Consumer Guarantee Loophole for Retailers

I just wanted to make a post here to inform those who might not already know that there is a massive loop hole in the consumer law that under certain circumstances has the potential to get the retailer off scot free from any liability they may have in relation to the ACCC regulations.

It concerns to payment methods in particular paying using an EFTPOS machine or online credit card. Under the ACCC regulations if a product has a major failure the store must offer you a remedy of either a refund, replacement, or repair and the choice of what one is your decision.

However if the product cannot be repaired due to no parts being manufactured or any other valid reason and is discontinued so cannot be replaced the store is left with the only option of giving a refund. The issue here lies in that if you made a payment using EFTPOS or online CC its tied to a particular card number and most retailers Terms require that the exact card used must be the card to accept the refund and the ACCC advised me that it is an acceptable term for them to enforce.

If you use Apple pay or Google wallet they both generate a virtual card for each individual purchase also if you replace your physical card with a different card number this applies.

After the retailer refused to issue a refund due to my card number not matching up and was unable to offer any other resolution due to the item not being able to be repaired and the item discontinued I hit a wall. Because that card doesn't exist its impossible for me to provide that card to receive the refund.

After that I opened a complaint with both ACCC and The Department of Commerce WA and both ruled in favor of the retailer sating that they have offered me an acceptable remedy under the ACCC regulations and that the stores policy does comply with their regulations and because it is me who is unable to fulfil my end due to not having the correct card number it becomes a civil dispute where both parties have to find an agreement outside of the regulatory body and they can offer no help to either party.

So just as an FYI be carful how you pay for something because if you cant provide the exact card used to pay the store has the right to refuse a refund and the ACCC agrees.

Edit
[Just to add I have tried coming up with an agreement with the store manager and they just didn't want to budge on their stance and the head office said its up the the individual store managers to handle in store returns. This post was just to advise users that in this particular gray area I have found myself in that stores have a lot more freedom compared to what the wording in the ACL implies they do.]

Final Update.
[So just as an update the area manager called me this morning and I had a good chat with them and at the end of it they agreed to give me the refund. The store has the policy in place to prevent fraud/theft and it has been pushed really hard in the recent months due to false returns increase and the store manager took the policy a bit too seriously. They said that the managers are allowed to use discretion based on the individual circumstance and that this will be discussed with the store. They also will be sending me a gift card as an apology.]

Comments

  • +16

    I've done refunds via Google pay and it hasn't been an issue. When they ask you for your card just tap your phone or whatever and enter the PIN if required. Doesn't matter that they see a different card number.

    • +17

      Some stores do enforce the card number in their terms. This one refused to do it unless they see the same card number in person that matches the receipt and refused to budge even their head office said the same thing. Its just something that can happen and also the ACCC sides with them in that particular situation.

      • +7

        Name the store.

        At least tell us the chain and the amount.

        Did they offer store credit?

        • +3

          At this time no solution has been found at all they are just waiting for me to accept the refund. It was under $400 so not heaps but still a huge F to be told not much I can do aside from work out an agreement with them.

          • +8

            @RustyNail1: Since it’s one of these stores

            Good Guys, JB Hi-Fi, Officeworks, Harvey Norman

            Why not ask for store credit or gift card ?

            I know I’d rather a refund but at this stage you reached a point where recouping something is better than nothing.

            • +3

              @HardQuiz: Not willing to give a gift card. I did insist right away on a refund then argued for a while about the card numbers then after they said no multiple times to a refund to a different card it was escalated to the store manager they said no as well then I said I would just accept a gift card as i was over the arguing and then they said no to that as well only wanting the original card.

              • +2

                @RustyNail1: Can't you show them your virtual account number in Google pay and they refund to that? It should show the last 4 digits which lines up with your receipt.

              • @RustyNail1: Due to Aus anti money laundering laws it has to go back to the same method it was paid on, shame they couldn't give you a gift card or store credit

                • @solidussnake: This is BS because I just got refunded a $179 set of faulty headphones 6 days ago to a different card (and bank) entirely because I had changed banks in this time.
                  This was a major retailer with a brick & mortar store.

