ComicLink charging illegal fees

[Tomega]

This stuff pisses me off.

 

 

Note: 3% surcharge added for U.S. credit card purchasers, 4% for International credit card purchasers.

 

 

Explanation of Surcharges

[greggy]

Is it illegal in NY state?

[murph0]

As far as I know it's only illegal in California. Truth be told, the 3 percent surcharge on Paypal is by far lower than any other CC purchase method. At least he offers it, he could NOT offer it and then people would have to come up with 5 dollars PLUS 2.25 percent for one of the CC-to-money order companies.

 

Brian

[Tomega]

As far as I know it's only illegal in California. Truth be told, the 3 percent surcharge on Paypal is by far lower than any other CC purchase method. At least he offers it, he could NOT offer it and then people would have to come up with 5 dollars PLUS 2.25 percent for one of the CC-to-money order companies.

 

Brian

 

It is illegal in New York and several other states. I am going to write comiclink and if they are not responsive, I will report them. The following states prohibit merchants from adding surcharges to credit card transactions

 

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Florida

Kansas

Maine

Massachusetts

New York

Oklahoma

Texas.

 

Tom

[joe_collector]

At least he offers it, he could NOT offer it and then people would have to come up with 5 dollars PLUS 2.25 percent for one of the CC-to-money order companies.

 

Why do you always drag out this tired old horse? If a business wants to increase profits through credit cards sales, then they are free to do so, but not at the expense of consumer rights and state/federal laws.

 

You seem to think it would be great to use a CC at a restaurant, even if they made you wash dishes for the right to use it.

 

"At least he offers it" cries Murph, "and this Palmolive is so soft on my hands!".

[BachelorOfComix]

At least he offers it, he could NOT offer it and then people would have to come up with 5 dollars PLUS 2.25 percent for one of the CC-to-money order companies.

 

Brian

It's not like he's doing us a favor by offering it. Obviously, if he didn't offer it he would lose business as alot of people pay by credit card rather than money orders..........

[joe_collector]

It is illegal in New York and several other states. I am going to write comiclink and if they are not responsive, I will report them.

 

I totally agree and have no patience for these dealers who want all the advantages that come by having Credit Card sales, yet want to foist their "cost of business" over to the consumer in the form of back-door fees.

[Tomega]

. At least he offers it, he could NOT offer it and then people would have to come up with 5 dollars PLUS 2.25 percent for one of the CC-to-money order companies.

 

Brian

Brian -

That is not the point, it is illegal and bad business. At 3% he may even be making money on the surcharge ( a lot of credit card services charge half of what he is charging and I bet he still takes a tax deduction for credit card fees.) Its hurts consumers and credit companies. That is why it is illegal in NY and quite a few other states. Maybe he should just take money orders - how do you think that would affect his business? It would go in the toilet, most internet purchases are done through credit cards. If comiclink wants the benefits and increased business for credit cards then the fees is the price to pay. It is the cost of doing busines. If a company cannot stay within the confines of state law then they should do business somewhere else.

 

Tom

[fantastic_four]

How does this hurt consumers? If you don't want to pay credit card fees, then you can choose not to use it. I can't see how these laws protect anything except the credit card companies' vested interest in making it simple for consumers to pay via credit card.

[greggy]

How does this hurt consumers? If you don't want to pay credit card fees, then you can choose not to use it. I can't see how these laws protect anything except the credit card companies' vested interest in making it simple for consumers to pay via credit card.

How about having to pay X $$ today vs the same amount of $$ when your credit card bill becomes due? Plus...for better or for worse, some people live off their credit cards!

[uclapeterg]

As far back as I can remember, Comiclink has never absorbed the credit card processing fees.

[fantastic_four]

How about having to pay X $$ today vs the same amount of $$ when your credit card bill becomes due? Plus...for better or for worse, some people live off their credit cards!

 

I understand why consumers want to use them...but you CAN pay with credit card, he gives you the option, it just costs more. Another arrangement that would make sense is to split the CC fees--1.5% to the seller and 1.5% to the buyer, but the law prevents THAT, too.

