the billing aggreement which has been done earlier (during first payment or so) and which also is something different compared to paypal subscriptions but OP wasn't aware of anyway.
so more like getting curious, click once, money gone, shit.
but that's just what I understood from the posts so far - not saying I got it right though ;-)
That's not how it works. At all.
You have to click:
Even if you have an agreement with PayPal in place, you have to consciously make an effort for all of this. Buyers Remorse is not a valid reason for refund.
thanks, as said above it's just how it sounded to me in the first place. I have no active service with virmach so can't tell how easily one can add funds by mistake ;-)
That's why I corrected you, and decided to point out just how absurd this thread is. OP is a whiny bitch and should lose his $5.
No worries, so I guess it works similar to vultr then, not quite as many steps but you for sure have to go to the page, enter or choose an amount, select the payment type and then make a confirmation with the processor even if you have a billing agreement in place.
My only real issue with this thread is the "accident" part, not that it impacts me either way I suppose, not looking for a fight either, just a point of interest.
"accident" is, and will always be code for "drunk on the internet".