[sillystu04]

Visa/Mastercard have enough power to enforce this on their own. Although obviously regulation would've been better.

If a bunch of elected officials wrote letters to execs and a couple of NYT articles were written about the issue, Visa/Mastercard might be motivated to help.

[isleyaardvark]

The NYT itself uses the dark patterns for cancellation that would be forbidden by this rule.

[callc]

They should be punished, the same as every other company that does this.

[sorcerer-mar]

Why? They get revenue from unwanted transactions too.

[dspillett]

Chargebacks might upset that being a big benefit, and being the firm that takes a stance for customer care could be good advertising fodder. Though I don't see it working unless they both do it in step which minimises the useful effect of that against each other. It could still be a benefit vs other payment methods, what is PayPal's policy on such things?

[jfengel]

Visa and MasterCard suffer from charge backs already, and don't seem to mind. They try to avoid it with AI in the fraud department, and they push some of the cost onto the merchants.

They could do so much more. We still don't even have chip and pin in the US. They seem to think that the current levels of fraud loss are cheaper than the business lost from stopping it.

[dawnerd]

How are they suffering when they recover funds, charge merchants per chargeback and charge higher rates for merchants with higher than avg chargebacks? Seems like something they benefit from.

[pc86]

Fees are not refunded and additional chargeback fees are levied regardless of the outcome of the dispute.

How exactly are they suffering?

[n_ary]

Number of people afraid to pickup the phone and talk to another human being instead of letting few hundred in forgotten subscription is larger than I previously thought. By that sense, without any data, I suspect that chargeback amount is wayyyy smaller headache compared to txn fees from forgotten uncancelled subscriptions.

[JohnMakin]

It has nothing to do with fear. Have you ever tried to call in and cancel one of these services? If you're even able to find the right number to reach anyone, or after you've already waited an absurdly long time to do so, you'll be transferred around until you get frustrated and give up, or be subjected to extremely aggressive sales tactics trying to pressure you to stay on. I got to the point with one of those DNA sites where I had to ask about next steps for legal action to the representative before they'd even consider getting to the step where I could cancel my subscription - and even after that, still got charged and had to call again.

It's maybe comforting to think "oh, people just don't want to call, they'd rather eat the fees" when this is way over simplifying the problem and giving way too much credit to sites that operate this way.

[permo-w]

(in the UK) it really depends on your bank and even the type of card you use. the debit card chargebacks I did when I was with Natwest were always very simple. fill out a form, send it off, get a response by email. for the one CC chargeback I did I think it required a call and a lot more trouble. when I tried a (debit card) chargeback with a different bank, it was an incredible amount of trouble and then I think they rejected it anyway

[wing-_-nuts]

>Number of people afraid to pickup the phone and talk to another human being

Try to call comcast and actually speak to a customer service representative. Try it. I dare you. I bought a new modem last year and simply needed to provision it on the service. I got caught in bot limbo so long my only recourse was to scream 'cancel my account!' over and over until I actually got a human on the line. I'm sure that will be automated away at some point too.

[dspillett]

> Number of people afraid to pickup the phone and talk to another human being

It isn't fear of the call or the human being (though for some that can be part of the problem.

It is that some or all of these, and other irritations, will be true:

* The call has to be in their working hours, which is possibly your working hours too. I can get away with sitting on hold for a personal matter in work time, but many can't.

* The call will not be short…

* You will need to interact with irritating menu systems to get onto the relevant queues, and if you hit the wrong thing or an issue causes a disconnect, you will be right back where you started.

* The interminable hold muzak and/or staticy silence…

* When you finally get to that human they will have a long script, and it can be hard to divert them from it to just let you cancel. They will try to dissuade you from cancelling with various offers, and occasionally lies, no matter how much you insist that you just want to cancel.

* If you call at the start of a period they'll tell you that if you cancel now, you'll lose the remaining X weeks and try get you to call back later to not lose that “investment”. If you do call back a couple of weeks later you'll be told there is a notice period and you'll be billed for another period. There are other underhand tricks similar to this.

* After all the upsell/resell the first person you get won't be able to process the cancellation. You'll be put back into the queuing system for some more lovely muzak/static.

* The second person might not be able to either. Lather, rinse, repeat.

* All this time, any technical issue that causes a disconnect puts you right back at the start.

* If you get exasperated by all of this and start sounding to aggressive in your irritation, they will sometimes state that you are being rude (maybe I am, but not as rude as them wasting my time and trying to con me…) and hang up, meaning you have to call back and restart at a later time.

Some years ago I cancelled a magazine subscription, that I signed up for in seconds online, in a call that lasted nearly an hour. I've been very wary of subscribing to anything that needs payment details ever since, a stance that has done me well. The only way they will stop doing this sort of crap is if enough people simply stop subscribing to things because of it, or if relevant legislation without easy loopholes is passed.

[skeletal88]

The rule should be simple. Canceling a service should not be more difficult than starting it. It should be possible to do it in the same channel you started it. No "we only do cancellations over the phone, during business hours on tuesdays, with an hour long waiting time"

[permo-w]

with chargebacks there's also the concern that doing a chargeback for a few small things now makes you more likely to be rejected for something more important down the line

[the_other]

How does that work when you’re deaf?

[doctoboggan]

Those transactions might have a higher than normal chargeback rate which could motivate them to get rid of them. It could also be a perk of the card, they could provide a subscription cancellation portal on their website.

[sorcerer-mar]

That would definitely be a huge perk to me!

[hangonhn]

I honestly would use a card that promises me easier subscription cancellation. In fact, I sort of do already: I use Apple's in app payment system to handle as many subscriptions as possible because of how easy they make it to cancel. I know Apple increases the cost to the service provider and they in turn charge me more but the ease of cancellation is worth it to me.

Now if a bank or card came along and provided the same (and maybe easy subscription management in general) they can have all my subscription revenue.

[thomastjeffery]

They do have that power, and have abused it in the past. For example, refusing to do business with cannabis distributors or porn creators.

If you take that past into account, and consider the fact that they aren't using that power the way you want, it becomes immediately clear that they never will.

[gsanderson]

Regulation? Unfortunately this administration is going in the opposite direction.

[kgwxd]

They absolutely don't have the power to excuse debt. Just because a company can't charge your credit card, doesn't mean you don't still owe them money on paper.

[sillystu04]

Visa/Mastercard can demand merchants meet certain standards of consumer care in order to participate in their networks.

No consumer business can operate without access to those card networks.

[arp242]

I really don't want unelected corporations with no accountability to anything other than profit margins to be policing payments, subscriptions, business behaviour, or anything else.

These companies provide an utility that is essential for participation in the economy. There needs to be some due process if you want to exclude people or corporations from that.

[drdec]

I, for one, do not want to encourage Visa/Mastercard to use their market position to enforce policies. What they have already done is damage enough.