                  • @Goose93: Shouldn't have.. when I worked at JB we all got trained on the anti money laundering etc and we told it has to go on the same card.

        • Kmart does this. Annoying as my when the wife or I buy something and the other person returns it's always different. I just get a store credit….but it's just really really annoying.

        • +5

          You can and the OP is wrong. Payments do not use a different 'virtual card' number, they are tokenised.

          Also, it's not the retailer that requires this typically. The network processing cards have a clause that say you can only refund to the card the purchase was on (but it's not well enforced by the overwhelming majority of merchants, and I know I can 'refund' any amount via Stripe to a card if I wanted, but if push came to shove, they can cease a merchant agreement for doing this; it prevents 'schwapping').

          • @drewbles:

            but it's not well enforced by the overwhelming majority of merchants

            This one is definitely enforced. If you paid using a visa card, you cannot have the funds refunded onto a master card, and vice versa.

      • Then open you digital wallet, then select your card, the go into details. It will have the virtual card number. The last 4 digit is all that should matter.

    • +1

      Yep. I believe this is just an isolated incident with a manager that doesn't fully understand the concept. They're just retail workers, not consultants.

      I never could give a sh** less when giving refunds as a student worker. Just wanted the customers to f off and stop complaining.

    • +2

      Our friend Rusty isnt saying that some stores do the right and will refund to a different card, they are just pointing out there are aresholes who play the system to their advantage and follow the exact wording of the law just to win.

  • +3

    physical credit cars only last 3 years don't they?
    .

    • Yes. But the new one will have the same numbers just a different expiry date and security code.

      • +17

        commbank gave us different numbers with most recent cards
        .

        • +3

          Same. My current and last cards have different numbers

    • Only ever had one credit card the number hasnt changed nearly 30 years.

  • +9

    Never had an issue getting a refund on Apple Pay. You just tap your card on the machine. No one asks to check it’s the exact same as when payment was made. Somethings off with your particular case.

    • +6

      I have had no problem either at so many stores never really get asked to check. just this particular that has caused this problem. I didn't even think about this situation before this its obviously just the stores way of trying to avoid the refund. But it also only applies if they cant repair or replace so its only under these perfect conditions that it happens in their favor that suck.

    • +8

      No one asks to check it’s the exact same as when payment was made.

      Really?

      I have been asked to show the original card used as payment when I have previously done returns at Woolworths, Coles, Officeworks and ALDI, but being asked to show the card originally used in the original transaction is unusual in my experience.

      To be fair, you are generally supposed to have refunds returned to the same card as the one used in the original purchase transaction. If you look at section 3.14 of Mastercard's Transaction Processing Rules, it says:

      • Merchants are supposed to only provide a refund to the card used in the original transaction.

      • Merchants should look at the purchase receipt to see the last four digits of the card used in the original transaction. However, there is a caveat to point out that virtual Mastercards stored on a mobile wallet may use a different card number to the one on the physical Mastercard.

      • If the card used in the original transaction is no longer available, merchants will need to follow its own returns policy.

      • -2

        "exact same". To be sure, to be sure.

    • Bunnings asks for the original card when doing a refund.

  • +3

    Thanks OP, useful insight.

    Might be best to take a screenshot of your virtual card number for next time.

  • +1

    I opened a complaint with ACCC ruled in favor of the retailer

    Nice story👍

    Digital transactions are easily reversible. Retailer provided the facility, they have the means to refund to the original payment source.
    There's a laundry list of privacy/legal regulations involved in handling cc information..would be amazed if the literal translation of exact cc number held up.

    • +5

      Last 4 digits might be on the receipt.

      • +3

        Last 4 digits of virtual cards are generally available in the transaction history of the app used.

  • +6

    Name this retailer please so we do not buy from them.
    And how much was it?

    Retailer clearly doesn’t want to give you a refund and they found the perfect situation to do so.
    An honest retailer will provide alternative ways to refund you.

      • +14

        don't want to name this retailer in particular for defamations reasons

        Surely given the nature of this website it would be in the public interest to share your honest opinion on a substantially true recollection of events.

        • -2

          The retailer associated with my post might have been listed in the response above regarding other previous experiences not related to this current issue.

