Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    1624 points yaythefuture | 22 comments | | HN request time: 0.868s | source | bottom

    Saw https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32261868 from a couple weeks ago and figured I'd share my own story.

    3 weeks ago, I woke up to a pissed off customer telling me her payments were broken. My startup uses Stripe Connect to accept payments on behalf of our clients, and when I looked into it, I found that Stripe had decided to deactivate her account. Reason listed: 'Other'.

    Great.

    I contact Stripe via chat, and I learn nothing. Frontline support says "we'll look into it." Days go by, still nothing. Meanwhile, this customer is losing a massive amount of business and suffering.

    After a few days, my team and I go at them from as many angles as possible. We're on the phone, we're on Twitter, we're reaching out to connections who work there / used to work there, and of course, we reach out to patio11. All of these support channels give us nothing except "we've got a team looking into it". But Stripe's frontline seems to be prohibited from offering any other info, I assume for liability reasons. "We wouldn't want to accidentally tell you the reason this happened, and have it be a bad one."

    We ask: 1. Why was this account flagged? "I don't have that information" 2. What can we do to get this fixed? "I don't have access to that information. 3. Who does? "I don't have access to that information" 4. What can you do about this? "I've escalated your case. It's being reviewed."

    I should mention at this point that I've been running this business since 2016, my customers have been more or less the same since then, and I've had (back when it was apparently possible) several phone conversations with Stripe staff about my business model. They know exactly who our customers are and what services we offer, and have approved it as such.

    After a week of templated email responses and endless anxiety, we finally got an email from Stripe letting us know that they had reviewed the account and reactivated it. We never got a reason for why any of this had happened, despite asking for one multiple times. Oh well, still good news right? Except nope, this was only the beginning.

    This morning I woke up to an email that about 35% of my client accounts had been deactivated and were "Under review", the kicker here being that one of those accounts is the same one they already reviewed last week! This is either the work of incompetent staff or (more likely) a bad algorithm. No reasonable human could make this mistake after last week's drama.

    So currently, my product doesn't work for 35% of my customers. Cue torrent of pissed off customer emails.

    And the best part is, this time I have an email from Stripe this time: Apparently these accounts are being flagged, despite the notes on our file, and despite the review completed literally last week, as not in compliance with Stripe's ToS. They suggest that if I believe this was done in error, I should reach out to customer support. Oh, you mean the same customer support that can't give me literally any information at all other than "We have a team looking into it"? The same customer support that won't give me any estimates as to how long it's going to take to put this fire out? The same customer support that literally looked into this a week ago and found no issues!?

    I feel like I'm going crazy over here. These accounts have hundreds of thousands of dollars in them being held hostage by an utterly incompetent team / algorithm that seems to lack any and all empathy for the havoc they wreak on businesses when they pull the rug out from under them with no warning, nor for the impact they have on customers when they all of a sudden lose all ability to make money. And all that for an account that has been using Stripe for nearly 7 years without issue!

    This goes so far beyond "customer support declining at scale." If lack of customer support means that critical integrations start to fail, that's not a customer support failure, that's a fundamental business failure.

    1. phendrenad2 ◴[] No.32855923[source]
    According to previous posts* this company sells something related to cannibis.

    I'd love to know why certain categories are always flagged or silently banned. Cannibis, sex toys, porn, crypto, etc. Payment processors seem to always give these categories the worst service and whenever a company is nuked like this, it's usually one of these categories. Why is that? It almost feels like there's some secret government organization tasked with upholding religious values telling payment processors to fuck with random accounts and swearing them to secrecy. I obviously don't believe that, but it's equivalent to the scale of whatever is going on due to natural causes. I don't believe that these industries are prone to higher than usual fraud. So what is it?

    * - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32263429

    replies(12): >>32856107 #>>32856596 #>>32856856 #>>32857276 #>>32857309 #>>32857520 #>>32857676 #>>32860396 #>>32860497 #>>32860882 #>>32863147 #>>32869359 #
    2. jdminhbg ◴[] No.32856107[source]
    Re: cannabis, it's federally illegal and you can get into serious legal trouble for facilitating payments. There have been several attempts to write legislation to fix this so state-legal cannabis operations don't have to work entirely with cash, but none have passed yet.

    Re: porn, the issue is its sky-high chargeback rates.

    3. carrotcarrot ◴[] No.32856596[source]
    "whatever is going on due to natural causes" lol
    4. soared ◴[] No.32856856[source]
    In addition to the other comment about cannabis, crypto is financial and comes with many laws and regulations that a payment process would need to be very aware of and follow.

    Porn is ripe with fraud/theft/bad actors/etc.

    It’s not a shadow government, it’s common sense.

    replies(1): >>32857920 #
    5. dflock ◴[] No.32857276[source]
    > I don't believe that these industries are prone to higher than usual fraud.

    This belief might be wrong - or at least not shared by payment processors?

