> Making it harder, rather than easier, to chargeback fraudulent uses is not what I'm looking for.
Honestly I'm still confused by the whole thing.
I told them that it was a fraudulent transaction that I didn't approve, they then kept asking me for tracking numbers and finally closed the support ticket, and would close any further ones instantly on me with this reply.
Never mind the fact that it was a completely separate issue than what they would keep replying to me about, the fact that they included the line of
> At this point, the only possibility is that the shipment was stolen after the delivery. This is no longer a case where the merchant is at fault. Hence, the case would be concluded in the merchant's favor.
is a complete disregard for visa's rules. The fact that they wouldn't even let me open a dispute is the biggest factor of "wtf" here to me.
Visa is probably easier to deal with in the case of fraud than what it sounds like privacy.com is like.
I use a single CC for everything (that I'm willing to pay with a CC for.) It's been compromised to the point that charges went through 2-3 times over the past decade and a half. CC company caught the fraud each time, automatically charged-back each of the fraudulent transactions, and overnighted me a new card. They also moved all of my recurring charges to my new card (somehow.) From what I understand, all of the big 4 CC companies operate more or less the same in this regard.
This thread has eliminated the chance of me using Privacy.com in the future. If they can't make dealing with fraud at least as easy as a regular CC (which is quite painless, there's no reason to use them.
I have never had to actually pay for any fraud, the bank's fraud detection alwasy catches it, it's never even showed up on my bill.
But I end up having to cancel and get a new credit or debit card about once a year. And this actually is really inconvenient, when you think of all the places you have stored a CC that have to be updated.
I guess my bank doesn't do automatic updates of any recurring subscriptions, I've always had to deal with it manually. (And in charitable contributions, amazon, paypal, stripe, grubhub, etc etc etc).
That was making me consider privacy.com instead... but if I'm doing it cause of that fraud inconvenience, which right now is just an inconvenience which I have no worry whatsoever would result in actual $$ (cause it's happened so many times now and it's never even been a threat), and switching to privacy.com may eliminate having to update card numbers everywhere when fraud happens but actually increases my risk of actually being out the $$ (or increases the amount of time I have to spend dealing or fighting with customer service or fraud recovery support anywhere) -- forget it.
Honestly I'm still confused by the whole thing.
I told them that it was a fraudulent transaction that I didn't approve, they then kept asking me for tracking numbers and finally closed the support ticket, and would close any further ones instantly on me with this reply.
https://i.imgur.com/EyjCGiU.png
Never mind the fact that it was a completely separate issue than what they would keep replying to me about, the fact that they included the line of
> At this point, the only possibility is that the shipment was stolen after the delivery. This is no longer a case where the merchant is at fault. Hence, the case would be concluded in the merchant's favor.
is a complete disregard for visa's rules. The fact that they wouldn't even let me open a dispute is the biggest factor of "wtf" here to me.