          • +8

            @RustyNail1: So one of these

            Good Guys, JB Hi-Fi, Officeworks, Harvey Norman.

            Please be Hardly Normal as we need another reason to avoid them.

          • +2

            @RustyNail1: Given they all stock similar products I don't see office works being too upset if you elaborate further on :

            • Item in question
            • Nature of claim under ACL
            • Value of transaction
            • Alternate remedies offered

            The individual franchisee on the other hand may disagree.

            Also do you have a document number for the ACCC determination?

      • +16

        Defamation only applies to false information so you're free to go ahead and name them.

        • -5

          Not really ,defamation is more about damaging a reputation etc.
          If this happened as per the OP they could and should name them. It's a though the OP thinks if they drop enough hints, without naming, the retailers PR will swoop in, feel guilty and cough up. Not going to happen. Still think there are bits (facts) missing in this saga. I am yet to see thi so called amazing loophole. The 'alleged' scenario would have happened a gazillion times and the pile of victims would have led to changes in retail laws.

          Do we know what the unfixable product is? I'd like to steer clear.

          • @Protractor:

            Still think there are bits (facts) missing in this saga

            OP holds one of three versions of the truth, without input from the retailer it will be hard to find the third.

          • +6

            @Protractor: The main defence to a defamation claim is truth. If OP was to say XYZ refused a refund due to tokensized credit card numbers not matching the physical card number and that's factual, there's no chance a defamation case would succeed. I'm guessing however the fact OP won't name them is their giving their version of facts which is more of a grey area.

  • +2

    If you're still within chargeback timeframe, do that.

  • +3

    ACCC has ruled

    Your singular vague experience does not set a precedent. Digital/Google/Apple transactions are easily reversible. People change cards and/or card numbers all the time regardless.

    • -2

      Well when both the ACCC and the Department of Commerce WA said that the retailer is legally allowed to restrict refunds to the exact cards number used says different Mr. Lawyer.

      Both the ACCC and DCWA also said its a grey area because nothin inside the law written covers or mentions credit card numbers so they have to go off what it does cover and the retailer did offer me a refund and that is all they are required to do I just have no way to accept it.

      • +6

        If you ain't suing them, just name and shame them

      • ACCC and the Department of Commerce WA said that the retailer is legally allowed to restrict refunds to the exact cards number
        ACCC and DCWA also said its a grey area because nothin inside the law written covers or mentions credit card numbers

        Lmfao.

        What ACCC have likely told you is they have no enforcement powers. Not the other way around as you've conveyed. ACCC are unfortunately a joke of a body, they can't really do shit except take companies and peeps to Court just like anyone else.

        • ACCC told me to double check with Department of Commerce WA they are the ones that actually enforce those laws in WA and they ran through what laws are in place and what they can and cant do what I can and cant do and said my best solution is to come up with an agreement with the store as the store has not breached any regulations and they wont take any action unless they have. Legal options are not worth it for $400.

          • +1

            @RustyNail1: Do you reside in Dog Swamp?

          • -1

            @RustyNail1: So, essentially exactly what I said. They have no powers and they've palmed you off. Cool. Thanks for confirming I was correct.

            • @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: Do you reckon OP is telling a porky?

            • @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: They have power just only if the business has breached a law and they haven't because of a grey area in the law that doesn't stipulate enough details.

              Consumer Protection, a division of the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety, promotes fair trading and consumer protection in Western Australia.

              Consumer Protection is here to help you by:

              providing information and advice to consumers, shops and businesses about their rights and responsibilities;
              helping consumers resolve disputes with shops and businesses;
              investigating complaints about unfair trading practices;
              prosecuting unscrupulous traders;
              regulating and licensing some business activities; and
              developing legislation, codes of practice and guidelines that protect consumers.

              • @RustyNail1: Cool copy and paste skills. Still doesn't change anything. They're a joke of a body with no enforcement powers. They've palmed you off with "grey area" and you've swallowed it hook line and sinker. Evidence of this - read every one of your posts on this thread.

