Game - New bunch of c***s Page 4

  • Page

    of 47 First / Last

  • captbirdseye 8 Jan 2007 15:11:25 4,987 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    captbirdseye wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    captbirdseye wrote:
    [Over the phone, lol.

    And no doubt credit card transactions over the phone are illegal now too? Apart from the fact millions of pounds are transacted this way every day.

    No you are trying to get a REFUND OVER THE PHONE mate. When some could have easily stolen that wallet.

    Do you read what you've written before you hit submit?

    What benefit, to anybody, could there be in refunding to a stolen card? It's not like the thief it paying the bill.

    /ill thought out arguments ftl

    lol and you work in a bank hahahahahahahahahaha
  • darrenb 8 Jan 2007 15:11:57 678 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Sounds like someone is having a bad day and just fancied and argument where he was certain not to get a punch..

    Just wait for warioware to come out and just get a f&&king exchange and stop moaning, I doubt they will refuse you that!!!
  • captbirdseye 8 Jan 2007 15:12:33 4,987 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    darrenb wrote:
    Sounds like someone is having a bad day and just fancied and argument where he was certain not to get a punch..

    Just wait for warioware to come out and just get a f&&king exchange and stop moaning, I doubt they will refuse you that!!!

    Unless he has been banned
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:13:39 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    woodnotes wrote:
    hehe, you're changing your story now, this doesn't tie in with your first complaint in the first post. actually, they have to have proof that they've 'witnessed' the card.

    If you don't believe me, get this. To get a refund to your card these days, you have to enter your PIN. Before, you had to sign.

    This doesn't apply to online stores because they store the original transaction and address details in a database.

    I don't believe I'm changing the original story at all. It said clearly "I got the cardholder on the phone to supply the full details of the card, expiry date etc. but they wouldn't even do this."

    Of the card is present, and there is a chip reader, since April 1st 2006 a PIN must be supplied. If the card is used in absentia (on the internet, over the phone etc.) then it is not required at all. This applies to purchase or refund...you just press that the cardholder isn't present on the EPDQ system. Happens millions of times a day.
  • Deleted user 8 January 2007 15:13:42
    You must have gone pretty fuckin daft to get your whole family banned out the shop.
  • woodnotes 8 Jan 2007 15:13:42 4,925 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake, seriously, what is you do at the bank? Because if you think refunding money onto a card over the phone where the company are not protected by distance selling regs, nor have any proof who they are speaking to is in anyway not "iffy" from a credit card company point of view, I really worry.

    Refunding a previously fully authenticated transaction over the phone is not an issue, it happens every day on EPDQ systems.

    Only if they have a license to take card payments over the phone and the original payment was placed over the phone with full billing address details taken can they then refund over the phone. Otherwise you must go in to the store WITh the card and type in your PIN or if they don't have a machine, sign,
  • darrenb 8 Jan 2007 15:13:52 678 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    captbirdseye wrote:
    darrenb wrote:
    Sounds like someone is having a bad day and just fancied and argument where he was certain not to get a punch..

    Just wait for warioware to come out and just get a f&&king exchange and stop moaning, I doubt they will refuse you that!!!

    Unless he has been banned

    Game will have new staff and a new manager by then!!!
  • woodnotes 8 Jan 2007 15:15:02 4,925 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    woodnotes wrote:
    hehe, you're changing your story now, this doesn't tie in with your first complaint in the first post. actually, they have to have proof that they've 'witnessed' the card.

    If you don't believe me, get this. To get a refund to your card these days, you have to enter your PIN. Before, you had to sign.

    This doesn't apply to online stores because they store the original transaction and address details in a database.

    I don't believe I'm changing the original story at all. It said clearly "I got the cardholder on the phone to supply the full details of the card, expiry date etc. but they wouldn't even do this."

    Of the card is present, and there is a chip reader, since April 1st 2006 a PIN must be supplied. If the card is used in absentia (on the internet, over the phone etc.) then it is not required at all. This applies to purchase or refund...you just press that the cardholder isn't present on the EPDQ system. Happens millions of times a day.

    They must have a license to take the payment over the phone and if they do it must be stored in to a database along with the BILLING address. As that did not happen in the first instance, you can not get a refund in the latter.
  • TheSaint 8 Jan 2007 15:15:05 14,414 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    Refunding a previously fully authenticated transaction over the phone is not an issue, it happens every day on EPDQ systems.
    Errr...the fact that Game and EVERY SINGLE OTHER POSTER ON THIS THREAD has said it is an issue kind of says it is.

    Hows that call to Trading Standards going?

    Have you never noticed recently when you get something refunded on your own card they ask you to enter you PIN again?

