Ok let's watch Cic go on a rant. Why does so-called fraud protection continually cost the consumer? Do I have to insure that the company I am seeking goods and services from that I am not a fraud as well as soak up the costs for their failed business practices by paying them extra, or soaking up additional costs from my own pocket?
Why do I
pay extra in most cases as a preventative measure to cover the costs of the company? Why is it my responsibility to pay for the fraudulent practices of
their customers?
Now that
I pay extra for the criminal actions of
their customers...who is attempting to defraud who?
Ok: Anecdote.
I buy from company A, and they add an extra fee for the transaction because of the loss from customer C, as explanation. Not to be so noticeable as to have this fee be astounding. So company A receives the fee and as it turns out, customer C actually accrued no costs, so this goes in as profit. So I have compensated for a variable that may or may not exist. This fee may adjust their losses or if they have not experienced a certain amount of losses for that period it has now been adjusted as profit.
I can choose not to buy from these companies or maintain these types of transactions, but this is all too prevalent with corporate so I can not refuse all transactions. If they had a more effective transaction history I would not have to pay for fraud protection, yet I am asked to pay for their fowl ups in fees or additional costs that may turn a profit or adjust their losses. Why is this my responsibility, and am I not being defrauded myself?
/off Rant
Long story short, these types of transactions are costing time and money, and are less efficient for the consumer. I am asked to cover
their risk.
I'll get over it.
