Some companies specifically forbid using Virtual cards. Their contract specifies a monetary value that a customer must pay, if one signs up using one these cards.
This would be in violation of the VISA Merchant Agreement. Though merchantes ARE permitted to refuse to accept debit/prepaid VISA cards, they may not charge an additional fee for the use of a credit card (though a "cash discount" is permissible). See http://merchants.visa.com/ds/pdfs/Card_Acceptance_ and_Chargeback_Guidelines.pdf (PDF), pg. 10 "No Surcharging".
I did the same thing, and a company that I tried to quit from sent the "debt" (that I did not renew and tried to cancel) into collection, which to this day shows up on my credit record.
Order a free copy of your credit report from the Big Three (you can do it easily from http://www.annualcreditreport.com/). When you receive the three reports, dispute the debt on each of them following the procedures outlined in the credit report.
The company reporting the negative information is then required to submit supporting documentation, which often doesn't happen.
Sounds like you may have already tried this, but if not, it's not too time-consuming.
I also found a section of the TOS contract that read: "You also agree not to dispute any authorized charge by True.com or its authorized agents." And "if you fraudulent[ly] report that an authorized charge by True.com or its authorized agents is unauthorized, you shall be liable to True.com for liquidated damages of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per incident."
Clearly no one is within their rights to dispute authorized charges. That's the whole point of a chargeback -- it's to charge back unauthorized charges.
You can't sign away your right to dispute unauthorized charges. For example, VISA's Chargeback Guidelines (PDF) specifically address this:
"No Chargeback" Sales Receipts Independent entrepreneurs have been selling sales-receipt stock bearing a statement near the signature area that the cardholder waives the right to charge the transaction back to the merchant. These receipts are being marketed to merchants with the claim that they can protect businesses against chargebacks; in fact, they do not. "No chargeback" sales receipts undermine the integrity of the Visa payment system and are prohibited.
BTW, reading the VISA document above is well worth time. It's useful for those checkout line arguments you invariably find yourself in occasionally. (minimum charges, ID checks, etc.)
does this apply only to items sent through the US Postal Service?
What if the item was sent through FedEx or UPS?
The linked item refers to 39 USC 3009. Browsing through Title 39, it sure seems to me that it is specific to the USPS. Indeed, Title 39 is entitled: "The Postal Service".
I think it pretty clearly states that there must be "cause to believe that the person detained in fact committed, or attempted to commit theft of store property." It's absolutely right that this is not a very strong burden of proof, but it STILL doesn't cover the majority of shoppers.
I tend to keep walking on EAS tag activations. I had Wal-Mart call the cops once on that one (the greeter stopped me in the parking lot, and refused to do whatever it was she needed to do there. I refused to return into the store, because their incompetence is not my problem, and I don't care to be inconvenienced to prove to them I didn't steal anything.)
Even so, I believe that due to the sheer number of false EAS alarms in most stores, they shouldn't even begin to hold up to the standard of probable cause.
Your expenses drop by $500/month and the $20,000 you spend pays for itself in about 2 years.
Good LORD how much money are you spending on electricity? My bill runs around $100/month, upwards around $200/month in winter. At that rate it would take at least 8 years to pay for itself.
The general public will be much more likely to vote for a "5 cents per year" gasoline tax increase than a "50 cent" increase.
I'm no economist, but seeing the way people just bent over and pumped $80 worth of gas in their SUVs last year, I suspect that your proposal would likely just cause inflation.
I suppose it might be enough economic incentive to develop lower cost alternatives. But I really see oil availability being the only thing that will cause a change.
How would you feel, thinking back to when you grew up, if your parents always knew exactly where you were?
Up to the point where I entered college, they did. In retrospect, it's probably good they were that hard-ass about it. Though it didn't necessarily keep me from getting in trouble in places they knew I was at. But that was quite a bit less trouble than I could have gotten in if I had had total freedom, that much is certain.
My point (albeit badly made last night) is that it's not something that the government really needs to regulate. I don't think a responsible blind person will ever operate a gun.
But you can't regulate every situation. Personal responsibility is one of the key tenants of freedom. We seem to have forgotten that as a society.
(Interesting side note: I had a blind intern this summer. I took him skydiving with me. That was quite interesting...)
