Credit card charge backs and inter registrar transfers

[Gerry]

Double correct me if I'm wrong. credit card charge backs, are not like stealing money.

It all depends on intent.

Fraud is fraud.

[draggar]

I'll give you guys the full story at some point, with permission from the person currently going through this. I often times side with businesses, but in this case the registrar really messed up, basically reneging on a deal with the registrant.

I think the registrant is prepared to lose all of the domains still at registrar X.

Right now would be a good time to start building up proof that you / your friend own the domains (screenshots, screenshots of WhoIs, receipts, even if it means going to the registrar and getting them).

That way you can show that they are your domains.

What I did with 1&1 is I transferred my most important names out and when I confirmed that they were out, I started to play hardball with them. It ended up costing me over $600 in transfer fees to the new registrar but well worth it.

[Gerry]

A person "Sam" registered a number of domains at registrar X.

Sam transferred half of the domains to registrar Z.

Joanne then did a credit card chargeback at registrar X,

I am baffled that a credit card company would permit a chargeback IF this did extent beyond the 60 days.

If this is within the terms of the issueing CC, then I can only presume it is fine.

But Andrew...

This opens up an entirely new can of worms and potential for further major issues...

if this is permissible in any shape, form, or circumstance...

this means that someone can literally taste domains for a very extended period of time (60 days plus), make decent revenue perhaps, keep the ones that are the top money earners, transfer those out to another registrar and keep them, then do a charge back to the losing registar?

Oh my God.

I have never heard of anything so insane and would have never thought this possible.

The legal ramifications could be huge. This is/could be the literal definition of a squatting scheme...like occupying a dwelling and not paying the rent.

I would hate to think of the consequences here if someone wants to pursue a fraud case.

Fraudulently and intentionally done is one thing I would not care to mess with.

[dvdrip]

I have heard worst things than this.
I just heard about some guy that gambles using his credit cards from various banks and then he is doing chargebacks claiming he never gambled at a certain websites.

[fab]

Fab, you might be shocked to know some (if not all) domain chargebacks have
been successful whether they're arguably justified or not. I don't remember if
all registrars get dinged chargeback "fees" for that, but it can hurt their ability
to take online credit card payments if that keeps up.

If true, then I definitely am shocked. This and other similar events will lead to the downfall of on-line shopping as we know it.

[Gerry]

If true, then I definitely am shocked. This and other similar events will lead to the downfall of on-line shopping as we know it.

The credit card companies will not let this happens.

You can rest assured that a pattern of this from anyone is closely monitored.

Continual chargebacks get redflagged and investigated.

Fraudulent use and violation of the TM could lead to prosecution.



In the case that Andrew describes, it would seem to me that if I was the registrar I would contest the chargeback in a hearbeat.

And, if I did not get restitution from the issuing card, I would have the legal department step in immediately.

This is, in my opinion, cyber crime and gets into an entirely new realm of criminal investigation.

The bottom line, the person requesting the chargeback (contested charges) has to provide a reason for the request.

Also, a note to consider, just because chargeback had been requested and granted does not mean it is a done and over with deal.

The registrar can resubmit the charges and this time they may stick.

I am aware of this being done by merchants who have been stiffed with chargebacks, most notably PayPal.

And I can guarantee that in nearly 100% of the cases, PayPal wins.

People have no idea how powerful PayPal has become. And they pump a ton of money into the CC's coffers.

[Dave Zan]

Right now would be a good time to start building up proof that you / your friend own the domains (screenshots, screenshots of WhoIs, receipts, even if it means going to the registrar and getting them).

That way you can show that they are your domains.

IMHO that won't matter in this case. Andrew said this earlier:

Joanne then did a credit card chargeback at registrar X, but not for the domain names she transferred to Z...only the domains that were still at registrar X.

Practically all registrars catering to end users have a term in their registration
agreements against chargebacks, many of which likely state they'll take back
ownership and lock them out unless they pay their fees. It'll hardly matter at
all if those domain names still show the person's name and all, as long as that
registrar shows the person "breached their contract" due to the chargeback
and were never paid for them.

True story: in my registrar days I dealt with a customer who, get this, asked
us to refund his registration fee...

...a few days before the domain name expired.

His reason? He wasn't able to "use" it as he planned, though I forgot what his
intended use was for.

When I told him politely we don't refund, he threatened to do a chargeback. I
couldn't tell him to do that as our policy that time was to be so darn nice, so
I rather "apologized" we couldn't do what he asked and stood inspite of what
he reasoned out.

Unfortunately I never checked if he followed through on his threat, more so if
it became successful. Got caught up with a gazillion other things since then.

Whatever happened with Andrew's acquaintance towards the registrar, he or
she believed s/he was "wronged" by them and later did what s/he figured was
the thing to do. To the registrar, they then got "wronged" by the person who
did those chargebacks and did what they likely stated in their contract in this
instance.

Pretty much it boiled down how to one would enforce their position. It turned
out...ugly.

[David G]

Almost every chargeback is successful and the seller not only loses the money charged but to add salt to the wound also a CC service charge, usually about $25 per chargeback. All the buyer needs to say is "not as described" or the best excuse which is "charge not authorized" and the #1 excuse where you will basically lose all the time. The CC firm could care less about the validity of the purchase or if you lose money, and they normally do not bother to investigate.

If it is a service or non-tangible item (i.e. domain name, website, membership, ebooks, software, programming, downloads, etc) the CC companies will be completely on the buyers side. The only hope of fighting a chargeback involves actual physical products but even then it's tough to win without proof of delivery and a product delivery receipt signed by the customer at the address shipped to, not signed by anyone else.

It's also incorrect you have no worries after 60-days with credit cards. Most firms have a much longer limit such as 4 to 6 mos (i.e. PayPal say's there is a 180 day CC limit in their TOS) and at some places the time limit is even longer. There have been documented cases with successful chargebacks as long as 11 months after the purchase date.