When merchants go bad?

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
Smilies
:) :thumbup: :thumbdown: :D ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :clap: :crazy: :shh: :problem: :angel: :eh: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek: :shifty: :sick: :silent: :think: :wave: :wtf:
View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Expand view Topic review: When merchants go bad?

Re: When merchants go bad?

by kevinchess1 » Sat May 19 2012 10:54pm

richard@imutual wrote:
mike wrote:I like Kev's idea of a 50% payout where the member has made a cash outlay.
I guess the question is: why not 100%? If imutual can afford it. After all, the member has done nothing wrong :?
I'm not sayin I'm in favour of 50% payout, I'm just sayin TCB do that

I feel the key thing to remember here is that TCBother would make payments out of their pocket/profit whereas at IMutual the payment would come out of everybody pockets. Richard might decide if to make a payment but it's not actually his money in the first place.
Not havin ago at Richard I'm happy for him to use his discretion
but it's probably something that will need addressin at some point perhaps an AGM discusion

Re: When merchants go bad?

by richard@imutual » Wed May 16 2012 12:30pm

zulu17 wrote:Is the contract between imutual and the merchant or is the merchant's contract with a affliate network who in turn has a contract with imutual.
It's generally the latter, but the contract will say that they are not liable to pay for transactions which are considered invalid by the merchant. It may well be challenge-able in the courts but for amounts of the order we're talking about, there is no way a company like ours could justify legal proceedings

Re: When merchants go bad?

by zulu17 » Wed May 16 2012 12:24pm

Is the contract between imutual and the merchant or is the merchant's contract with a affliate network who in turn has a contract with imutual. If that is the case presumably you have to sue the network who you rely upon dealing with many merchants.

Re: When merchants go bad?

by kevinchess1 » Wed May 16 2012 9:18am

yes of course they should sue merchants who refuse to pay. I guess they don't because it cost too much.

Re: When merchants go bad?

by Kelantan » Wed May 16 2012 8:55am

kevinchess1 wrote:Any threat of legal action is Null and void if the merchant goes bust.
That may be true. But not in cases where they refuse to pay

Re: When merchants go bad?

by kevinchess1 » Tue May 15 2012 10:26am

Any threat of legal action is Null and void if the merchant goes bust.

Re: When merchants go bad?

by One Eyed Snake » Mon May 14 2012 4:48pm

Mel wrote:If they are too careless to ensure that the offer cannot be abused that is their problem and they should pay up, and if they refuse then legal action should be taken.
Presumably the contract that the merchant enters into with imutual allows them a get out - otherwise legal action should be the norm for reneging merchants.

Re: When merchants go bad?

by Mel » Mon May 14 2012 3:49pm

richard@imutual wrote:But one or more members take advantage of this and generate a large number of transactions that the merchant considers to be 'abuse' of the offer, and promptly terminates their relationship with imutual and refuses to pay for any outstanding transactions.
It should be incumbent upon the merchant not to make offers which they are not prepared to honour. If they are too careless to ensure that the offer cannot be abused that is their problem and they should pay up, and if they refuse then legal action should be taken.

Re: When merchants go bad?

by Richard Frost » Mon May 14 2012 3:39pm

richard@imutual wrote:
mark_r_abcd wrote:When I first joined iMutual, I had a load of dailes rejected because the affliate ... didn't pay up.
Yes, you're right I forgot about that incident (affiliate chief). As I recall, we did end up paying for some transactions out of our own pocket, but limited that to a certain number per member. That was early in imutual's life and I wasn't confident that we had the financial strength to set a precedent of paying out for all transactions in such circumstances. Happy to revisit that decision if it's deemed appropriate
I think that no payout was made to anyone at the time but I could be wrong! Personally I do not feel it is necessary to visit the episode.

Re: When merchants go bad?

by Richard Frost » Mon May 14 2012 3:36pm

expressman33 wrote:
Drahcir wrote:
expressman33 wrote:What would Imutual pay out if say Yipii ( http://www.imutual.co.uk/lotteries/yipiii ) went bust ? Members have probably paid out £10 for no return and If the payout was 50% of the £15 expected then members would be losing money.
No return should not be the case for anyone as if you do not win money from your plays are refunded into your account. Then you could buy goods at a discount.
But who would buy from this site when you can get the same things much cheaper elsewhere, even after your discount?
That may be the case but the principle remains "No return should not be the case for anyone"

Top