I hardly see how the blind should be allowed to own and operate a firearm.
I hardly see why the blind shouldn't be allowed to own a firearm. Why shouldn't they? Likewise with operation of a gun. As long as they are doing so in a manner that won't cause harm to someone else (e.g. at a firing range, with a sighted person present), and as long as they are willing to take responsibility for what they do, how is it MY business to tell them otherwise?
What next, telling a blind person he can't own a car? Telling me that I can't own an x-ray machine because I don't know how to use it safely? Where do people like you get off telling the rest of us what we should and shouldn't do?
Phone companies HATE the PUC and they will jump when you mention them.
Generally good advice, however, wireless carriers are not regulated utilities, and thus do not fall under the jurisdiction of any Public Services Commission.
+5 for informative? wow... if I had mod points that would get overrated.
I am glad that you didn't have mod points, because instead of simply silencing someone you disagree with, you took the time to write a detailed repsonse.
That's basically all the current moderation system does...it measures how strongly the people with points agree/disagree with the post in question.
My system of moderation generally has me locate an interesting thread, and burn 3 or so mod points on all of the interesting posts in that thread, regardless of which side of the argument the poster is on. Must be why I didn't have mod points for a year or so, and only recently started getting them again. But anyhow, I find it is the best way for me to be fair.
I wonder how the airlines are going to keep inappropriate video (i.e. porn or even just movies like "Snakes on a Plane" or "Alive") from appearing on the seat-back displays."
I'll wager they'll do it just the same way that they would handle a person that is playing inappropriate video on their 15" laptop sitting on the tray table in front of them. My guess is that would be to ignore it unless a passenger complains, then politely ask the viewer to turn it off.
Personally, were I a flight attendant, I would discreetly ask those around if it offended them. If it didn't, I'd ignore it.
Do you really expect anyone on Slashdot to know what 'littoral' means?
Nope. I expect people who listen to WTOP to have heard the commercials for Lockheed's littoral combat ship and thus cackle madly at my witty joke. Or maybe not.:)
If you're in radio earshot of the capital beltway...The local AM radio stations (and NPR sponsorship slots) will fill up with advertisements that can only be meant to influence about half a dozen people.
It worked with me, I love my new littoral combat ship.;)
In fact, it strikes me as simply barbaric to basically say to a child, "sorry, I can't treat your injuries because your parents don't have enough money". How can doctors, who have sworn oaths to help the sick and wounded, live with themselves after turning injured children away?
They don't. Hospitals write off a significant chunk of their patient bills. So much so that's it is quite often abused by the more deadbeat types in society.
Recommendation: open the door with any other card, since the reader only checks for a magnetic strip and not for a valid card.
Find where someone is installing a retail POS system. Many of them come with "test" credit cards. Installers just toss them in the trash. I have test Visa card in my car presently, as a matter of fact.
make my kids use firefox when they go to myspace; I also only let them access it on a system that is firewalled from the rest of the network, which they have to keep running.
You are aware that MySpace isn't the only potentially hostile site on the Internet, right?
RFID features longer range and a small uniform, pre-encoded response. (e.g. ID Badge at work) HP's new chip features shorter range and a larger response, selectable from a large pool of responses, and probably the pool of responses is changeable even after deployment.
Not at all. Passive RFID chips can have computational capabilities. A good example is Speedpass, which uses a challenge-response crypto system. It's bad encryption that was easily duplicated by some grad students at Hopkins, but it is done.
I'm not quite sure what HP sees as the distinction here. It looks to me just like RFID, albeit a refinement.
Slashdot Mirror
Order a free copy of your credit report from the Big Three (you can do it easily from http://www.annualcreditreport.com/). When you receive the three reports, dispute the debt on each of them following the procedures outlined in the credit report.
The company reporting the negative information is then required to submit supporting documentation, which often doesn't happen.
Sounds like you may have already tried this, but if not, it's not too time-consuming.
Clearly no one is within their rights to dispute authorized charges. That's the whole point of a chargeback -- it's to charge back unauthorized charges.
You can't sign away your right to dispute unauthorized charges. For example, VISA's Chargeback Guidelines (PDF) specifically address this:
BTW, reading the VISA document above is well worth time. It's useful for those checkout line arguments you invariably find yourself in occasionally. (minimum charges, ID checks, etc.)
