-
debbiedance91, today at 06:22 pm CEST
-
XuodanayboJanxiXeaee, yesterday at 08:30 pm CEST
-
frapi07, yesterday at 07:04 pm CEST
-
Spielheld, on 8th May. 2025 at 10:47 pm CEST
-
JJepsa96, today at 06:35 pm CEST
-
Pneumatic, today at 06:28 pm CEST
-
canasongrass, today at 05:23 pm CEST
-
JJepsa96, today at 04:07 pm CEST
-
Marlies123, today at 03:42 pm CEST
-
Druff, today at 03:49 am CEST
-
x00NY, today at 12:58 am CEST
-
Leon030, yesterday at 10:28 pm CEST
-
fros7byte, yesterday at 08:44 pm CEST
-
Langhans_innen, yesterday at 03:26 pm CEST
-
Twfarcry6, yesterday at 01:39 pm CEST
-
JJepsa96, yesterday at 01:21 pm CEST
-
Diablojahna, yesterday at 01:18 pm CEST
-
Zockerbernd, yesterday at 11:59 am CEST
-
frapi07, yesterday at 11:03 am CEST
-
Langhans_innen, yesterday at 10:25 am CEST
-
sundance, on 9th May. 2025 at 10:51 pm CEST
-
fros7byte, on 9th May. 2025 at 06:32 pm CEST
-
DerLorax, on 9th May. 2025 at 06:04 pm CEST
-
frapi07, on 9th May. 2025 at 02:52 pm CEST
-
Olli_Eule, on 9th May. 2025 at 11:14 am CEST
-
Bonusfan, on 9th May. 2025 at 10:48 am CEST
Mandato bank transfer went back
Nobody has liked this post so far
This post has been translated automatically
Mandato bank transfer went back
Nobody has liked this post so far
Even if they send it to a Debt collector, neither the debt collector is in the right, nor the accruing fees, these are probably in 99% of all cases in court, classified as immoral, since these are usually in no relation or fees are charged, which may not be calculated or were much too high.
Unfortunately, only many unsuspecting pay these fees, for fear it goes before the court or the bailiff is right there. Predominantly, many debt collectors then leave it at their threatening letters, because they know that a court case would mean prepayment and in the dumbest case, if there are errors, also further expenses.
This post has been translated automatically
Mandato bank transfer went back
Nobody has liked this post so far
Well, if you withdraw a confirmed online transfer for a service that you have received, this can be interpreted in the worst case as fraud
This means that even if you have done nothing, the Provider and if you do not report also the collection in the right and you would have to charge this in the next step the payment provider must then cover the fees if it was a legal transaction that was not canceled for reasons of legal situation or others
The general collection costs there you would have to look in each case exactly what was charged and then you could point to any costs incurred not enforceable
In principle, however, the provider has the right to the reminder and consequently also the right to charge reminder costs for several individual bookings, the chargeback can also be charged per booking because the banks also set these costs per booking and not for all bookings in period X
If you have e.g. a PayPal account and 5 debits are not redeemed you will also be charged 5 x 4,xx which is then also 20 €
This post has been translated automatically
Mandato bank transfer went back
Nobody has liked this post so far
Incidental fraud would be present if one would act in advance knowingly, with the intention, e.g. due to insufficient funds in the account, to carry out a transaction, this would not be possible from the outset, so knowingly trying to harm someone or to gain an advantage.
Is not present here, however, according to the aforementioned facts, since the customer was willing to make the aforementioned payment and this was also submitted with the consent of a third party provider, and a credit was also redeemed accordingly on the player account via the system. Since this is a system error, this is probably also to become different, also since the transfer was assigned to a third party.
I would contact the casino accordingly and get a confirmation. So you have something in hand regarding collection, etc. and can prove that you have made an effort to clarify.
This post has been translated automatically