    This is so they can check your identity, this is all good security practices to protect the customer and the store.
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:15:12 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    And I'll say again, there's no rules against using a credit card over the phone.
    Distance selling regulations?

    Obviously some regulations apply, my context meant that there is nothing in particular preventing a charge/refund in the absence of the cardholder when applicable.
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:17:08 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    woodnotes wrote:
    RETAIL STORES DO NOT HAVE A LICENSE TO TAKE CARD PAYMENTS OVER THE PHONE YOU DUMBF*CK NEVER MIND REFUNDS

    ahhhh vent over

    Edited by woodnotes at 15:10:20 08-01-2007

    They do it all the time. It's often used to take deposits over the phone etc.

    A florist is a perfect example of a retailer that takes phone payments all day ever day. "Cardholder not present" is what the receipt says, when they press the button...
  • TheSaint 8 Jan 2007 15:17:20 14,414 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    And I'll say again, there's no rules against using a credit card over the phone.
    Distance selling regulations?

    Obviously some regulations apply, my context meant that there is nothing in particular preventing a charge/refund in the absence of the cardholder when applicable.

    We are going round in circles.
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:17:30 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Fat Boy wrote:
    Wow, Jaffa really knows how to reel you geeks in, doesn't he!

    ssshhhh ;O)
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:17:30 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Post deleted at 15:21:38 08-01-2007
  • TheSaint 8 Jan 2007 15:18:06 14,414 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    woodnotes wrote:
    RETAIL STORES DO NOT HAVE A LICENSE TO TAKE CARD PAYMENTS OVER THE PHONE YOU DUMBF*CK NEVER MIND REFUNDS

    ahhhh vent over

    Edited by woodnotes at 15:10:20 08-01-2007

    They do it all the time. It's often used to take deposits over the phone etc.

    A florist is a perfect example of a retailer that takes phone payments all day ever day. "Cardholder not present" is what the receipt says, when they press the button...

    They will take your address at time of order though as someone above said.
  • Mike_Hunt 8 Jan 2007 15:18:26 23,514 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    captbirdseye wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:

    There was no reason why they couldn't, when provided with the card details, refund it to the original card holder.

    I say again

    i double say again, OVER THE PHONE LOL, OVER THE PHONE LOL.

    And I'll say again, there's no rules against using a credit card over the phone.
    No but thanks to a combination of chip-and-pin and new anti-fraud regulations retailers are increasingly warey of, what is called "Cardholder not present" transactions. If they don't have the physical card in front of them and don't collect a PIN number from the customer - and a fraud results because of this it is now the retailer who is out of pocket rather than the bank/financial institution. Which explains why they weren't willing to authorise the refund over the phone to a mystery voice.

    Only refunding to the original card and not cash is not an anti-fraud solution endorsed by not only the financial institutions but retailers alike in order to protect everyone associated with a transaction (retailer, bank and customer). Think about it - you nick a credit card, go and buy a 2000 plasma TV, what's that worth down the pub? 150 if you're lucky?! If this system weren't in place card fraud would be rife because criminals would steal cards, purchase expensive goods, return them and they get cash in their back pocket. That there... is the sole reason for this WORLDWIDE EVERY SINGLE RETAILER policy.

    The reason it's not specified everywhere is because it's common *fucking* knowledge, almost every numpty knows about it so what's the point in plastering adverts everywhere? You know you have to enter your PIN into a cash machine before it gives you cash don't you?! There's no warning that state "cash only given if correct PIN known" is there? No because a certain level of intelligence is assumed. Of course you can't take into account every individual - some aren't as savvy as others, the kinds that struggle working out which doors need to be pushed and which need to be pulled, but like I said, they've got to start the assumed intelligence level somewhere.

    Of course you could ignore this valid explanation of the legal reasons why your request was declined and shout "But my brother was on the PHHHHOOOOOONNNNEE!!!" one more time. It won't stop you being horribly wrong though.

    Oh and you stating that you work for a bank is extremely concerning.

    [MH]
  • woodnotes 8 Jan 2007 15:18:56 4,925 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    TheSaint wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    And I'll say again, there's no rules against using a credit card over the phone.
    Distance selling regulations?

    Obviously some regulations apply, my context meant that there is nothing in particular preventing a charge/refund in the absence of the cardholder when applicable.

    We are going round in circles.

    That's because Jaffa doesn't understand the context of the law meaning you have to get a refund via the same method of payment as was paid.

    ie. if you paid via a card in a store, you didn't need to enter a billing address, you just entered your PIN. Therefore, if you want a refund, you must do the exact same and enter a store and enter your PIN.
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:19:21 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    Refunding a previously fully authenticated transaction over the phone is not an issue, it happens every day on EPDQ systems.
    Errr...the fact that Game and EVERY SINGLE OTHER POSTER ON THIS THREAD has said it is an issue kind of says it is.

