I still don't understand the billing practices

olemanwinter · November 2014

When I go get gasoline, they put a hold on my card because they don't know how much gas I will pump.

The gas enters my vehicle prior to the money leaving my account, so they place a hold of arbitrarily determined amount on my card to protect themselves.

THIS MAKES SENSE.

But why, if I have no current subscription, and I'm going to buy one, would Zos need (or even desire) to place a $1 hold/authorization on my account prior to and along side of the actual $15 cost?

1) The amount is predetermined
2) Because the charge is immediate, there is no reason to "hold funds".
3) The product (game time) is being granted after the charge.

I don't understand their billing practices.

I deal with hundreds if not thousands of different businesses per year and nobody has a billing practice like this. Not subscriptions. Not products. Not online. Not offline.
If you are charging me now, for something I will begin using from hence forth, then WHY do you need a second charge?

ZOS_LenaicR · November 2014

Hi @olemanwinter,

When a player sets up a new subscription or changes their payment method for a subscription, our system will perform an authorization check that will appear as a charge of up to one dollar in the player's local currency (one pound in Great Britain, one euro in Europe, etc.)
This is done to ensure the payment method is valid.

Usually this authorization hold lasts a short period of time before being removed. The duration of this hold can vary from bank to bank.

Elsonso · November 2014

And, in the event that you do not believe ZOS_LaniacR, or think that Zenimax is being strange...

A lot of online businesses do the $1 hold before making the actual charge, particularly when you tell them to remember the card or are doing a recurring subscription. I see it quite frequently.

Rylana · November 2014

You think you got it bad, at the beginning it was 15 dollars. Thats right, you had to have double money in your account to start a sub in April (and the game time that came with your box wasnt included until after you set up a sub)

KBKB · November 2014

olemanwinter wrote: »

I deal with hundreds if not thousands of different businesses per year and nobody has a billing practice like this. Not subscriptions. Not products. Not online. Not offline.
If you are charging me now, for something I will begin using from hence forth, then WHY do you need a second charge?

Calling bs there =P its common practise to withdraw $1 first.

Valen_Byte · November 2014

Why are you gripping about a dollar? Its....a dollar......

Tandor · November 2014

It's a dollar that you get back almost immediately, and yes, it is common practice.

Elf_Boy · November 2014

I worked five years as a Debit Card Fraud / Non-Fraud claims supervisor for one of the largest banks in the world. I also have 13 years of retail 'cashier supervisor' experience.

Which is to say I have a fairly strong basic understanding of how the visa/mc/amex/disc etc system works.

Creating an open authorization to verify a card number is valid and has at least $1 of funds avail is normal. As you stated gas stations, restaurants and like businesses will often over authorize to make sure there are sufficient funds to cover a large tip, or the amount of fuel to fill even the tank of an RV.

I would suggest out in the real world use debit as much as possible the system is cleaner and doesn't use authorizations. Of course not possible with web based vendors.

No matter what system you use check your bank statement regularly. Something the OP did which is the smartest thing anyone can do.

Any questions on general visa (they all works pretty much the same) I am happy to scratch my brain and try to answer. I did take a class that costs the bank $500 per person to get visa certified.

olemanwinter · November 2014

Everyone is commenting about how this in an acceptable practice. Ok, fine.

BUT WHY?

Why "ensure the payment method is valid" for a charge taking place immediately?

That's like picking up your phone to check for a dial tone (old phone) to make sure you can pick it up again 1 second later to make the call. Just check and make the call simultaneously.

I didn't say their billing practices were wrong. I'm saying I DON'T UNDERSTAND THEM.

If I am going to be charged at 1:00pm EST for a product I will begin using at 1:00pm EST, then why do an authorization check at 12:59:59 (1 second before)?

Just run the charge. It will either be accepted or it wont.

Another thing I've never seen before is the "authorization charge" remain so long after the actual charge. So much longer than other vendors. It appears to be something other than a bank policy because it's different and longer.

And yes, finally, it is just a buck. I don't like things happening in my bank accounts I don't understand. Just that simple.

My finances are none of your business. This company's billing practices however are very much my business as a customer!

Elsonso · November 2014

Understanding is a three-edged sword.

Elf_Boy · November 2014

olemanwinter wrote: »

Everyone is commenting about how this in an acceptable practice. Ok, fine.

BUT WHY?

Why "ensure the payment method is valid" for a charge taking place immediately?

That's like picking up your phone to check for a dial tone (old phone) to make sure you can pick it up again 1 second later to make the call. Just check and make the call simultaneously.

I didn't say their billing practices were wrong. I'm saying I DON'T UNDERSTAND THEM.

