I have just had an automatic refund applied to one of my sales. The person said they sent multiple support requests but I never received any of them. I do notice that there was only the one request, not multiple as stated.

I only received a notification when the person asked for a refund. I answered the ticket stating that I had not received a support request but that I was willing to help them.

I then receive a notice that the refund has happened.

I did not get a chance to deal with the ticket and am wondering about the refund process.

How is the refund arbitrated?
What time length after a sale can a refund be requested?
What constitutes the terms for a sale and refund?
How can I the seller object to a refund?
Who is in charge of the refunds on concrete5's side?

Answers to these questions would be appreciated.

View Replies:
tallacman replied on at Permalink Reply
Refunds are (were) at the discretion of Franz.
You can object in the forums, here like you have.
PineCreativeLabs replied on at Permalink Reply
Here's the official refund policy for the Concrete marketplace:
dexcode replied on at Permalink Reply
I have read the refund policy and must state that I have concerns with the refund of my sale.

First off, is I never received a notification from concrete5 about the ticket so had no idea there was support needed. The original support ticket was created on Dec 16 2016 at 1:16 am. I only received notification of the request when the buyer asked for a refund on the Jan 13, 2017 at 3:46 am.

Second is the buyer stated that they requested support multiple times, which is not true as there was only the original support request, no other ones.

Third is I replied to the support request as soon as I knew it was there on Jan 13, 2017 at 4:02 am after the refund was requested, which I did receive a notification from concrete5. I offered help if the buyer could describe the issue.

Fourth is the buyer stated they needed help in setup. This does not mean the add-on does not work as stated, it just means the buyer could not set it up. This is not my fault. The documentation for the add-on is pretty comprehensive as are the installation vids from your site.

Fifth is the refund was automatically applied without any recourse from me, even after I offered help. This does not seem to be fair as I have not had a chance to comment on things.

Sixth is the add-on has been purchased many times with this being the only refund requested. If there were issues with setup then they should have been noticeable from past purchases.

I am requesting a review of this refund.
mnakalay replied on at Permalink Reply

I understand your frustration and it's not the first time I hear stories like yours so it is concerning.

I even had people buying an add-on and then asking for a refund "just because"

Now my 2 cents on this situation are:

You lost only the money they paid you, you didn't incur any extra charges and, hopefully, they didn't slam you with a terrible review?

2 things you can do: send them a last message explaining it is a misunderstanding and you're sorry it went that way. Don't point fingers, don't take responsibility for things you didn't do. Just a simple courteous message as a show of goodwill and good faith. Then move on.

And next time, when you are alerted to a situation by a request for a refund, first, contact Franz urgently because he's the one who grants refunds. Explain the situation to him. Then contact the client and try to fix it.

Contacting Franz first will most likely (but not certainly) give you time to address the situation and defuse it.
dexcode replied on at Permalink Reply
A have just had another refund applied to my account. The issue this time is that there is no reason for the refund at all. The add-on was purchased one day and then refunded lease than 24 hours later.

There was no communication from the purchaser or from concrete5 except for the refund notice.

Now as stated by concrete5's terms and conditions on refunds:

"You can request a refund if you are unable to get the add-on to work, or if the add-on does not perform as claimed on its marketplace page."

Who is in charge of the refunds? As far as I can see concrete5 are not following their own terms. As a marketplace seller, I need confidence that the people in charge are doing the right thing by us.

This last refund is far from the right thing. There needs to be a system where the seller has a right to object to a refund. At the moment we seem to have no rights at all even though stated in the terms.

I would like to see the reason for the refund and a statement explaining why the terms are being ignored by the person who ok'd the refund.

Not happy seller.
mesuva replied on at Permalink Reply
I had the same thing happen in the last day or so, two sales (one of them a multi pack) by the same customer.

Was your customer Jost44?

Looking at that user now, they've been flagged as a Troll and they have no messages or other badges.

My guess here is that Franz has manually processed these refunds because that user has used a stolen credit card and has racked up a whole bunch of sales that now are being cancelled. I recall this happening once before.

