Dissatisfied customer

EULA/TOS say a lot of garbage that isn't held up in court but if they don't say stuff it can be used against them, but talking about the services rendered or whatever it doesn't matter if it's part of your card's services that SE accepts. If they took the card they can say they don't offer the ability in the EULA and it doesn't matter. They can't stop or punish you for doing it, outside of permantly preventing you from being a customer to their products again.

They can't sue you for using your credit card's feature they accepted (they accepted by accepting it's payment). Technically they can try to sue but the credit card companies would most likely make it pointless and a waste of SE's resources, so SE won't. Also realize certain feature don't always lead into charge backs but the credit card company will bite the bullet for you. SE is more likely to remove their cash shop than hunt you down for using a service they agreed to.

Be sure to read your credit card features and restrictions not all cards are the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kridd7

I was actually very polite through the whole endeavor. The only time that I was upset was when corporate transferred me back to the help desk and they were very rude, wouldn't listen, and just kept repeating "there's nothing we can do for you".

---

There's nothing polite about ignoring them each time they tell you no just because you don't like the answer. It's actually extremely aggravating and there's really nothing a CS agent can do with those sorts of customers since they'll just keep tying up resources until they get what they want. You screwed up. Sucks. It would have been nice if they could help you, but ultimately it's your fault and you're responsible for what happened here, not SE. I'd suggest you move on.

I guarantee you SE is capable of giving refunds. They would lose nothing by refunding the subscription so that the OP could then activate the correct account. They DO lose money by not providing a refund, however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkstride

Service has been rendered.

---

I'd like to see the evidence of this. What you've been espousing would never hold up in a chamber of commerce. And I'm sure the OP can also make a claim with the BBB. And as I've said before, his bank/credit union would back him as well if he really wanted that money back.

Legality has nothing to do with this. Its good sense, community, society, and trust. That's what every organization I just listed is about. Its weird and sad that you cannot (or more specifically choose not to) comprehend that and would like to see an innocent suffer for an honest mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaethra

I'd like to see the evidence of this. What you've been espousing would never hold up in a chamber of commerce. And I'm sure the OP can also make a claim with the BBB. And as I've said before, his bank/credit union would back him as well if he really wanted that money back.

Legality has nothing to do with this. Its good sense, community, society, and trust. That's what every organization I just listed is about. Its weird and sad that you cannot (or more specifically choose not to) comprehend that and would like to see an innocent suffer for an honest mistake.

---

The BBB is just a nonprofit organization of questionable value and has no actual authority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaethra

I'd like to see the evidence of this. What you've been espousing would never hold up in a chamber of commerce. And I'm sure the OP can also make a claim with the BBB. And as I've said before, his bank/credit union would back him as well if he really wanted that money back.

Legality has nothing to do with this. Its good sense, community, society, and trust. That's what every organization I just listed is about. Its weird and sad that you cannot (or more specifically choose not to) comprehend that and would like to see an innocent suffer for an honest mistake.

---

I'm not a lawyer but I still know the basics: OP is party A and SE is party B. A and B close a contract. A provides the payment, B provides the access to the server. A made a mistake, B is not willing/able to help (and not obliged to). A does a chargeback but B provided the access to the server. So B fullfilled his part of the contract, A not. Just because A isn't able to log in because of his own mistake, doesn't nullify that B provided him with access to the server. B has the right to demand the payment with a lawyer/collection agency and as a consequence to ban his accounts.
It may differ from country to country but the basics how to close a contract are fairly similar.

I know it would be nice if SE would give the refund, for a mistake that isn't theirs but the OPs. That is the thing though, OP made the mistake. The user agreement was also agreed to. This really isn't going to go anywhere, and we've referenced the rules. Let this be a lesson to pay attention to what you're doing especially when you have more than one account for something. Sounds a little harsh, but really, that's the way it is.

Lol the whiteknighting in here is also making me nauseous. I love how a lot of people in here are quick to say "OH IT'S YOUR FAULT YOU ADMITTED TO IT SUCK IT UP" because this has probably NEVER happened to them. At least, not with SE. And I am almost positive that most of you have not worked customer service jobs.

With all the ToS and legality crapola aside, it would do well for SE to cater to the OP. They spent $75 and made an honest mistake to go along with it. It would honestly be in SE's best interest to do so because this is likely to give them more business. And who doesn't want business? $75 is not a small chunk of money (especially for someone like me) so I'd do something about it if I were in OP's shoes.

Instead, SE will suffer a chargeback and because of their business practices, they will likely put a permanent ban on his account. As previously stated by other users, the bank/financial institution/credit card company will almost always back a customer no matter what SE's EULA legal garbage says. If the OP wished, he will likely get his money back. It is probably in the OP's best interest to go this route if he is okay with his account being likely banned. (And any subsequent accounts he creates under his name.)

We need a "are you sure?" check in the payment process, I think

Isn't there a confirmation page that even shows the service account before you pay and after. It's sounds like OP was just in a hurry. Clicked on the wrong account and didn't read it until he submitted the payment.

Guess we all learn that reading is fundamental