If I am going to be charged at 1:00pm EST for a product I will begin using at 1:00pm EST, then why do an authorization check at 12:59:59 (1 second before)?

Just run the charge. It will either be accepted or it wont.

Another thing I've never seen before is the "authorization charge" remain so long after the actual charge. So much longer than other vendors. It appears to be something other than a bank policy because it's different and longer.

And yes, finally, it is just a buck. I don't like things happening in my bank accounts I don't understand. Just that simple.

My finances are none of your business. This company's billing practices however are very much my business as a customer!

You should be directing your rage at VISA - which was created by Bank of America and then spun off as a separate legal entity.

Visa/MC charges are NOT instant as much as you might like to believe they are. It is a two part process. ONE get authorization, TWO send in back up to get payment.

The one holding the authorization against your balance is YOUR BANK, not ZOS, or VISA. MOST banks go with a 3 BUSINESS day limit but are free to choose any arbitrary time frame they like.

Just because you did not notice this happening prior does not mean it didnt happen.

Some banks will post the auth $ as a final sale and adjust it later.

Some banks/merchants have agreed to extra VISA regulations, rules, and charges to use express processing. Before you start screaming about ZOS not doing it that way, I see no evidence they are or are not AND it would increase visa surcharges which would be passed on to the customer. So lets just leave it alone.

Keep in mind there are FOUR parties at work here. ZOS, VISA, YOUR BANK and YOU. These things are more complicated then the average person knows.

Now DEBIT is a one pass system that works more like what you are suggesting. It also has stronger security requirements - like having a pin # and physical card present. DEBIT is also one way only. NO direct refunds. Voids have to be processed immediately.

I suggest you read up on:

Fed Reg E

*and*

http://usa.visa.com/merchants/become-a-merchant/how-a-visa-transaction-works.jsp

olemanwinter · November 2014

I'm not raging against anyone. Especially not Zos, however I am mildly frustrated with some of you.

You people are all going on at length about how VISA operates and how this is standard practice...blaa blaa.

BUT WHY?

It is undeniably different.

______________________________________________________________________

* 2 days ago I made an online purchase at a webhosting company for $12.99

* 2 days ago I made an online purchase for ESO for $14.99

* Webhosting transaction of $12.99 was PENDING immediately.

* ESO transaction of $1 was PENDING immediately.
* ESO transaction of $14.99 was PENDING immediately.

* TODAY the PENDING webhosting transaction has been replaced by a FINAL settled transaction for the SAME AMOUNT of $12.99

* TODAY the PENDING transactions for ESO (Both) still remain.

* I was able to use the webhosting at the time of purchase.

* I was able to use ESO at the time of purchase.

_______________________________________________________________________

Now, read that comparison above as many times you feel necessary before you grasp the concept that ESO is doing something different from other vendors.

Perhaps legal. Perhaps ethical. Perhaps normal. BUT DIFFERENT.

I paid for both with VISA. So, that's not the variable.

I paid for both with the same bank. So, that's not the variable.

WHY, when both products can be accessed immediately, and both charges are hitting my bank immediately, and both are being paid the same - does ESO charge a second fee? And why does their fee remain so much longer?

Elf_Boy wrote: »

Keep in mind there are FOUR parties at work here. ZOS, VISA, YOUR BANK and YOU.

Indeed, and as you just read (perhaps) I just accounted for 3 of the four variables, unless Visa or my Bank is treating Zos differently (like a foreign transaction for example). If so, that begs a new set of questions.

Elf_Boy wrote: »

I suggest you

I suggest you focus more on the actual question I'm asking and ACCEPT THE CENTRAL PREMISE rather than rushing to educate me on the workings of VISA.

Accept that these ESO transactions are different than most.

Don't assume I'm some idiot who never noticed a 2nd SIMULTANEOUS transaction, making a pair of pending transactions that linger for an extended period of time.

Something is different. And that's okay, but I want to know why.

Sheesh. The only thing that is pissing me off is the people going.

"DUDE, STFU it's only a dollar and do you even bank bro? Do you even Visa? GTFO"

^ That's annoying.

Elsonso · November 2014

Was your web-hosting purchase a subscription or a one time purchase and did the web-hosting company retain your credit card information for future use?

Evergnar · November 2014

I wouldn't let these people touch my credit card again with a 10ft pole. Just get a time card (amazon or local game shop) and you won't have to deal with that nonsense.

ebunts14_ESO · November 2014

Your payment of $15 is pending like you said. Its PENDING because you have 30 game time included with the game and you are not going to be charged for your subscription until your 30 day included time is completed.

