How to deal with: Payment reversal - no cardholder authorization.
Discussion started by TheGoodBrick
Why do people do this? And what hurts me the most because cgtrader allows it, does anyone believe that when this happens it is because someone's credit card has been stolen? who steals a credit card and uses it to buy 3D objects, I thought thieves did that to buy jewelry, expensive clothes, smartphones...
From my point of view these cases are clear, people who take advantage of their bank's lack of security to get free things.
And the real problem is that if that person doesn't mind stealing the work of others like that, surely he won't mind re-selling the work of others. And this in a niche like the one I work, can mean that in a short time, your model is all over the internet selling at a ridiculous price, thus drastically reducing the sales of this model.
This also only happens with buyers from certain countries, mainly the United States, and I wonder how the first economic power does not know about the new ways of financial security that prevent anyone from carrying out this type of scam.
I hope I don't offend anyone, but it's a very frustrating situation that is losing me a lot of money, I guess I needed to vent and see if I'm the only one suffering from this problem.
Kind regards to all!
Answers
4
The problem is not with cgt, the problem is time between credit card stolen - theft detected. This detection can take weeks, months. I remember someone on the forum posted that he/she got payment reversal - no cardholder authorization almost six months after sale, of course he/she already got money, but cgt took that money from the next payment. There is a solution for this, and for stolen models, but i don't want to get into that discussion again because there is no point.
I have found the forum topic in question: https://www.cgtrader.com/forum/selling-buying-3d-models/what-is-the-reason-for-refund-unauthorized-purchase-no-cardholder-authorisation (I made a mistake it's three months not six)
0
Well, for me it happens too often, and always with the most expensive models, for me, if I still remember the last time someone robbed me, it's because it happens too often.
Support can't do anything, and it's normal, but companies can always refuse to return that money, the problem is the bank's security and they should be the ones who suffer the loss of that money, will they have insurance or something like that for these cases right? So I'm not saying that CGT deliberately allows this, but rather that they could seek a better agreement with the banks in which the banks are the ones that fix their own blunders.
My point is that, I don't think anyone steals cards to do this, it's the card users themselves who do this, and that's a problem between the bank and its client, and above all the bank's security, as I've already said. . But in the end, the users pay for it and I imagine that CGT loses its commission, so we must pay for the incompetence of the banks and for the thieves? It doesn't seem fair to me.
In the same way, thanks for your answers and for the link, I'll take a look, maybe I'll find all the information and relief I need there.
I noticed on one marketplace they mention that once the item has been downloaded the customer is not allowed a refund unless the product is faulty - which I think is fair. That seems like a simple policy update to me and is much more fair to the vendor/artist.
In terms of the bank/payment I don't understand how this is the case since when I pay for something online if I don't have the funds in the account I simply cannot continue with my purchase. Is there something I'm missing here?
@TheGoodBrick High quality expensive models are bought via stolen credit cards by people who runs 3d warez sites in order to generate traffic and earn money and that's all, I can bet you that you will find your models free to download on some of those places.
I understand you PhantomG, but whatever the case, it is still a problem for the bank and its client, I insist that today there are many ways to protect credit cards, and the non-use of these ways is the sole responsibility of the user of the card and especially the bank.
But never from the platform or the creators, so why do we pay?
And I also insist that CGT is as much a victim as we are, I don't want to remove a taboo topic or something like that, I suppose any topic can be discussed here.
0
What you say would be fair yes, but it is not my case. Still, conditions like the ones you mention are necessary, and platforms have many ways to check if a model is functional or if the complaint stems from another attempt to get something for free. For example, check the purchase history, if 10 buy this and they are happy, if 11 is not, there is probably no failure. So of course if CGT doesn't have something like that, it should implement it. Although I think there is already something like that.
And in the same way, a bank can verify if its client made the purchase or not, even from where it was made. We are in the 21st century. And in the same way there are ways to protect a card so that it is practically unhackable.
I still think that no one steals a card to buy a single 3D model, and I still think that this is a problem between banks and their card customers and neither creators nor CGT should pay for it. And probably in the end, this is a problem for someone who buys something they don't know how to use and wants to get their money back in any way or from a thief, and these are things that can be controlled.
In any case, I guess I should have been more specific with the title of the post, since morally dealing with this is probably the only thing I can do.
You raise some very good points. I really like your analogy of the 11th customer. Seems like a missed opportunity with the rating system.
Your answer
In order to post an answer, you need to sign in.
