Author Topic: Strange refund (Read 1557 times)

BaldricksTrousers · « **on:** March 31, 2012, 05:15 »

I just had to wave goodbye to 52c from November 2 (year not given, I presume it is last year). It's not really an issue but how can a refund pop up six months (or 18 months or....) after the sale?

ShadySue · « **Reply #1 on:** March 31, 2012, 06:43 »

I agree it's ludicrous, but it seems to be pretty much an 'anytime' refund.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=341901&page=1

Graffoto · « **Reply #2 on:** March 31, 2012, 12:25 »

If iStock wants to give refunds in perpetuity, that's up to them, but the content creator should be able to keep their earnings!
As Sean points out, the 'Mother Ship" - Getty, has a 30 day refund policy.

ShadySue · « **Reply #3 on:** March 31, 2012, 12:38 »

Quote from: Graffoto on March 31, 2012, 12:25

If iStock wants to give refunds in perpetuity, that's up to them, but the content creator should be able to keep their earnings!
As Sean points out, the 'Mother Ship" - Getty, has a 30 day refund policy.

Yebbut I wouldn't push that too far, else they'd pay us 20%.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #4 on:** March 31, 2012, 13:02 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 31, 2012, 12:38

Quote from: Graffoto on March 31, 2012, 12:25
If iStock wants to give refunds in perpetuity, that's up to them, but the content creator should be able to keep their earnings!
As Sean points out, the 'Mother Ship" - Getty, has a 30 day refund policy.
Yebbut I wouldn't push that too far, else they'd pay us 20%.

That would be a mercy

RapidEye · « **Reply #5 on:** April 01, 2012, 15:51 »

You also have to wonder what kind of cheapskate goes to the trouble of doing the paperwork for a refund of $2.50 or so.

markrhiggins · « **Reply #6 on:** April 01, 2012, 20:16 »

"You also have to wonder what kind of cheapskate goes to the trouble of doing the paperwork for a refund of $2.50 or so."

Is it eally a refund or is Istock getting back the commission it paid on what has become a bad debt or scam?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #7 on:** April 02, 2012, 01:48 »

Quote from: markrhiggins on April 01, 2012, 20:16

"You also have to wonder what kind of cheapskate goes to the trouble of doing the paperwork for a refund of $2.50 or so."

Is it eally a refund or is Istock getting back the commission it paid on what has become a bad debt or scam?

It can't be a bad debt with the credit system, can it? And I don't see how a credit card refund could happen so late. Which maybe leaves someone doing the end-of-year books and noticing a double download or something like that. Which would be cheapskate even by my standards (notice how laid back I am managing to be about the loss of all this money

)

johngriffin · « **Reply #8 on:** April 04, 2012, 22:14 »

Sometimes these are the result of a credit card holder seeing a transaction on their statement, not recognizing it or it being done fraudulently, and then asking their bank to reverse the charge which istock might find out about a few months down the road. I dont know if that is the case bc i dont work there but that can happen. It is strange that it was so long after the purchase and if it wasn't fraud then it really isnt fair for a customer to get a refund on a digital good after 6 months.

JPSDK · « **Reply #9 on:** April 06, 2012, 22:29 »

The refund policy of certain agencies has always pissed me off.

It is the agency´s job to handle their side of the trade and any loss, fraud or not working modern technique is their problem, since we contributers have no chance of knowing or influencing what goes on or how payment for the pictures takes place.

I consider it low business moral, close to fraud to let the contributers pay for their bad management.

If a shoplifter steals something in a shop it is not the supplier of oatsmeal that has to pay for the loss, but the shop.
If a shop has fraudulent credidcard transactions, its the shop that pays, not the oatmeal supplier.

Its their shop, and THEIR responsibility.

Actually I think we would win a lawsuit against an agency for such a refund.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #10 on:** April 07, 2012, 04:45 »

Quote from: JPSDK on April 06, 2012, 22:29

Actually I think we would win a lawsuit against an agency for such a refund.

Interesting idea but I suspect that the legal costs I would incur might exceed the 53c to be gained.

They have sent me another refund ticket since that one, though for a more reasonable timeframe. However, I am starting to worry that my refunds may soon exceed my sales, driving me into a vicious spiral of debt that could eventually bankrupt me

louoates · « **Reply #11 on:** April 19, 2012, 19:41 »

Hey, all you folks quit yer bellyachin', IS just refunded ME:

FileID Amount Paid Correct Amount Difference Date
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0003740993 $00.23 $00.24 $00.01 1/27/2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Amount Paid: $0.01

Now if I could just figure out where to spend it all.

dbvirago · « **Reply #12 on:** April 19, 2012, 19:49 »

Quote from: louoates on April 19, 2012, 19:41

Hey, all you folks quit yer bellyachin', IS just refunded ME:

FileID Amount Paid Correct Amount Difference Date
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0003740993 $00.23 $00.24 $00.01 1/27/2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Amount Paid: $0.01

Now if I could just figure out where to spend it all.

Hah! I got .02.

Oshoot · « **Reply #13 on:** April 19, 2012, 20:10 »

When I wore a buyer's hat, I once bought a red flower that looked great as RGB, but was impossibly out of gamut when converted to 4-color. Three of us worked on it for about an hour, then requested a refund, which was immediately granted. I have also bought images that looked great until you saw the full-sized image, but never had one of those that could not be corrected.

sgoodwin4813 · « **Reply #14 on:** April 20, 2012, 07:38 »

Quote from: dbvirago on April 19, 2012, 19:49

Quote from: louoates on April 19, 2012, 19:41
Hey, all you folks quit yer bellyachin', IS just refunded ME:

FileID Amount Paid Correct Amount Difference Date
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0003740993 $00.23 $00.24 $00.01 1/27/2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Amount Paid: $0.01

Now if I could just figure out where to spend it all.

I beat you both - I got $0.07!

Hah! I got .02.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #15 on:** April 20, 2012, 22:25 »

Quote from: louoates on April 19, 2012, 19:41

Hey, all you folks quit yer bellyachin', IS just refunded ME:

FileID Amount Paid Correct Amount Difference Date
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0003740993 $00.23 $00.24 $00.01 1/27/2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Amount Paid: $0.01

Now if I could just figure out where to spend it all.

Well when someone says we're working for spare change, or I complain about 25c downloads and people come back with, the 33c is easy and all the RPD - RPI mambo jumbo. You are living proof that it is pennies.

There are only two things that can beat that, and we've seen both. First is more credit than the original sale, which is a negative number. Horrors! And the most common, working for nothing, free downloads to promote the sites.

You have the real record unless someone comes up with a fractional sale? Wow a 1 cent payment credit. We better start baring the doors to prevent a flood of new people trying to cash in on this boom.

But don't worry, you can make it up on volume. 99 more sales and refunds like this and you'll have a whole dollar!