I just received a mail regarding a refund due to fraud on a credit sale made on July 25th. 

While I can understand a refund in the case of fraud, it seems extremely strange for this to be detected so late and a refund to be taken almost 3 months after the sale.   

This is my first refund at Dreamstime and although I have experienced a few with other agencies they always were related to sales made in the previous few weeks.  Has anybody had similar experiences?

How cautious do agencies need to be with regards to model releases?  I just had
five out of six videos rejected due to identifiable people and lack of model release.  While I certainly understand the importance of model releases with identifiable people, etc. as well as the need to be cautious, this seems to go over the top:

http://footage.shutterstock.com/clip-240502-high-definition-time-lapse-video-of-machu-picchu-in-peru-an-unesco-world-heritage-site-and-new.html

The video is a time-lapse at Machu Picchu taken from a distance as an overview of the entire city.  While I do not disagree that there may be identifiable people, they are only a few pixels in size and appear for only a couple of frames at a time.  Furthermore the clip is taken at a heavily touristic place at a non-descript day and time.  The odds that somebody would recognise himself are astronomical...  Even in this remote circumstance, could they really push for action against the buyer of this clip and argue that they are being associated with the product being sold? 

While they were all approved at Shutterstock, Stockxpert gave me these rejections.  Will wait and see the response at iStockPhoto....