    Hows that call to Trading Standards going?

    Not required, I got it refunded elsewhere...that wasn't so fussy.
  • Huntcjna 8 Jan 2007 15:19:21 13,876 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    captbirdseye wrote:
    [Over the phone, lol.

    And no doubt credit card transactions over the phone are illegal now too? Apart from the fact millions of pounds are transacted this way every day.

    Game is a retail outlet, you or someone would have purchased the item with a card via chip and pin in a retail store. To honour a refund they would refund to the card in question provided the refund is made via the original purchase route. Which means you would have to have the physical card to refund onto and the required pin number.

    Offering you a refund via any other method is FRAUD as there is no way to prove that it is you who purchased the item. Thats why everyone switched to chip and pin its for better card security.

    Thats putting in in lamens terms, if you want go find yourself a copy of the Money Laundering law in England and Wales and it will refer you to the exact point of the National Banking Code where it categorically states its is both illegal and fradulent.

    The retailer is not obliged to offer you a copy of said document because it is national law not retailer policy and therefor doesn't affect your statortory rights.
  • woodnotes 8 Jan 2007 15:20:14 4,925 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Mike_Hunt wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    captbirdseye wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:

    There was no reason why they couldn't, when provided with the card details, refund it to the original card holder.

    I say again

    i double say again, OVER THE PHONE LOL, OVER THE PHONE LOL.

    And I'll say again, there's no rules against using a credit card over the phone.
    No but thanks to a combination of chip-and-pin and new anti-fraud regulations retailers are increasingly warey of, what is called "Cardholder not present" transactions. If they don't have the physical card in front of them and don't collect a PIN number from the customer - and a fraud results because of this it is now the retailer who is out of pocket rather than the bank/financial institution. Which explains why they weren't willing to authorise the refund over the phone to a mystery voice.

    Only refunding to the original card and not cash is not an anti-fraud solution endorsed by not only the financial institutions but retailers alike in order to protect everyone associated with a transaction (retailer, bank and customer). Think about it - you nick a credit card, go and buy a 2000 plasma TV, what's that worth down the pub? 150 if you're lucky?! If this system weren't in place card fraud would be rife because criminals would steal cards, purchase expensive goods, return them and they get cash in their back pocket. That there... is the sole reason for this WORLDWIDE EVERY SINGLE RETAILER policy.

    The reason it's not specified everywhere is because it's common *fucking* knowledge, almost every numpty knows about it so what's the point in plastering adverts everywhere? You know you have to enter your PIN into a cash machine before it gives you cash don't you?! There's no warning that state "cash only given if correct PIN known" is there? No because a certain level of intelligence is assumed. Of course you can't take into account every individual - some aren't as savvy as others, the kinds that struggle working out which doors need to be pushed and which need to be pulled, but like I said, they've got to start the assumed intelligence level somewhere.

    Of course you could ignore this valid explanation of the legal reasons why your request was declined and shout "But my brother was on the PHHHHOOOOOONNNNEE!!!" one more time. It won't stop you being horribly wrong though.

    Oh and you stating that you work for a bank is extremely concerning.

    [MH]

    Well said.
  • captbirdseye 8 Jan 2007 15:20:49 4,987 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Mike_Hunt wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    captbirdseye wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:

    There was no reason why they couldn't, when provided with the card details, refund it to the original card holder.

    I say again

    i double say again, OVER THE PHONE LOL, OVER THE PHONE LOL.

    And I'll say again, there's no rules against using a credit card over the phone.
    No but thanks to a combination of chip-and-pin and new anti-fraud regulations retailers are increasingly warey of, what is called "Cardholder not present" transactions. If they don't have the physical card in front of them and don't collect a PIN number from the customer - and a fraud results because of this it is now the retailer who is out of pocket rather than the bank/financial institution. Which explains why they weren't willing to authorise the refund over the phone to a mystery voice.

    Only refunding to the original card and not cash is not an anti-fraud solution endorsed by not only the financial institutions but retailers alike in order to protect everyone associated with a transaction (retailer, bank and customer). Think about it - you nick a credit card, go and buy a 2000 plasma TV, what's that worth down the pub? 150 if you're lucky?! If this system weren't in place card fraud would be rife because criminals would steal cards, purchase expensive goods, return them and they get cash in their back pocket. That there... is the sole reason for this WORLDWIDE EVERY SINGLE RETAILER policy.

