You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider Wolfmarsh.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.
I know you feel like this is a new thing that they are doing, but the vast majority of credit card processors keep this money during a refund.
It's called an interchange fee and you can even negotiate it if you do enough volume.
PayPal is just joining the rest of the world on this.
Quoted from OLDPINGUY:How about a 5% restocking fee for returns, John?
I have always been pissed to pay CC fees for State sales tax....Why should CC companies profit off of tax collection?
(I know the answer...it still bothers me, like a Monthly fee NOT to list my phone!)
Depends on the situation, but I don't have a problem with that especially if I made a mistake like clicking twice.
If the company sent me incorrect things or broken items, I would expect to be able to return them and the business would eat that cost as part of doing business.
Perhaps a flat increase in prices is a less complicated way of dealing with it, giving the product enough margin to absorb failures and returns at some calculated percentage.
Art has the benefit and wisdom of having run many successful businesses. 
Quoted from ForceFlow:It seems like either way you look at it, the customer loses, either through restocking fees or increased price. Businesses generally don't want to "eat the cost", and with a smaller business, it's difficult to do that in the first place.
I get that for low value items, it's not that big of a hit. But when you start getting into the hundreds or thousands of dollars, it's a pretty significant sum.
What if you're selling a NIB game, and you get an accidental duplicate order? Whoops, that's at least a $150 loss or more. You can't really pass that along to the customer as a restocking fee. Plus, if you raise your prices to cover that, now you have higher prices than your competitors, which could lead to a decrease in sales.
Definitely not an easy situation for a business owner to be in, but I don't think it's fair to expect the payment processors to do things for free either. There are tangible costs associated with processing payments.
Sounds like Zitt is OK paying the fee on a single transaction when he gets money, but in a refund situation he expects the payment processor to give up their processing cost on what has now become two (or more) transactions they have to deal with.
One of my big projects at work this year was taking a product and making it PCI compliant. There's a lot of ongoing feeding and care that has to be funded to keep things secure for clients and provide things like 100% uptime for payment processing, etc...
Quoted from Zitt:EXCEPT that as of this date; Paypal has NO WAY to flag duplicate orders. It's a single "Issue Refund" link and that link doesn't allow you to select a reason. This means - at least as I know it now; I can't flag a duplicate order and get the transaction fees returned to the customer.
<< I do have situations where someone accidentally buys two items but only wanted one and other things like that which will generate a paypal refund transaction. To get dinged with fees when that happens because of customer accident would kind of suck. >>
That's my point. If this was a once a year problem; I'd be ok with it.
BUT this happens once a month. I'm probably going to have to look into preventing dup orders... something very draconian. Like preventing orders from entering the system at all for the same account until it's marked shipped or something.
The REAL problem I have is I know... KNOW there is going to be a duplicate order or a refund expectation and the customer is going to file a dispute over the couple of dollars for the fee. And I know... just know; that paypal is going to side on the buyer and TAKE the refunded fees out of MY account... even when I have a restocking fee. Because that's the way they roll.
Can't you implement the duplicate invoice number functionality that PayPal offers? https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/how-do-i-avoid-duplicate-transactions-ts1097
Also it looks like Paypal was very clear that this rule change would not apply to the types of transactions you are concerned about: "This policy will not apply to duplicate transactions, voids and most disputed transactions." (source: https://www.ecommercebytes.com/2019/09/19/paypal-clarifies-new-refund-policy-when-it-comes-to-voids/)
Quoted from Zitt:That's just it. With the current system - Paypal makes no effort to flag refunds for an reason. As the seller; I cannot flag a refund as a duplicate order... if they did or will... and then will refund the fees; then great - I'm happy. But as it stands now... with the system as I see it now; There is no way to avoid those fees on duplicate orders.
Are you saying you are completely blocked because they didn't put a button for it?
You might just have to pick up the phone or email them when it happens to get it fixed.
There's probably a conscious decision to not automate that.
You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider Wolfmarsh.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.
Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.
Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!
This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/oct-11-paypal-begins-to-screw-customers?tu=Wolfmarsh and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.
Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.
