@dust2dust wrote:
Well there you go then, going nuclear was the suggestion from a company representative. Keep a copy of that suggestion. No, chargebacks are from the bank side, not the company. The company does the refund, not chargeback. I suppose a technical wording difference.
It's more than that. Companies are supposed to handle problems with their customers - in this case, where the service paid for cannot be provided because activation was not completed. A chargeback is an actual dispute, where you are effectively accusing the company of wrongdoing when talking to your bank. They happen, and in small quantities aren't a concern, but my understanding (from dealing with some work things I can't go into here) is that credit card companies monitor the number of chargebacks a company ends up with, and if it's too high, they start raising the credit card (interchange fee) for that vendor.
So yeah, it's really odd that PM even suggested a chargeback. My guess is that the CS agent was sympathetic but had policy barriers in the way.
In any case, it seems like that would be the next step.
