10-25-2024, 06:48 AM
I'm sure some of us have hit that wall..., trying to cancel recurring charges of 'subscription services' or 'licensing' that keep recurring even after the desire to cancel is duly expressed.
I offer as an example my own struggles trying to cancel several such contracts for "anti-virus," gaming subscriptions, etc.
You "logon" to the service, or navigate to customer service and lo and behold... there is no 'button' or app that will simply register the cancellation. The systems force you to bounce around the board, click after click, and even when you thin you're done, you find the charge is still drawing your money over and over, and the remedy seems 'out of reach' as you are forced to repeat and re-accomplish the same steps...a gain and again...
The problem itself is bad enough to have elicited exposure simply due to the number of people who are being fleeced of their money... to the collective tune of billions of dollars per year... and most (if not all) of those 'charges' are ultimately "irreversible."
Companies such as Blizzard, or Netflix, actually profit significantly from the simple overcomplication of a process which is clearly designed to "make it harder," or even "impossible" to simply cancel a recurring charge. And it became even more abusive as many of the beneficiaries of the charges separated themselves within the process through "third-party'' companies contracted by the providers to "handle subscription services" adding yet another entity through which users we obliged to deal with... just to say "goodbye." So much so, that the charges would recur, and the company could just say... "Oh. We don't handle that... you have to contact xxx because we are not the one's charging you" And the money siphoning game continues... while the frustrated user bleeds money into someone coffers for a service or subscription they no longer use or want.
Eventually the FTC and ancillary authorities could no longer "ignore" the complaints or hide from their legislated observation to act, lobbying not withstanding.
Sourced from ArsTechnica: Cable companies ask 5th Circuit to block FTC’s click-to-cancel rule
Apparently, reason prevailed and they had to officially act,
"... the Federal Trade Commission approved a rule that "requires sellers to provide consumers with simple cancellation mechanisms to immediately halt all recurring charges."
One week later, a Cable lobby group - NCTA-The Internet & Television Association and the Interactive Advertising Bureau trade group, sued the FTC in the Texas US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.
The lawsuits say the FTC order was "arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act," that it was unsupported by substantial evidence, and exceeds the FTC's statutory authority in violation of the US Constitution.
So the trade groups members are playing a "delay" strategy... based upon the wording we can see the stereotypical claims of "challenging statutory authority" and "questioning the Constitutional grounds" adding the egregious characterization of "capriciousness;" as if it were being done out of malicious glee, or spite.... poor babies, they won't get to keep sucking on the teat of profit with impunity.
For example; NCTA CEO Michael Powell claimed during a January 2024 hearing that "a consumer may easily misunderstand the consequences of canceling and it may be imperative that they learn about better options" and that the rule's disclosure and consent requirements raise "First Amendment issues."
The Interactive Advertising Bureau argued at the same hearing that the rule would "restrict innovation without any corresponding benefit" and "constrain companies from being able to adapt their offerings to the needs of their customers."
Imagine that, legally requiring the provider to accept contract cancellation is somehow "unfair" and a 'rights' violation.
There is a lot here to expose, and in my opinion, it all hinges on the "benefits" to the company... and zero obligation to accept 'user cancellation' as an honorable contract obligation.
I offer as an example my own struggles trying to cancel several such contracts for "anti-virus," gaming subscriptions, etc.
You "logon" to the service, or navigate to customer service and lo and behold... there is no 'button' or app that will simply register the cancellation. The systems force you to bounce around the board, click after click, and even when you thin you're done, you find the charge is still drawing your money over and over, and the remedy seems 'out of reach' as you are forced to repeat and re-accomplish the same steps...a gain and again...
The problem itself is bad enough to have elicited exposure simply due to the number of people who are being fleeced of their money... to the collective tune of billions of dollars per year... and most (if not all) of those 'charges' are ultimately "irreversible."
Companies such as Blizzard, or Netflix, actually profit significantly from the simple overcomplication of a process which is clearly designed to "make it harder," or even "impossible" to simply cancel a recurring charge. And it became even more abusive as many of the beneficiaries of the charges separated themselves within the process through "third-party'' companies contracted by the providers to "handle subscription services" adding yet another entity through which users we obliged to deal with... just to say "goodbye." So much so, that the charges would recur, and the company could just say... "Oh. We don't handle that... you have to contact xxx because we are not the one's charging you" And the money siphoning game continues... while the frustrated user bleeds money into someone coffers for a service or subscription they no longer use or want.
Eventually the FTC and ancillary authorities could no longer "ignore" the complaints or hide from their legislated observation to act, lobbying not withstanding.
Sourced from ArsTechnica: Cable companies ask 5th Circuit to block FTC’s click-to-cancel rule
Apparently, reason prevailed and they had to officially act,
"... the Federal Trade Commission approved a rule that "requires sellers to provide consumers with simple cancellation mechanisms to immediately halt all recurring charges."
One week later, a Cable lobby group - NCTA-The Internet & Television Association and the Interactive Advertising Bureau trade group, sued the FTC in the Texas US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.
The lawsuits say the FTC order was "arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act," that it was unsupported by substantial evidence, and exceeds the FTC's statutory authority in violation of the US Constitution.
So the trade groups members are playing a "delay" strategy... based upon the wording we can see the stereotypical claims of "challenging statutory authority" and "questioning the Constitutional grounds" adding the egregious characterization of "capriciousness;" as if it were being done out of malicious glee, or spite.... poor babies, they won't get to keep sucking on the teat of profit with impunity.
For example; NCTA CEO Michael Powell claimed during a January 2024 hearing that "a consumer may easily misunderstand the consequences of canceling and it may be imperative that they learn about better options" and that the rule's disclosure and consent requirements raise "First Amendment issues."
The Interactive Advertising Bureau argued at the same hearing that the rule would "restrict innovation without any corresponding benefit" and "constrain companies from being able to adapt their offerings to the needs of their customers."
Imagine that, legally requiring the provider to accept contract cancellation is somehow "unfair" and a 'rights' violation.
There is a lot here to expose, and in my opinion, it all hinges on the "benefits" to the company... and zero obligation to accept 'user cancellation' as an honorable contract obligation.