As for your gasoline, why not just tell the station clerk that you want $$ amount of gas and it will be paid at time of purchase instead of a pre-authorized amount.

Elf_Boy · November 2014

Dude - you can preach about how you want the world to be or you can learn how the world really works. Up to you.

It is pretty clear your more interested in having a hissy fit then learning how to understand the system.

If you want to know why things are different I suggest you do some research rather then getting on the soap box and screaming at the world.

If you dont like it go to Visa. The owner of the system and the maker of this 840 page document.

http://usa.visa.com/download/about_visa/15-October-2014-Visa-Rules-Public.pdf

As well as this 215 page document.

http://usa.visa.com/download/about_visa/15-October-2014-Visa-Rules-Public.pdf

also dont forget this tine 81 page PDF

http://usa.visa.com/download/merchants/card-acceptance-guidelines-for-visa-merchants.pdf

When I see the tide coming in I move out of the way. Some people seem to think they can tell the tide to get out of their way, and/or tell the tide that if it doesnt explain its self in terms they can understand or are willing to accept then the tide cant come in now or ever.

You asked a question and people answered. You didnt like the answer so rather then saying 'thank you' you got mad at the people who helped you.

Sadly a fairly common behavior.

No one here is going to be able to explain why your bank posts thing the way they do. Have you tried talking to a person at your bank about this?

olemanwinter · November 2014

Elf_Boy wrote: »

You asked a question and people answered.

Are you insane? I asked why their transactions seemed different and you linked 1000+ pages for me to read.

That's not an answer. And neither is "[snip] - Go talk to Visa".

I have never seen multiple transactions EXIST AT THE SAME TIME for one purchase online purchase or subscription.

I've seen a first transaction fall off before a replacement transaction replaces it. But never this.

But whatever, this is a joke. You people are all hilarious. From the "who cares it's just a dollar" people to the "[snip] VISA" guys to you with your 1000 pages.

The next time someone asks me about fishing I'm just going to tell them to go read the bible. "I know there is something about it in there somewhere".

This post has been edited based on our Community Rules on cursing and profanity.

olemanwinter · November 2014

lordrichter wrote: »

Was your web-hosting purchase a subscription or a one time purchase and did the web-hosting company retain your credit card information for future use?

Subscription and did maintain credit card information. Not the first time. I have several of them.

olemanwinter · November 2014

ebuntsb14_ESO wrote: »

Your payment of $15 is pending like you said. Its PENDING because you have 30 game time included with the game and you are not going to be charged for your subscription until your 30 day included time is completed.

OBJECTION. Assumes facts not in evidence!

I bought the game at launch. I let my subscription expire because I didn't want to play. I came back. There is no free 30 days.

The "30 game time" that I am paying for BOTH began at the time of purchase and was charged at the time of purchase.

But I was here at launch. I remember the double $15. At the beginning of the 30 free days $15 was charged. At the end of the free days $15 more was charged prior to them releasing the first charge.

AT LEAST that made some sense because of the free 30 days.

WHY would there be two charges when the 30 days begins instantly and the charge is also instant?

Elsonso · November 2014

olemanwinter wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Was your web-hosting purchase a subscription or a one time purchase and did the web-hosting company retain your credit card information for future use?

Subscription and did maintain credit card information. Not the first time. I have several of them.

In my experience, some companies that store credit card numbers for long term reuse will run a $1 "toe in the water" charge through even though they are going to be charging the card in a moment anyway. It has to do with how they have their website application set up. If the part of the website that handles credit card retention is not part of the checkout process, it seems to be more likely.

olemanwinter · November 2014

lordrichter wrote: »

In my experience, some companies that store credit card numbers for long term reuse will run a $1 "toe in the water" charge through even though they are going to be charging the card in a moment anyway. It has to do with how they have their website application set up. If the part of the website that handles credit card retention is not part of the checkout process, it seems to be more likely.

I haven't encountered it before. If I were a vendor such as that, I don't think I would want a processing company that handles it in such a way. Since, logically it's unnecessary. And since they are clearly not all the same.

lordrichter wrote: »

If the part of the website that handles credit card retention is not part of the checkout process, it seems to be more likely.

See, now this is starting to approach a real answer. And I greatly appreciate it.

So, let me see if I understand this:

The company sells a product, but doesn't process it's own checkout. So, even though the company may know it's an immediate charge, the processing company has to get a go-ahead prompt of some sort for the "real" charge, and not knowing that it will be (or may be) immediately, they do a test charge first unaware that the go-ahead prompt is being sent almost simultaneously.

Have I got that about right?

The only thing that makes me doubt that is how at launch the pre-charge was also $15. Would that not point to Zos processing it's own credit card checkouts?