So I can't really comment on your initial refund, but for your more recent one if it's the same user I think the circumstances are different - basically the sale is voided, not being refunded.
dexcode replied on at Permalink Reply
Hi mesuva,

Thank you for the explanation. It was indeed Jost44.

I can understand the need for a void/refund in that situation but feel that I should have been notified about the circumstances of the refund and not just a refund notice.

A marketplace is supposed to communicate with buyer and seller. From what I can see there is not much communication from the marketplace to the seller.

When a refund is requested, then the seller should have the chance to object BEFORE the refund is processed. Refunds should ONLY happen if they follow the terms set out on the refund policy page, not just because the buyer requested it. They need a valid reason for a refund.

A refund notice should state the reason for the refund, not just tell me that a refund has taken place.

So when a refund is requested, then the buyer should have to state the reason for the refund. The seller should then have a chance to rebut the refund reason and if successful then there is no refund. If the reason does not fall into the concrete5 refund policy then the refund should be rejected.

This wishy-washy way of doing refunds is far from acceptable and needs to be addressed.
mnakalay replied on at Permalink Reply

I think this is not to be taken as the way things are usually done. Jost44 bought many add-ons from many people. He bought 2 of my add-ons, one as a single, and the other one as a 5-pack.

Usually, there is communication when it comes to refunds unless the buyer can demonstrate to Franz that you were unresponsive and unsupportive. In which case you might not get much in terms of communication.

In this situation, however, I think the system is simply not set for batch communication. I might be wrong but my understanding is Franz can email the whole community or individuals but not a selected group. So if he had to take money away from 30 sellers, communicating 1 by 1 might have been unpracticable.

Many things need to be addressed in how the marketplace works, I agree, maybe this is one of them.
ramonleenders replied on at Permalink Reply
As "mnakalay" explains above, this person is a scammer. He is using a stolen creditcard or something. You can often see at the registration date of a person if it's legit or not. If he just registered the day he orders AND you get a refund a day or two after, it's a troll indeed. He bought like 22 licenses of my Add-Ons, totalling around $550.00 (many 5-packs too). I saw this happening and contacted Franz right away, because this is disturbing for both the marketplace, marketplace holder AND the sellers. I don't want all these emails and sold licenses if the guy isn't legit. It will mean I will not get money anway, so rather not get any sales from this guy (he probably still is using the licenses in some way, but hey, can't do anything about that now).

As it's bought with "stolen" money, it's quite a valid reason to refund. It could be communicated better/different, but it's a legit refund if you ask me. What do you think happens when there are sales on "Steam" with stolen creditcards? You think the game companies get money anyway? Would you be paying others, even if you have to return the money yourself? Guess not. It's just quite unfortunate, but you have to realize people are doing shit like this and no one will profit from this in the end...
mnakalay replied on at Permalink Reply
To add to this, the alternative is the rightful owner of the credit card was going to warn his bank and ask for a chargeback. When it comes to that, the money is taken back, Franz is charged a fee because it is a chargeback and it hurts his "credit" with the Payment processor (Paypal I suppose).

Whatever you do, always do your best to avoid a chargeback.
ramonleenders replied on at Permalink Reply
Correct. And even more time will pass and you may be more pi$$ed your money is taken ;)

As for the "fee", he'd have to pay $20 per incident. So it would have been like $ 120.00 for my orders only already. Go figure what the total amount would be..
Steevb replied on at Permalink Reply
I had the same issue yesterday, a 5 pack purchase and refund within twelve hours. Customer ‘Jost44’?
This has happened before with a stolen credit card and Franz mentioned to me last time it cost him/company a lot of money to put right.

There’s little point in looking to address any issues the purchaser has, when the purchase is fraudulent. Can’t get stressed, just have let it go.

My concern is that possibly the add-on is downloaded before the refund. Therefore the add-on becomes free and without limitation on usage!
Might need to look at giving licence numbers or something.
Remove the option to ‘Download Archive’ and only allow ‘Association’.
Then I suppose none of the above will work, if once the add-on is on the server it’s just a matter of ftp to bring down and give out!!

Maybe credit check purchaser before allowing any items to be bought?

Oh well, c’est la vie, I got work to do…