The linked item refers to 39 USC 3009. Browsing through Title 39, it sure seems to me that it is specific to the USPS. Indeed, Title 39 is entitled: "The Postal Service".
I tend to keep walking on EAS tag activations. I had Wal-Mart call the cops once on that one (the greeter stopped me in the parking lot, and refused to do whatever it was she needed to do there. I refused to return into the store, because their incompetence is not my problem, and I don't care to be inconvenienced to prove to them I didn't steal anything.)
Even so, I believe that due to the sheer number of false EAS alarms in most stores, they shouldn't even begin to hold up to the standard of probable cause.
Good LORD how much money are you spending on electricity? My bill runs around $100/month, upwards around $200/month in winter. At that rate it would take at least 8 years to pay for itself.
I'm no economist, but seeing the way people just bent over and pumped $80 worth of gas in their SUVs last year, I suspect that your proposal would likely just cause inflation.
I suppose it might be enough economic incentive to develop lower cost alternatives. But I really see oil availability being the only thing that will cause a change.
Up to the point where I entered college, they did. In retrospect, it's probably good they were that hard-ass about it. Though it didn't necessarily keep me from getting in trouble in places they knew I was at. But that was quite a bit less trouble than I could have gotten in if I had had total freedom, that much is certain.
My point (albeit badly made last night) is that it's not something that the government really needs to regulate. I don't think a responsible blind person will ever operate a gun.
But you can't regulate every situation. Personal responsibility is one of the key tenants of freedom. We seem to have forgotten that as a society.
(Interesting side note: I had a blind intern this summer. I took him skydiving with me. That was quite interesting...)
I hardly see why the blind shouldn't be allowed to own a firearm. Why shouldn't they? Likewise with operation of a gun. As long as they are doing so in a manner that won't cause harm to someone else (e.g. at a firing range, with a sighted person present), and as long as they are willing to take responsibility for what they do, how is it MY business to tell them otherwise?
What next, telling a blind person he can't own a car? Telling me that I can't own an x-ray machine because I don't know how to use it safely? Where do people like you get off telling the rest of us what we should and shouldn't do?
Nope. Verizon Wireless is a completely separate company from Verizon. Verizon does own quite a bit of stock in Verizon Wireless, however.
Generally good advice, however, wireless carriers are not regulated utilities, and thus do not fall under the jurisdiction of any Public Services Commission.
I am glad that you didn't have mod points, because instead of simply silencing someone you disagree with, you took the time to write a detailed repsonse.
As a matter of fact, yes I was, at a football game. And I think the whole stadium complained, actually. :)
My system of moderation generally has me locate an interesting thread, and burn 3 or so mod points on all of the interesting posts in that thread, regardless of which side of the argument the poster is on. Must be why I didn't have mod points for a year or so, and only recently started getting them again. But anyhow, I find it is the best way for me to be fair.
Parents.
I'll wager they'll do it just the same way that they would handle a person that is playing inappropriate video on their 15" laptop sitting on the tray table in front of them. My guess is that would be to ignore it unless a passenger complains, then politely ask the viewer to turn it off.
Personally, were I a flight attendant, I would discreetly ask those around if it offended them. If it didn't, I'd ignore it.
Nope. I expect people who listen to WTOP to have heard the commercials for Lockheed's littoral combat ship and thus cackle madly at my witty joke. Or maybe not.
Or the Secure Border Initiative. etc. etc.
It worked with me, I love my new littoral combat ship.
More specifically, at the equator it would be geostationary orbit.
They don't. Hospitals write off a significant chunk of their patient bills. So much so that's it is quite often abused by the more deadbeat types in society.
Find where someone is installing a retail POS system. Many of them come with "test" credit cards. Installers just toss them in the trash. I have test Visa card in my car presently, as a matter of fact.
You are aware that MySpace isn't the only potentially hostile site on the Internet, right?
Not at all. Passive RFID chips can have computational capabilities. A good example is Speedpass, which uses a challenge-response crypto system. It's bad encryption that was easily duplicated by some grad students at Hopkins, but it is done.
I'm not quite sure what HP sees as the distinction here. It looks to me just like RFID, albeit a refinement.
On a completely unrelated note, has anyone seen Sandy Berger recently?