I now hold my own SimCity livestream show, visit www.twitch.tv/jordanmrichards :)

Thursday, 7 March 2013

Why you get banned for chargebacks on origin

Hey Mayors!

Today I was strolling along the forums when I came across a thread that stood out to me: Gamezone article on EA threatening bans.  After reading this I was shocked by that article by Gamezone. Their lack of knowledge of EA's reasoning really made their article quite the slander-type.

If you read it at first, like me and thought "Hey that's dumb, banned for a chargeback? That's NOT FAIR!" Then this article here, is perfect for you. As you'll soon realize EA's reasoning behind chargeback bans.

Firstly though, I would like to comment that: You are NOT wrong for wanting a chargeback, I totally understand why you would want one, having been given what you call a 'broken product'. The ban system when getting a chargeback is purely because of people who ruin it for YOU. That's right, if no one abused the refund system, EA would be handing out refunds with no bans!

Anyway, now that that is covered lets take a dive into the depths of why EA have decided to ban users who get a chargeback.

Having done research into selling online goods. I have been enlightened by how this system works, I am also working on my own kids website, which on there - I will be selling online goods. I will try not to make this too hard to understand, so I'll put it into simple terms.

First, think of a restaurant. Okay, now think of their sauces that they provide free of charge. If someone abuses that and takes, for example 30 tomato sauce from the trey, the restaurant now has to refill the tray, eating into profits. Because of this, they would have to resolve this issue. There is no way they could tell when someone is going to abuse the system, so they have to put LIMITS in to place. (So for a restaurant, they'd charge __ per each tomato sauce.)

Okay now think of this from the selling online goods perspective. When you sell online goods, there is NOTHING YOU CAN FULLY DO, TO PROVE THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN THE CUSTOMER THE GOODS THAT THEY HAVE PAYED FOR. So, keeping this bold fact in mind, anyone can go to paypal, or the service used to do the billing and say 'Excuse me, I have not received my online goods from EA, I would like my money back.' By law, they would have to get the money back & although EA knows for definite that they got they're goods (whatever game they purchased) and they could show for example - paypal they're origin account with the game they bought. For all paypal knows, they could of added that game to the account AFTER the requested money-back. Now then, think what would happen if you didn't get banned for money back on online goods. Someone could easily get every origin game for free, whilst people like me have payed a lot of money. THIS is what you call unfair and that is why EA bans every account that has had money back. Yes, they could just remove the game from the origin account, but for all they know, that person may be trying to steal games from origin, so this is just a 'just incase ban'. Which I think is pretty sensible.

I hope you now have a more clear understanding on EA's reasoning. I know I do and I see why they have done it. People have ruined it for you, if you wanted a chargeback it's not EA's fault that people abuse the system. So if you are looking for someone to blame, blame the system abusers! :D

I do however, see this has a very nasty situation for people who really want a chargeback for their broken goods. I do see how it can seem unfair, but that's just how it HAS to be. You should of expected issues with the launch before you bought it and also read origin's terms of use policies. You agreed that you read them, that's your fault if you lied.

Please do not slander EA for banning users for chargebacks, they just have to do it. It's the only solution to preventing users doing this time and time again. Staff at EA have to monitor these things, without a ban, wasted time and energy on the staff with a person who keeps trying to get games for free.

Thanks for reading mayors, link anyone on the forum to this post if they have doubts about EA's reasoning on the ban.

~JMR (Origin:jordan-m-richards, twitter:@JordanMRichards)


  1. Hope you're not that naive. They could just block your access to that particular game, not ban an entire account!

    1. "It's the only solution to preventing users doing this time and time again. Staff at EA have to monitor these things, without a ban, wasted time and energy on the staff with a person who keeps trying to get games for free."

    2. How about something like a "counter" that "counts" chargebacks? More than X results in a ban, where X is defined based on actual data. Pick X that minimizes abuse while impacting the smallest possible number of paying customers.