    The reason it's not specified everywhere is because it's common *fucking* knowledge, almost every numpty knows about it so what's the point in plastering adverts everywhere? You know you have to enter your PIN into a cash machine before it gives you cash don't you?! There's no warning that state "cash only given if correct PIN known" is there? No because a certain level of intelligence is assumed. Of course you can't take into account every individual - some aren't as savvy as others, the kinds that struggle working out which doors need to be pushed and which need to be pulled, but like I said, they've got to start the assumed intelligence level somewhere.

    Of course you could ignore this valid explanation of the legal reasons why your request was declined and shout "But my brother was on the PHHHHOOOOOONNNNEE!!!" one more time. It won't stop you being horribly wrong though.

    Oh and you stating that you work for a bank is extremely concerning.

    [MH]

    BOOM headshot

    Edited by captbirdseye at 15:21:19 08-01-2007
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:20:58 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    TheSaint wrote:
    Have you never noticed recently when you get something refunded on your own card they ask you to enter you PIN again?

    This is so they can check your identity, this is all good security practices to protect the customer and the store.

    They've always required a signature on refunds. Unless the cardholder wasn't present.
  • woodnotes 8 Jan 2007 15:21:03 4,925 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    Refunding a previously fully authenticated transaction over the phone is not an issue, it happens every day on EPDQ systems.
    Errr...the fact that Game and EVERY SINGLE OTHER POSTER ON THIS THREAD has said it is an issue kind of says it is.

    Hows that call to Trading Standards going?

    Not required, I got it refunded elsewhere...that wasn't so fussy.

    Adds Jaffa to 'ignore'
  • Mike_Hunt 8 Jan 2007 15:21:12 23,514 posts
    Seen 2 days ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    woodnotes wrote:
    RETAIL STORES DO NOT HAVE A LICENSE TO TAKE CARD PAYMENTS OVER THE PHONE YOU DUMBF*CK NEVER MIND REFUNDS

    ahhhh vent over

    Edited by woodnotes at 15:10:20 08-01-2007

    They do it all the time. It's often used to take deposits over the phone etc.

    A florist is a perfect example of a retailer that takes phone payments all day ever day. "Cardholder not present" is what the receipt says, when they press the button...
    How the hell does the GAME numpty know that your brothers card is the original purchase card anyway?! On the receipt the details will be masked out, so your brother going "Honest guv, it was my card and here's the details..." is hardly a valid method of verification, is it?

    [MH]
  • woodnotes 8 Jan 2007 15:21:44 4,925 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    TheSaint wrote:
    Have you never noticed recently when you get something refunded on your own card they ask you to enter you PIN again?

    This is so they can check your identity, this is all good security practices to protect the customer and the store.

    They've always required a signature on refunds. Unless the cardholder wasn't present.

    Thats a contradiction in itself.
  • TheSaint 8 Jan 2007 15:22:17 14,414 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    jaffacake wrote:
    Furbs wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    Refunding a previously fully authenticated transaction over the phone is not an issue, it happens every day on EPDQ systems.
    Errr...the fact that Game and EVERY SINGLE OTHER POSTER ON THIS THREAD has said it is an issue kind of says it is.

    Hows that call to Trading Standards going?

    Not required, I got it refunded elsewhere...that wasn't so fussy.

    So a bit pointless writting that letter to Game head office then?

    I feel so dirty defending game but for once it seems they were right.
  • jaffacake 8 Jan 2007 15:22:41 986 posts
    Seen 3 years ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    TheSaint wrote:
    jaffacake wrote:
    woodnotes wrote:
    RETAIL STORES DO NOT HAVE A LICENSE TO TAKE CARD PAYMENTS OVER THE PHONE YOU DUMBF*CK NEVER MIND REFUNDS

    ahhhh vent over

    Edited by woodnotes at 15:10:20 08-01-2007

    They do it all the time. It's often used to take deposits over the phone etc.

    A florist is a perfect example of a retailer that takes phone payments all day ever day. "Cardholder not present" is what the receipt says, when they press the button...

    They will take your address at time of order though as someone above said.

    They take the delivery address and the card details and then press the old "cardholder not present" button.
  • JayPee 8 Jan 2007 15:22:50 1,490 posts
    Seen 12 months ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Jaffa, what if game put a sign up outside that said "Single Again"?
  • captbirdseye 8 Jan 2007 15:23:01 4,987 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Maybe Jaffacakes bank should use this thread for training purposes.

    Edited by captbirdseye at 15:23:43 08-01-2007
  • TheSaint 8 Jan 2007 15:24:55 14,414 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    JayPee wrote:
    Jaffa, what if game put a sign up outside that said "Single Again"?

    Lets just say I wouldn't want to go anywhere near their letterbox.
  • Page

    of 47 First / Last

Log in or register to reply