Oh, I got you now.Yes, understood.
But it is about the $7 , principle man
If they need to fuc you around over $7 imagine what they would do for $700 .. lol
Oh, I got you now.Yes, understood.
But it is about the $7 , principle man
If they need to fuc you around over $7 imagine what they would do for $700 .. lol
Cancel the card!I did use my credit card but I had also paid through sezzle so I can pay by installment. I had contacted Sezzle they said if the merchant did not start the refund process they will still charge me on schedule.
It's not about the $7 it's about our terms of service and letting the customer know that it is 100% normal to charge a processing fee for refunds, regardless of the amount. These processes are largely automated and require additional inputs to override this in exceptional circumstances. While upset over the processing fee this customer is now trying to say we took too long to process the refund, even though it was end of day yesterday and we processed it before mid-day today.I don’t know , but yours first response saying you would refund the $7.25 made it sound like you were mocking him over such a trivial amount of.
Your business must not be doing that well if you can’t swallow a whopping $7.25??? Lol
Here's my interpretation:
If you truly ordered an in stock item, with no mention of backorder, then you are being treated unfairly. As for the credit card refund, those take time so I'd give them the benefit of the doubt (unless lots of time has already passed).
If you THOUGHT the item was in stock, but was actually on backorder, then the restocking fee is justified.
Victory Ridge Sports
You're totally correct.At a really basic level:
If the item he ordered was shown as “in stock,” but it actually wasn’t. And when he asked for a refund, they still charged him a cancellation fee. That’s really unfair on VR’s part—the mistake was in their inventory, not the customer’s.
But maybe I'm misunderstanding the situation.
It’s been less than 24 hours and an agreement was already reached prior to this thread.Why, it says a lot about a company who gives you the fuc around over $7.25 ??
At a really basic level:
If the item he ordered was shown as “in stock,” but it actually wasn’t. And when he asked for a refund, they still charged him a cancellation fee. That’s really unfair on VR’s part—the mistake was in their inventory, not the customer’s.
But maybe I'm misunderstanding the situation.
I had already agreed to pay for the restocking fees which there are actually no stock to be restocked.It's not about the $7 it's about our terms of service and letting the customer know that it is 100% normal to charge a processing fee for refunds, regardless of the amount. These processes are largely automated and require additional inputs to override this in exceptional circumstances. While upset over the processing fee this customer is now trying to say we took too long to process the refund, even though it was end of day yesterday and we processed it before mid-day today.
especially when an agreement for a full refund including the credit card fee was already reached.Victory Ridge sounds pretty reasonable to me in this instance - the error in this case was on the part of the complaining customer. Making such a fuss over $7 is a bit much, but an aggrieved customer is an aggrieved customer I suppose, and must be dealt with if only to mitigate unwarranted damage to the business.
Certainly not something that I would have made a big deal to the point of "outing" a site sponsor over, that's for sure....
At the end of the day? Much ado about nothing IMHO.
You weren’t forthcoming with all the facts in your original post.My point is not the 5%, I'd already give it to him, my point is urge him to start the refund process so that Sezzle will not take a second payment from me![]()
Have your been following this thread at all?Yes, understood.
But it is about the $7 , principle man
If they need to fuc you around over $7 imagine what they would do for $700 .. lol
They haven’t changed him anything by what’s been laid out in this thread.At a really basic level:
If the item he ordered was shown as “in stock,” but it actually wasn’t. And when he asked for a refund, they still charged him a cancellation fee. That’s really unfair on VR’s part—the mistake was in their inventory, not the customer’s.
But maybe I'm misunderstanding the situation.
Hi Calvin,
I am sorry you felt so aggrieved you needed to come on here and complain over $7.34
As we explained to you on the phone, the part you asked for on the phone was not the part you ended up ordering online. When we identified the mistake, we offered you an alternative muzzle brake, the Rock Solid vs the Defiant brake which is only 5mm longer for no extra charge.
When you declined the substitution our staff member informed you of the 5% Credit Card fee which is not refundable normally as this is charged to us by the credit card company and comes out of our pocket for your mistake.
Please note, this is NOT a restocking fee. Restocking fees explained clearly in our terms of service are 15% and we were never going to charge you that at all.
As a show of good faith, we are going to waive the 5% Credit Card fee as well. We are notifying Sezzle immediately so that you don't get charged the next installment.
At least I have to state the whole thing in my original post right.You weren’t forthcoming with all the facts in your original post.
It's not about the $7 it's about our terms of service
There was no restocking fees.I had already agreed to pay for the restocking fees which there are actually no stock to be restocked.
And I had also send you a follow up email attempt to ask for the confirmation of the refund but no reply.
Plus, I've read your Google reviews that you tends to not refund your customers and block them on social media and not pick up their phones nor replying their emails; therefore, I have every reason to believed that you may do this to me as well.
And if I didn't come to this forum I probably won't see the refund processed.
But now it's all good and I hope you have a wonderful business in the future.




