      Failing that, base the decision on what %age of the money spent on the account the chargeback relates to. If I've got a £1,000 Origin library and chargeback a £40, it's highly likely to be a genuine grievance.

      They're pretty radical, cutting-edge ideas but I'm sure EA could manage one if they cared enough about their customers to even try.

      Sorry, but this post is nothing but disingenuous spin. At best you're saying that EA care more about their profits lost to abusers than they do about keeping their paying customers happy. At worst, they're incompetent and incapable of solving simple problems.

      My personal opinions if that they're just so big that they don't give a damn if they upset customers.

  2. I like the way you write your blog. Will be following !

    1. Thank you so much! It means a lot :)

  3. Very enlightening. Sometimes we need to look deeper into an issue before throwing around blame and slander. Tks.

  4. So if I have 20 games on my account and I want a refund on 1 game because it doesn't work, I should lose all my games??? That's stupid. That's like if I buy $2,000 worth of electronics and want to return a $100 item I get $100 back and have to return all the items I bought and am out $1,900.

    1. Completely agree with your comment. When all is said and done if someone wants a refund on a faulty product then the company has failed, not the customer. It really isn't fair to have all of your Origin games disappear because they have failed to deliver a fully working and operational product as advertised. Unfortunately they get away with it because they are too large an organisation to actually be damaged by bad reviews etc and some people genuinely think it's acceptable to use the "well a few naughty children have ruined it for the rest of you" tactic as this article suggests.

    2. Yep, you are both spot on! :D

    3. If they remove access to other games you paid for after a successful charge back just contact your CC company again and issue charge backs for every other game citing retaliatory behavior. You WILL get your money back, as long as your original charge back was not falsified or bogus. Scare tactics are just that, so ignore them and don't be afraid to take back what is rightfully yours.

  5. Another example of why this country should be call the United Corporations of America not United States of America because it's no longer "we the people" it's "we the corporations". That's why lobbying should be made illegal. The corporations make the laws now.

  6. maybe if ea didn't poop all over its customer on a regular basis people might not feel the need to try to get something back from them. but ea constantly lets us down weather its a broken product, or as simple as keeping us informed on when next patch is coming. you cant boycott them they own over 50 percent of the gamming companies out there. what I really don't understand is why there isn't any class action law suites against them, I mean how many broken things can you sell and keep advertising to sell more of? that's like you buying a brand new car and there are know doors on it, and the dealer says the manufacturer will have them in some time next week just stop in and we will slap them on for you, will that be cash or credit please!!!

  7. "You agreed that you read them, that's your fault if you lied."

    No one reads those, and no one expects that you will read them. It's a surprise to both the company customer service and other people when things on such agreements are pointed at.

  8. Credit Card Not Present Transactions (CNP)- The Risks
    Mеrсhаntѕ whо ассерt сrеdit саrd-nоt-рrеѕеnt (CNP) trаnѕасtiоnѕ are at a highеr riѕk of rесеiving frаudulеnt ѕаlеs thаn a саrd present mеrсhаnt. Website and mobile рurсhаѕеѕ, teleрhоnе оrdеrѕ, аnd mail order ѕаlеѕ аrе typical еxаmрlеѕ оf when a сrеdit оr debit саrd wоuld be kеуеd-in, not ѕwiреd. Popular аmоng сrеdit card сriminаlѕ bесаuѕе of the anonymityаnd not having to swipe a credit card, merchants must tаkе special рrесаutiоnѕ tо ensure thеу will nоt bе the nеxt victims оf сrеdit саrd fraud.
    Businesses rеlу heavily оn еlесtrоniс payments—it’s thе nature of offline and оnlinе shopping. Virtually аll оnlinе trаnѕасtiоnѕ are completed uѕing credit cards, and e-commerce businesses needonline payment processing available fоr their сuѕtоmеrѕ.
    Regards : ChargebackExpertz.com

  9. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and for inspiring us.
    Keep it up and continue on what your doing. Visit my site too.




Hey, why not post a comment as feedback? I'd sure appreciate it.