                Take the retailer to your State's tribunal and the retailer will bend over backwards instantaneously to hand that refund to you. Buuut ACCC never told you to do this did they? Because, and I've done a copy and paste tactical move like yourself, ACCC "cannot provide legal advice on your rights and obligations under the law"

                • -1

                  @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: ACCC cant deal with anything at all for me because Im from WA. They can give advice and provide me with a copy of their regulations but I have to deal with Commerce WA part of the DMIRS to handle a dispute or if I chose privately in court I guess but F that.

                  • -1

                    @RustyNail1:

                    ACCC cant deal with anything at all for me because Im from WA.

                    Lmao, are you suffering from Stockholm syndrome? What difference does it make that you're from WA to a federal body?

                    They can give advice

                    They literally cannot give you advice, I already copy pasted that from their rules. See my last post.

        • +4

          I agree. The ACCC is a retirement village.. As is the Do Not Call register, all Fuelwatch orgs,TIO etc. The ACCC may as well be industry advocate. Advocate for liquor, fuel,energy and any other cartels/ripoffs.If with their powers they are not moving beyond calling out fuel after decades, what's the excuse.
          "Not enough legal powers". If that were the case they would have called for and got beefed up powers just by asking (decades ago). If they have the powers why do they sit on them so willingly?

          All these consumer orgs have a common theme.The ability to tell us to shop around, rather than seek behaviour change in predatory marketing, or obligation avoidance.It seems the obvious solution is to be avoided.

          If any of this episode happened at all, there are essential parts missing in the story. I predict we'll never here an ending ,let alone a happy one re this saga.

          • @Protractor: What power/s do you want them to use with regard to fuel?

            • +1

              @jacross: Price cycling "because they can" is blatant rorting. It is a protection racket.
              A watchdog has teeth that bite the parasites ripping off their citizens. As it is the actual servos and fuel retailers wear the wrath for the massive bullying power wielded by fuel cartel (virtual) gangsters.
              The questions is as I framed it,initially. They should already have that power, and should have been using it. If they can't/won't do this they may as well be abolished and refund the wasted opportunity money to consumers.
              "Shop around" is nothing but a joke. It has become the catchcry of the lazy retirement villages of govt 'ombudsman' etc.
              The new 'spam cop' is just a bottomless pit of dead money that will wheel out the same message.

              • @Protractor: You said "if with their powers".

                What powers, that they have, do you want them to use with regard to fuel?

                The powers are set out in the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.

                It's your statement. I'm just curious as to what you mean specifically.

                Or do you want to abandon that statement in favour of your reform/abolition comments?

                If they were abolished, what functions would you keep and not keep? Or is none of it useful in the absence of a power to 'have teeth'?

                • @jacross: It's as useful on the things that count, as a brochure stand at a country field day.
                  They pick off a few things around the edges. It's trying to sit on a fence.They hide behind the concept that if there's competition, they are doing their job.Price cycling is the biggest scam in Australia. Did THAT make it to their tax payer funded 'Little Book of Scams'? Yes I'd like to see them abolished. But FIRST I'd like to have the NACC investigate their behaviour and that of both sides of govts around the ability of fuel cartels to game consumers.

          • -2

            @Protractor: Under Mr Fels they worked fine. Then they put a chick in charge;
            Same story on ACMA: it is a Industry advocate!
            Optus experimented with a chick in charge, then they had a leak.
            I could make a long list but can't run that fast!

            • +1

              @payless69: I think it more about personality, than gender. For these roles you hire people who solve the problems, not who waffle on about 'getting around the same table for a chat'.
              It's hard to get the max out of public servants at that level when they see the role as a platform to climb, a springboard into politics, etc, rather than a challenge to succeed in.

            • +1

              @payless69: I don't think Optus putting a lady in charge had anything to do with poor cybersecurity practices that were probably there long before her tenure. She'd only be culpable for not fixing the problem (like Mr. Fels and whoever before him) but it's very unlikely she created it by virtue of her being unsuited to the role because she's a woman

              Why do you believe women can't be effective in leadership roles?

              • @SpainKing: Of course women can be great leaders! Best example was Margaret Thatcher. Sadly she is gone and all the women after her did not seem to do anything for peace. Last one caused a financial earthquake!