    6. jabart ◴[] No.32857309[source]
    Credit card processing requires a sponsor bank, and that sponsor bank sets what categories they want to process for. If you fall out of that, or the account gets reviewed a second time and someone thinks it falls into one of those categories, the account is shut down. OF almost had this happen to them because of their sponsor bank and I've seen it happen for other companies from the underwriting department (not stripe, another processor).
    7. mellavora ◴[] No.32857520[source]
    re: sex toys, potential felony in texas

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_obscenity_statute

    or google "texas six dildoes"

    <edit> https://www.theregister.com/2016/12/13/us_purchase_governmen...

    and https://onwardtexas.org/trending/is-it-illegal-to-own-more-t...

    which was posted on HN about 3 months ago and flagged.

    </edit>

    replies(1): >>32857862 #
    8. themoonisachees ◴[] No.32857676[source]
    Cannabis is federally illegal, sex toys and porn have incredibly high chargeback rates and crypto has this handy thing where since you can't reverse anything, as soon as the crypto you bought is out of the custody wallet you cant get the thing back so the chargeback rates are also very high.

    Don't believe me? Ask anyone at the front desk of a hotel the rate of attempted chargebacks for ppv porn.

    You can get vetted by banks, visa and co for those things (maybe not cannabis with US companies) but the fees are considerably higher because of the chargeback rates. This is why onlyfans announced then backtracked the porn ban, visa told them "either you're paying us like you distribute porn, or you stop doing it".

    replies(2): >>32862370 #>>32865524 #
    9. thro388 ◴[] No.32857862[source]
    You could rape someone with a dildo, it is basically a gun and should be banned as such!
    10. pas ◴[] No.32857920[source]
    It is a shadow government but it also makes sense.
    replies(1): >>32861569 #
    11. lmm ◴[] No.32860396[source]
    > It almost feels like there's some secret government organization tasked with upholding religious values telling payment processors to fuck with random accounts and swearing them to secrecy. I obviously don't believe that, but it's equivalent to the scale of whatever is going on due to natural causes.

    Operation Choke Point pretty much worked like that.

    I don't have a problem with the government fucking with the cannibis business given that it's still federally illegal, but the messing with legal businesses needs to stop.

    12. motohagiography ◴[] No.32860497[source]
    It may be related to a general policy of burning grey market businesses that has been going on for a decade or so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point

    While I don't know what the incentives are for payment processors, they act as though they are under a quota, similar to SARs in banks, where it's mainly about showing they are getting petty crime as a means to protect their interest in partnership level crime.

    13. Cederfjard ◴[] No.32860882[source]
    Am I missing something? That thread from almost two months ago is about a completely different business. OP linked it in his initial post, mentioning that reading it was what triggered him to post this one, but nothing more than that.
    14. soared ◴[] No.32861569{3}[source]
    It’s not a shadow government if the laws and policy are public. You can read all of the laws.
    replies(3): >>32862444 #>>32867906 #>>32876559 #
    15. jesterson ◴[] No.32862370[source]
    If it's the case, perhaps it makes more sense to block based on chargeback rate (that's actually what payment processors are doing) instead of blocking on nature of business?
    replies(1): >>32865653 #
    16. deely3 ◴[] No.32862444{4}[source]
    Basically "educate yourself", yes?
    17. iuiz ◴[] No.32863147[source]
    Nice to see my post linked. Last time I was accused of being a shill account, however I just do not post often. :D
    18. remram ◴[] No.32865524[source]
    > the front desk of a hotel the rate of attempted chargebacks for ppv porn

    To be honest this seems more like a hotel problem than a porn problem. E.g., I viewed it by mistake, I didn't understand the pricing, etc. I would expect that there is a similar amount of complaints about the hotel room's minibar and snacks that are lying there but charged an incredible rate afterwards if touched.

    19. remram ◴[] No.32865653{3}[source]
    This seems incredibly obvious, and would probably be fairly easy once your business picks up volume. That or make you absorb the charge backs yourself, or via an independently-contracted insurance.
    20. from ◴[] No.32867906{4}[source]
    > It’s not a shadow government if the laws and policy are public. You can read all of the laws.

    This is not really true. The BSA says banks have to maintain an "adequate AML program" and policies to "reasonably know your customers identities" or whatever. These policies are deliberately vague. Then based on these deliberately vague rules, banks have to make a compliance program that usually goes above and beyond the minimum that is required (in order to avoid being fined). These compliance programs that specify what kinds of behavior and transactions to consider risky are never made public.

    21. psteinweber ◴[] No.32869359[source]
    There’s a really good Podcast from FT on the payment issues with porn. It’s more complicated than the chargeback rates. If you want to go down that rabbit hole: https://www.ft.com/content/762e4648-06d7-4abd-8d1e-ccefb74b3... The podcast is quite a nice history wrap-up on online payments. Episode 8 addresses the current situation with credit card companies most detailed.
    22. pas ◴[] No.32876559{4}[source]
    there's no FOIA for banking processes that affect you. consumer finance protection regulations are also a complete joke (oh no, banks have to file some more reports, oh the horror).