Comment by methodical | Hacker News Reader

Comment by methodical | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

My horror story of Ticketmaster; I recently bought standing-room-only tickets on short notice (<1wk) for an event near me, declining the additional fee to be able to refund my tickets. After more discussion with the others I was going with, I bought seated tickets instead through SeatGeek. Understanding I declined the ability to refund, I attempted to sell my tickets, but their system kept encountering an internal error preventing me from selling the tickets.

I reached out to support for assistance, and after several days of wasted time and run-around, they finally sent my issue to their engineering team saying they'd get back to me in 5 business days. Keep in mind I said I bought these tickets a week before the event, and they'd already wasted a few days giving me the run-around, functionally meaning I wouldn't be able to sell my tickets.

I attempted to charge back the purchase since they did not provide what I paid for (tickets I could sell), and they fought me and won somehow.

So thanks Ticketmaster, for sucking me out of hundreds of dollars for nothing more than bytes in your database that I couldn't do anything with. I hope they go bankrupt.

For anyone who is in my shoes and hasn't used Ticketmaster yet and might be tempted to give them a chance thinking all of these horror stories are just unlucky people- don't. I was naive to think that all of those companies with bad reputations are just the loud minority but Ticketmaster is the only one I've had the misfortune of finding out is seriously awful. Use SeatGeek or countless other platforms instead. Gun to my head to use Ticketmaster again I'd probably take the lead instead.

> I attempted to charge back the purchase since they did not provide what I paid for (tickets I could sell), and they fought me and won somehow.

This has happened to me twice now (though not with TicketMaster) and I was 100% in the right, and I lost. When I mentioned it on HN I was met with a lot of doubters. I think something has really changed regarding chargebacks.

Subjectively, I've seen a lot more conversation on the internet in the last few years about people using chargebacks, often in contexts where it's obvious to me as an outside observer that they're abusing the system by doing chargebacks compulsively without even trying to resolve things with the merchant.

It wouldn't surprise me if we're seeing a tragedy of the commons: chargebacks were easy as long as people were inculturated to use them as a last resort. Now that enough people reach for them first, banks have to look at each one more closely and they're going to err in the direction that takes less work.

100% chargebacks have changed in the last 2-3 years. I had a vendor send me the wrong part and refuse a refund. Even showing that they sent the wrong part despite ordering the correct part, my chargeback was denied.

I think a lot of banks have gotten weary of chargeback scams and taking the brunt of Amazon's binning practices.

Frankly, I'd think it better if they just cut off those bad retailers from the system, which is where the failing is. Alas, monopolies in -that- sector as far as I know prevent a single bank from doing a whole lot, especially when it's a vendor that does so much volume that all the legitimate chargebacks won't risk their standing with the payment processors.

> taking the brunt of Amazon's binning practices

Amazon has a lot of flaws, but I've never once had an issue returning an item for a full refund. I'm sure chargebacks are up in recent years, but I'm not sure it's Amazon that's to blame.

i think this is a reference to amazon's co-mingling of inventory regardless of where it came from, which results in businesses selling legitimate items having customers that get sent counterfeit goods.

Chargebacks are only as aggressive as the bank's customers are willing to enforce by leaving / suing against the vendor's level of customer expectation of service. Outside of a vocal minority, no one is going to want a card that doesn't work on amazon.

The playing field has been rapidly shrinking, and the customer base is much more stressed and unwilling to fight.

Not to mention that's also roughly around the timeframe that binding arbitration really got pervasive.

I'm not sure why. In many cases the merchant is charged a chargeback fee regardless of whether they are in the right or not. The bank gets paid either way.

I think a lot of people have been abusing chargebacks (e.g. "I didn't like the item, so I chargedback rather than returning it") and they clamped down on it, and it affects us normal people moreso.

They most definitely have some BS in the fine print about how they're not responsible for their awful system, as CYA for things like this. Truly scum of the earth.

If I had to guess, it is probably in their fine print, and the ability to pay for a refund would be a further refutation in a chargeback case.

That the ticket could not be sold via their system for whatever reason, is not a 'simple' act, although TBH maybe they should write to the DOJ or whatever... given some of the other stuff they've been caught doing, it would not at all surprise me to see some `if (!ticket.HadRefundOption) throw` hidden in their sales system.

TBH OP (Not a lawyer, not legal advice) you could always try small claims, they might not even show up and then you can collect a default judgement

You may win the judgement in small claims court, but how will you collect? That is another dilemma.

Isn't this where the hilarious "sheriff showed up at the office, graciously giving them 30 minutes to cut a check before he started to confiscate the chairs" stories come from?

Given that ticketmaster and live nation own venues all over the place, you should have somewhere for a sheriff to enforce a judgement.

What would be the problem? I imagine it'd be straightforward but I'm naive about this stuff.

> how they're not responsible for their awful system,

Yea, this is something that has to be protected by consumer rights laws. Otherwise companies will be like "It's unfortunate we have a monopoly, but fuck off and give us your money. Thank You. Your case has been closed".

which bank if you feel free comfortable sharing?

It was USAA. I don't know if this matters, but it was a Visa card.

For the record I'm very pleased with USAA overall and I think quite highly of them.

So you didn’t purchase ticket insurance, you got the tickets you paid for (which they can allow you to sell, at their discretion) and you filed a chargeback… why is that Ticketmaster’s problem? Like it sucks, to be sure, and Ticketmaster is awful, but I’m not sure why that chargeback would be considered legit.

If the tickets were sold as marketable (it sounds like they were) but were not in fact marketable, that's a problem.

If they were sold as marketable pending function(situation) with the implication that function(situation) was not simply "return false" but it turns out that function(situation) was actually "return false," that too is a problem.

Have you considered pursuing them in small claims court?

As much as I'd love to stick it to them, I haven't looked into it at all, assuming I'd have to pay more for legal counsel than the tickets were worth.

Legal counsel isn't allowed in small claims courts. It's just a question of whether it's worth your time.

edit: Ha! Here is a guide on how to sue Ticketmaster: https://fairshake.com/ticketmaster/how-to-sue/

Time and potentially some filing/service costs. You may be able to claim some of those as well (When I almost had to sue for a security deposit, in that Jurisdiction I could get some filing fees but not service costs for whatever reason...)

That said, if they don't show up, you'll get a default judgement. And if TM doesn't pay, they can have fun with it if there is an office nearby. A while back someone got a judgement against a bank, they didn't pay out. He came by with the sheriff and they started loading up chairs/etc when they hesitated to cut a check. :)

Or, whatever other 'collection' action you may have to motion for after the fact if they don't pay.

At least where I live (Texas, United States) from what I saw it's allowed to have legal counsel, although it may be uncommon. I'll have to look into the process more and see if there's anything I can pursue.

Actually, I'm forgetting...

Did you possibly agree to binding arbitration for all disputes?

I can't believe I forgot -that- loophole facepalm

I vaguely recall in california you can opt-out of arbitration within 30 days of a contract. don't know if there are details or if that is still the case.

> Legal counsel isn't allowed in small claims courts.

That's only true in a handful of states. Most allow you to bring a lawyer.

Small claims courts will generally have simpler and friendlier procedures so that even if a lawyer is allowed you will be fine without one in most cases.

Not a lawyer, but maybe a CLRA suit if you are in California. As I understand it - you may be able to get attorneys fees and punitive damages.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com