              • @SpainKing: The Optus CEO appointed her own cyber security manager. Her job was to oversee his role. She failed. She should have gone. es. Her CV should be reassessed by govt. The fact she kept her job is an insult to the victims of her sloth. Again, not a gender issue, just a job beyond a persons 'actual' capacity.

          • @Protractor: The organisations mentioned are all simply fake voices that pretend to be your friend and tahts it. THey are a waste of money, especially fuel watch, the only thing they actually do is collect fat wages for nothing along with the occassional public statement thats it not fair..

  • I've never had a problem either - just said "I don't have the card any longer" and used my current card.

    • +1

      Yeah same here. I have had to do a few returns and never had any issues iI just hit one this time and I am amazed that it is so difficult when it gets to this point.

  • +4

    ACCC has ruled

    And yet

    https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/contact-us/report-a-consume…

    What the ACCC can't do:
    We don’t resolve individual complaints or provide legal advice on your rights and obligations under the law.
    We don’t make formal decisions on whether a person or business has breached the law as only the courts can do this.
    We generally don’t comment on our investigations or what action we may take from the information provided in reports we receive.

    • +2

      Also, here is how you find an Apple Pay card number (the specific one used on the transaction) - https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212779

      Dunno what the process is for Google though.

      • Same process.

      • I don't use apple pay. Google does have a a purchase history that you can see I don't know if it shows you the virtual card number but when you get a new card it clears the history from the expired card so you can no longer see it.

        • Ah, that's annoying. Yeah, from the company perspective you no longer have access to the same card. I'd just ask for a gift card/credit instead.

      • Thanks for posting this link - Apple explains how to do refunds very clearly. Not every retail assistant or store manager knows how refunds on Apple or Google Pay work, and some are suspicious of it, or don’t have the time or inclination to have it explained to them by the customer (who also may not understand all of the complexities). After all, if the store training has told them one thing, why should they accept ‘training’ from a customer who is up to no good or too stupid to understand store policy?
        Maybe AI will sort it all out for us.

        • -1

          Apple tells a lot of lies, by omission.

          They for example state everywhere that purchases only have 1 years warranty and then hide a little star somewhere that the law actually says other things. THey have even been fined for this which is a miracle considering how few times penalties actually are given.

          NEver beelieve anything any Apple representative says, you can be sure they arent your friend. Its alsoa. miracle how many times you remind them that the Australian government makes the law not Apple lawyers and then their denials become refunds.

          • @CowFrogHorse: There's that also!

          • @CowFrogHorse: You are correct in that Apple are certainly not in the business of being your friend.

            But Apple very clearly outline what their ACL policy is, have done so for over a decade and (after, yes, being forced to by the ACCC) clearly state that you get a 2 year minimum, and depending on product likely more, as a result of the ACL. I'd say its disingenuous to call it a 'little star'.

            • @SteveBuscemi: Steve: But Apple very clearly outline(apple.com) what their ACL policy is, have done so for over a decade and (after, yes, being forced to by the ACCC) clearly state that you get a 2 year minimum, and depending on product likely more, as a result of the ACL.

              cow: They may say that on one page but they hide this fact everywhere else.

              If you talk to any apple staff member via chat or in person they NEVER mention this. They are very dishonest about this they pretend not to know. Its not until you mention ACCCC and Australian law do they acknowledge you have rights that are much more beneficial than the minimum they tell you.

              https://www.apple.com/au/legal/statutory-warranty/au/

              This page gives figures of 2 years is morally dishonest, because Australian law actually says you are entitiled to a much longer period of time. We all know the law says a reasonable time, a reasonable time is not 2 years for most apple products, its much longer.

            • @SteveBuscemi: Apple care is basically a scam.

              Just about everything selling point they "sell" as part of Apple care, you as a consumer are entitiled for free under Australia law.

              Nobody should be buying apple care. Its dishonest to charge people for something they have already paid for, given Apples Australia tax.

              I was once in an Apple shop buying a laptop and i saw the apple dude trying to sell apple care for a laptop, he was telling them a bunch of reasons. I stepped in and told the buyer, they were already entitled to all this care for free under Australian Consumer law. I told them to ask any apple staff the same question or too call the ACCC. YOu can bet the apple dude(tm) was not happy and he admitted basically 9 out of 10 of the Apple Care items must be honoured by Apple for customers without Apple care.

