News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on TIFU by using Stripe as a payment processor for my small business. Parent comment

Re:TIFU by using Stripe as a payment processor for my small ... by DebtDeflation on Thursday July 28, 2022 @08:37AM (#32263466)
Flagging a larger than normal transaction is fine. Placing a 120 day hold is very much NOT fine. This should be resolvable within 24-48 hours after the business provides the requisite documentation showing the transaction to be legitimate. The root cause is a completely automated process devoid of any capability for human review like we see with so many online platforms these days.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:TIFU by using Stripe as a payment processor for my small ... by ceejayoz on Thursday July 28, 2022 @09:07AM (#32263755)
Documentation can be faked, and 120 days wasn't picked randomly; customers have that long to dispute charges.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:TIFU by using Stripe as a payment processor for my small ... by sgc on Thursday July 28, 2022 @09:51AM (#32264269)
It is a tiny amount of money comparatively speaking. They should not put a freeze over a couple of days. If there is no dispute, then their risk drops exponentially. If the amount were much higher, they should just devote more human resources to verifying the charge, and still keep the frozen period low.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:TIFU by using Stripe as a payment processor for my small ... by ceejayoz on Thursday July 28, 2022 @10:17AM (#32264634)
> It is a tiny amount of money comparatively speaking.

It's hardly the only charge of this nature.

[ Parent | on HN ]