Actually you are beating the dead horse. Here's how it went, George: Cyberrebate advertised all over the net. In fact, they were Ziffnet's biggest advertiser and among AOL's top three advertisers, according to C-Net. (Search "cyberrebate" at C-Net's news.com.) Their ostensible business model -- before anyone realized that this was a glorified Ponzi scheme -- was that they would float the money for three months and profit from the interest, whereupon the full price (or a substantial amount) would be rebated back to the buyer. Incidentally, this worked well for Cyberrebate's customers from 1998 through 2000. So Cyberrebate wasn't only well known, but it had a good track record. Unfortunately when the stock market's bubble burst, so did Cyberrebate. (Incidentally, there are others on the net who utilize a similar business model. Creditnet member "Creditsense," for example, runs a business which invests money from credit cards and suggests a return of 19%+ at year's end. I have no idea if that business is sustainable either, although Herb -- "Creditsense" -- says that it is. Who knows.) In any event, Cyberrebate was very well known across the net with a good track record, so when they offered a neato little retro radio for $79 (which I knew was worth no more than $20) with a $79 rebate a few months later, I went for it. That was December 2000. By March 2001, when my rebate hadn't arrived I got nervous. Then they announced their bankruptcy. Since the rebate was an advertised component of the transaction, Capital One stood by its customers as did several other VISA and MasterCard issuers. (Cap One distinguished itself for its consumer focus in this case, though.) In every case, American Express and Discover did not. If you visit the bulletin board link I provided in the post earlier in this thread, you'll become more educated to how consumers dealt with the fallout. Many AmEx and Discover customers brought successful small claims suits -- judges tended to side with consumers on this score, since Cyberrebate advertised their rebates as an integral component of the transaction. (That language, in fact -- "integral component of the transaction" -- is why judges did not find for the defendants American Express and Discover in almost all of these cases.) George, I realize you are much too intelligent to fall for something like Cyberrebate. However, please understand that many of us who aren't nearly as cognitively gifted as you are, did in fact fall victim to the Cyberrebate bankruptcy. I heartily recommend you read their stories and experiences on the bulletin board I mentioned earlier. I think the relevant lesson for this thread's topic is this: I've cited a particular example where American Express's often-touted customer service actually turned against the consumer. On the other hand, in the exact same situation, Capital One chose to champion the consumer. I could tell you whose card I use more often when internet shopping these days, but instead I'll let you guess, lol. Doc
I had a buy 3 printer inks at BEST BUY get the price of one refunded by mail... If I had never got my money, I wouldn't expect AMEX to refund it...it was a CANNON/BEST BUY rebate...
Gosh, Superman, I sure wish I'd spoken with you before I fell for it. Hey, you think I should call Capital One and tell them I've had a change of heart? Maybe something like this: Hi, Capital One? I was talking with my friend George from the Creditnet.com bulletin board. Maybe you know him -- he's the guy who's posted 8000 times. Anyway, he mentioned that I shouldn't have asked you to stand by your 100% Internet Protection Guarantee even though Cyberrebate advertised my radio for "$0 After Rebate." His position is that since a rebate was involved, I should eat the money if I got scammed. Anyway, the more I've thought about it, the more I realize George is right! Would you be so kind to take back the money you so generously refunded? I just don't feel right keeping it. After all, Cyberrebate screwed me, not you, so it's just not right that you would step up to the plate like that to protect me. Thanks anyway. If there are any problems, please have Mr. Cooke call me. Ok, thanks. Bye now. I'll go do that tomorrow -- thanks for the feedback, George! Doc
Psych- I usually agree with you, but sorry on this one. If you use a credit card for gambling- you can't go back to the issuer after you lose your shirt and try to charge-back the casino. I don't see how you could expect an issuer to stand by you for getting duped by a ponzi scheme - or anything that resembles a "free money" kind of deal. That's just plain unfair. The whole concept of a charge-back or consumer protection on a card is to ensure that the consumer actually received the goods they ordered (sounds like you did), not get charged if they didn't use their card (or indicate intention to charge) - my hotel bill screw-ups. Last I checked, no constitutional right exists to protect people from getting duped by their own greed (or naivety, to put it nicely). That's financial darwinism- survival of the smartest. Don't get me wrong- people who intentionally screw others out of their money should be hung by their bullocks. People who lose money due to a bad investment should consider the purchase of lottery tickets instead. I'm shocked Cap1 did the chargeback for you. Then again, with their profitability, they can afford to. -mj
Well, mj, many people would certainly agree with you. A few who agree with me: 1) VISA International, which drew up consumer-favorable recommendations for handling CyberRebate customers who were specifically promised "$0 After Rebate" at the point of purchase. 2) Paymentech, Inc., the nation's largest credit card transaction clearinghouse, which demanded a 100% monetary percentage to be in the Merchants bank for all disputed claims. 3) Fistfulls of small claims courts who have sided with consumers due to the "$0 After Rebate" claims, where the rebate is considered to be an integral part of the transaction contract. In any event, my principal point was not to argue whether credit card companies should or should not side with customers on this issue. Instead, I simply wanted to point out which credit card companies DID and which ones DID NOT stand behind consumers of their own volition (i.e., without legal prodding). I think it stands to reason that we should look favorably upon those companies who will stand behind consumers even when intelligent people can disagree regarding whether or not they should have done so. In this case, American Express did not in every case. But, wonder of wonders, Capital One did -- not just for me, but for thousands of other people as well, some of whom lost thousands of dollars. I will now trust Capital One forever. Doc
At a casino there is a reasonable expectation that you *will* lose your money. In this case, the rebate was advertised as part of the "goods" True...BUT credit card companies do have policies in place to protect their customers from situations where they have been duped. If they don't uphold those guarantees, they are breaking the terms of the customer's contract with them. -ingenue
