So Lets Say This Billing Company Screws Up and....

[TheLegacy]

So lets say a billing company screws up and after a few months they didnt upload their chargebacks into NATs to see. So now a program needs to inform all the webmasters that were creating fraud that they are banned - but not until the program has lost a few thousand.

Does the billing company need to owe up and refund over their mistake?

[Evil Chris]

Depends on your definition of "screw up". How often are they supposed to post their CB information? Was NATS somehow refusing the information to be posted by some kind of technical glitch? Was the information being posted but not showing up?

[Rochard]

IT's the cost of doing business man. The billing company can only do so much, the program itself needs to pay attention. We screen each affiliate by hand and know what to look for.

[TheLegacy]

Well this company said that the error was on their side - NOT Nats. Their error meant they didnt post the information for about 4 months.

[Evil Chris]

4 months is a long time for a billing company to "forget" posting information to a program's backend.

I know from experience that comms between biller and program can go down a lot. In my opinion, it's the program's responsibility to keep an eye on their own shop. But, suffice to say, it's a case by case thing.

[Cyndalie]

Well this company said that the error was on their side - NOT Nats. Their error meant they didnt post the information for about 4 months.

Then they should offer some form of compensation since you paid out on those sales that were unreported chargebacks.

[12clicks]

I never trust NATS version of CBs. its too important. I only use the bank's #s

[jjacksonesq]

This is interesting. What do you mean by "creating fraud?" This matter could fall strictly under contract law. Is there a written or oral contract between the billing company and the Program. If so what does it say about the frequency of charge backs? If there is no contract what is the industry standard on charge backs? If the industry standard on charge backs is that charge backs are done on a monthly basis then you could argue that the billing company violated industry standards and they should be "estopped" from doing the charge backs. I am not sure that I got the facts right so do not take this as legal advice. It is just something to think about.

I write an article for another boards news letter do you mind if I use the facts here to help those in the other board?

[12clicks]

This is interesting. What do you mean by "creating fraud?" This matter could fall strictly under contract law. Is there a written or oral contract between the billing company and the Program. If so what does it say about the frequency of charge backs? If there is no contract what is the industry standard on charge backs? If the industry standard on charge backs is that charge backs are done on a monthly basis then you could argue that the billing company violated industry standards and they should be "estopped" from doing the charge backs. I am not sure that I got the facts right so do not take this as legal advice. It is just something to think about.

I write an article for another boards news letter do you mind if I use the facts here to help those in the other board?

no offense but it doesn't sound like you understand the issue.

[jjacksonesq]

I likely do not. I would be happy if someone would set me straight. What is going on here?