If you remain LM-17'd after this whole ordealFollow

just came back in to make the argument:



This. Just because a company makes you sign something, does not make the document legal. It's completely true. If you think otherwise you're going a sheep who is going to get taken advantage of by companies who think they can bully you.

You're not signing a contract, you're agreeing that they're offering you a service.

Now if they change the TOS, the can only (and this is where you legally have a case) ban you for that action from that point forward because when you initially agreed to the contract, it was not originally displayed to you.

They cannot retroactively enforce a TOS they implement TODAY. This is what you can argue legally, and rather pay for the court yourself... make the claim through your credit issuer! It's not fraud, it's a claim, it doesn't mean you'll win, but you have an argument.

They offer you a guarantee of service given certain conditions you must agree to, then they take you for a couple hundred bucks, change the conditions and terminate your membership for something you did on day 1, despite you not agreeing to this on day 1.


This is the same reason if your cell phone provider makes a change to your TOS, you have the right to cancel your contract without penalty.


Now read this:


Now as you'll no doubt turn to arguing for that last sentence, i submit to you just that.

IT IS ARGUABLE, AND THEREFORE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO FILE A CLAIM

I don't know why the **** you are essentially protecting squeenix. They are doing a ridiculous disservice to their customer base, and it should be fought with any means necessary. Next you'll be telling me that if i post my registered script on a website that states "Anything poster here is the property of the owner of this website", that i just forfeited rights to my intellectual property.

It's not a perfect analogy, but you see how companies can essentially use a TOS/EULA to bully customers into not bothering to file claims?

Gourry, are you still defending your statement that you're going to dispute all previous charges to your CC if you get banned? Despite your long-winded, quote and bad analogy laden post, it is still fraud.

You did not sign a contract with SE for your character.

You agreed to their Terms of Service

. That is not a contract laying out each party's rights, that is what you have to do to be able to receive their service. By disputing the charges you are fraudulently saying you did not receive the service.

Their security failed to keep the hijackers off the plane.

It's worth noting that while banks are often willing to eat a chargeback to keep a customer happy even if they cannot recover the money from the seller, this is still something that they take note of. If you really tried to dispute years of service that you were clearly receiving, there is actually a chance that the credit company would cough up the cash themselves just to keep you a happy customer. However, you've now marked yourself to the bank as a client who makes frivolous or ill-considered claims. You had better hope that you never need to legitimately dispute a charge on your card, because you're probably not going to get the benefit of the doubt a second time.

And, in general, this vilification of SE's billing practices is getting tiresome. Yes, SE makes billing errors, especially regarding inconsistent monthly billing that often gets corrected in the form of a double-billing the following month. However, I have yet to see a credible case where the problem wasn't fixed or explained reasonably after a call to customer service. Too many players see an unexpected charge (or, I suspect, have their parents yell at them about an unexpected charge) and come onto this forum to rant about SE's billing scams, before even calling SE and having the problem fixed.

SE's billing is inconsistent and sloppy, but not fraudulent or malicious, and a phone call usually fixes the problem. And, suggesting that people risk the relationship with their bank just to try to squeeze some bitter revenge out of SE is really, really terrible advice.

Dumb ***... it'll be SE that will file a fraud case against YOU. You may dispute full charges for that last partial month, but SE DID provide you with their service (FFXI) for the last two years.

It's people like you that are the root cause of SE's 3-D Secure requirement on creditcards now, as that's designed and encouraged to prevent false charge-backs.





SE is in the wrong when they double charge a month or charge for the month following the bans, but they will return the overcharge money when you report it to them. Sometimes it's a billing error, sometimes the ban isn't processed in time. (If you appeal a ban and it spread to the next billing cycle, they might continue charging for the next month as they are still providing service.)

Edited, Sep 2nd 2009 1:37pm by Seedling