    • Well that's what they said to me on the phone call they put me on hold for 20mins and came back to me with what the store is saying does abide by the regulations they have in place and I have to come to an agreement with the store. It was also the ACCC that advised me to contact the DCWA because they are the ones that handle it for WA and they said the same thing what the store is doing doesn't breach the regulations and I will have to go off the store policy or come to an agreement with them or take legal action against them if we cant come to an agreement.

      • +1

        That's because the ACCC isn't there to solve your problems. And they're absolutely right, you should be discussing this with the store first. You're off calling this a "loop hole" and making all kinds of claims about rulings being made but it sounds like you haven't done the right thing at all. Call up the company and talk to them about it to come up with a solution.

        • +3

          I already did they said point black its the store managers decision on what to do and they cant do anything to help me they did say I can lodge a complaint but the store manager is correct and has not done anything wrong because it says in their stores policy that the card needs to match. Store manager wont accept anything at all other than the original card with matching numbers that the only thig he will accept no credit no gift card only and exchage for exact item that is discontinued or a refund. I've never had to deal with it being this difficult before.

          Someone else commented saying its likely an anti theft policy

          • @RustyNail1: Perhaps there's a 'cultural clash' that may be skewing this managers attitude.

          • @RustyNail1: Hey Rusty, re:

            'Someone else commented saying its likely an anti theft policy'

            It would only function as anti-theft policy if you didn't have a receipt. You have a receipt, right?

  • +4

    I have updated "ACCC has ruled" to "advised" to avoid any confusions as a few replies have mentioned this.

  • +1

    If you use Apple pay or Google wallet they both generate a virtual card for each individual purchase also if you replace your physical card with a different card number this applies.

    That is not true. Yes, any card that you add to Apple Pay gets a new unique card number but it is persistent and stays the same for each purchase.

    Open Apple Pay, select a card, tap on the three dots button in the top right corner, select “Card Number”. You will see the last 4 digits that are always used for that card on that particular device.

    • For google at least it changes maybe for each transition or maybe just for each merchant but its not the same as the one the app shows.

      You can use your virtual card for online or in-app purchases.
      When you pay online, you can check out faster if you allow Google to automatically fill out your virtual card payment info and CVC.
      If you use autofill, your bank may send a temporary code to your phone to verify your identity.
      Tip: The virtual card number, expiration date, and CVC may be different from your physical card. For added security, some card issuers change your virtual card number or CVC for different merchants or transactions.

      • For Google pay, go to the original transaction and you can find the card number it has been used with other details.
        I had this issue before but the store rep showed me how to find the card number from the transactions history on Google pay

    • +1

      That's good to know.

      Yes with Apple Pay, a different card number (virtual card number) will show up on the receipt than what is shown on the card image on your phone.

      If you go to pay by double clicking the side button, you will see your card with your normal card number. You can't see the virtual card number.

      But as verio has said above, if you go into your wallet app, and goto your card, then there are three dots button in the top right corner where you can select to see the virtual card number which is the one that is shown on receipts.

      For the op, if you don't have the same card number anymore, you could just say that it was done of your phone so the virtual card number is shown. Then do the refund. When the card number on the receipt is different to the original receipt, just act ignorant that you don't know why.

    • Glad this was posted before I had to.

      If the OP still isn't sure this the case, a real world example is when you tap onto Opal in Sydney. You need to tap on and off with the same device. You can't tap on with your phone and tap off with your watch even if they're for the same virtual card. You'll be charged two full separate fares.

      Add a payment card to your digital wallet on your phone, watch or other device to pay for your fare. (Digital wallet (Apple Pay, Google Wallet, Samsung Pay)

      • We accept American Express (AMEX), MasterCard, Visa credit or debit cards.
      • Tap on and tap off with the same device each time to access your travel benefits.

      https://transportnsw.info/tickets-opal/opal/contactless-paym…

      That can only mean the card number doesn't change per transaction.

      Close this thread down.