 

It's not that I don't see the consumer point of view...I don't like paying those fees either and I'm not a seller. What I don't get is why the LAW has to step in and say to a business that they've either got to pay the fees or not offer credit cards...why is this something that should be regulated? I don't necessarily think there's nothing to the law, but there has to be more complex reasoning behind it than most of us have come up with so far. My uneducated conspiracy theory about this is that the credit card companies have lobbied these laws into existence to protect their own self-interest, but I could very definitely be wrong.

[joe_collector]

How does this hurt consumers? If you don't want to pay credit card fees, then you can choose not to use it.

 

Other than having to pay a premium based on the seller's payment options, I'll give you a good one:

 

It discriminates against those with physical disabilities and limited mobility, whose only source of commerce is through their credit cards. Paying a surcharge on CC payments, requiring online money order services, et al, imposes a financial burden on those least able to bear it.

[joe_collector]

As far back as I can remember, Comiclink has never absorbed the credit card processing fees.

 

Now this is interesting... Did a customer get all riled up and force them to "come clean" on their backdoor dealings?

[fantastic_four]

It discriminates against those with physical disabilities and limited mobility, whose only source of commerce is through their credit cards. Paying a surcharge on CC payments, requiring online money order services, et al, imposes a financial burden on those least able to bear it.

 

That makes sense...although I'd like to see the fee split in that case between the credit card company and the seller. This is something that wouldn't be hard to do...much like we have handicapped parking spaces, credit card companies should have to issue handicapped credit cards.

 

Most of my distaste for this credit card law is that the primary benefactor seems to be the credit card companies, and I think of credit card companies as VERY deep pockets leeching off of very shallow pockets, and in many cases, both the buyer and seller are shallow-pocketed. The one thing I like about what they do is the fraud protection...but the interest rates and profit margin they make from them makes the maximum of $3000 they pay to a small percentage of fraud cases per year seem rather trivial.

[joe_collector]

Hey FF, my reply has nothing to do with my thoughts on CC companies, only that to be fair to everyone, CC surcharges have been outlawed in many areas.

 

It's also not fair for Comiclink to be foisting the CC bill over to their clients, when enthical sellers pay for it out of their revenues. If I were a big seller, I'd be pissed at CL trying to get a free ride on their ticket.

[Tomega]

How does this hurt consumers? If you don't want to pay credit card fees, then you can choose not to use it. I can't see how these laws protect anything except the credit card companies' vested interest in making it simple for consumers to pay via credit card.

 

 

1. It is discrimatory against people who cannot people who have to pay by a credit card.

2. Why should two people pay a different price for an identical item.

3. Why should I have to pay money to get the protection of a credit card. I do not know him from hole in the wall. Now if I want to protect myself with credit card I have to pay him fees.

4. What about if you have no choice to use a credit card - such as paying for food if you had no money. What about renting a car? They require you to use a credit card ( for the most part.) should they be allowed to surcharge?

5. Where does it end - what is a fair fee ? 3%, 10%, 20 % ? Especially in circumstances in my last point.

 

If I want to use a credit card and the company wants to provide that service - they have to abide by the prevailing laws. Comiclink agreed to the terms of credit fair use and is not sticking to them.Just because this company does not think it is right, or you for that matter, they still have to abide by the laws. Like I said earlier, he is probably making money on it after tax deductions and varying percentages that the cc companies charge ( another reason for these laws.)

[cicamen]

Yah I just bought a few items from him and had to pay that 3% charge. I know its just like 30 cents more but he even tacks that 3% charge on to the $10.00 shipping.

[joe_collector]

Yah I just bought a few items from him and had to pay that 3% charge. I know its just like 30 cents more but he even tacks that 3% charge on to the $10.00 shipping.

 

Way to support the underground economy Jethro.

 

BTW, I require a $2.00 admin fee for viewing this message, and I'm tracking IPs.

[BachelorOfComix]

Yah I just bought a few items from him and had to pay that 3% charge. I know its just like 30 cents more but he even tacks that 3% charge on to the $10.00 shipping.

That's tacky & I will not to buy from them.