  • +5

    The issue here lies in that if you made a payment using EFTPOS or online CC its tied to a particular card number and most retailers Terms require that the exact card used must be the card to accept the refund and the ACCC advised me that it is an acceptable term for them to enforce

    This isn't a retailer rule, this is a anti money laundering law.

    If you use Apple pay or Google wallet they both generate a virtual card for each individual purchase also if you replace your physical card with a different card number this applies.

    The card on the phone is virtual, it does not change for each transaction. On Google Pay for example go to the card, click details, it will show you the 'virtual' account number.

    After the retailer refused to issue a refund due to my card number not matching up

    See above, they are following the law, but can offer you a store credit as well if you are going to buy another one. So not sure what the real issue is. As you have options. Take a store credit/gift card and move on if you don't have the card anymore.

    • Nah there is no law requiring for the card numbers to match its simply a store policy the only restriction is it has to be the same form of payment so cash for cash EFT to EFT bank transfer to bank transfer Department of Commerce WA went over it all with me on the phone they took a fair bit of time to help me out and made it clear nothing is stopping the store from doing it and I cant force them to and its just at their discretion if they want to accept it or not so we have to come to an agreement.

      My virtual card number does not match the receipt it actually doesn't match any of my receipts at all. The store manager would not authorize a gift card without matching my card too Straight up refused anything other than a refund to that exact card number that is all the manager was willing to do (other than exchange but no stock as discontinued) he wont accept anything else.

      • +1

        Not store policy, more merchant agreement / card scheme rules

        https://www.commbank.com.au/business/pds/customer_merchant_a…

        If you buy something on a points earning card and then refunded to a debit card, you're keeping points you're not eligible for

        If you buy a TV on a credit card, return and get it refunded on a debit card, and then do a chargeback on the original TV transaction (eg the credit card was stolen), the merchant has no leg to stand on and they could be out of pocket twice

        • That is interesting. Looks like that might have influence on it. Also a friend said they also do it to stop people getting receipts from the bin and returning new products straight off the shelf with a random receipt for money AKA theft.

          Part 2: How to use your Facility
          2.8 Refunds
          Refunds on Card Transactions must be returned to the same
          account used for the original sale where that account can be
          identified. If you give a refund to an account which is different to
          the account used in the original Transaction you may be breaching
          Card Scheme rules and will be wholly liable for any chargeback
          claim or dispute in respect of the original Transaction, regardless
          of whether we allowed you to process the refund. Never give cash
          refunds for Card Transactions.
          When calculating refunds, you are responsible for the calculation
          and should rely on your own records, not solely on our reporting.

          • @RustyNail1: I had your situation happen to me in David Jones in the early days of Apple Pay. I eventually resolved it with the store manager by demonstrating that the transaction matched the account number rather than the virtual card number. I had to show the account transaction and the physical card number matched.
            Not all managers or retail staff understand how Apple and Google pay works. When it happened to me, the staff really believed I was spinning a dodgy story.
            The card schemes refer to the account number, not the card number, as you just posted.

      • -2

        Nah there is no law requiring for the card numbers to match

        The Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act might disagree with you. Go have a read. There is a reason all stores refund the method of payment across the board. Cash to Cash, Gift card to Giftcard etc. They won't allow a cash sale to be refunded to a card for example.

        so we have to come to an agreement.

        Based on your replies here, you seem like an easy going person….so can't see why you can't come to an agreement…. not.

        • The store manager literally told me point blank 5 times the only thing he will accept is the original card used like I have said multiple times nothing else whatsoever no credit, gift cards, or anything else only the original card. Looks like you just want to troll because I have said that so many times in this thread.

          If you can show me on the official government documentation (-C2022C00179 Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006) that states the card numbers must match the receipt for a refund to be issued ill give you $100 via PayPal if you can't you give me $100 what ya say?

          Bet you wont because DCWA part of the DMIRS already said its fine for them to do so if they agree and there is nothing in -C2022C00179 because I have read it

          • +2

            @RustyNail1: Both you and the store are making this so much more complicated than it needs to be.

            Why not show a bank statement with the transaction amount and timestamp highlighted matching that of the receipt?
            This proves that you didn't steal someone else's receipt to claim a refund.

Login or Join to leave a comment