Discussion of article "Payments and payment methods" - page 12
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
This means that now any withdrawal of funds will depend on the response of the service desk. And in any case there may be a "reference" to their reading of the terms of depositing funds to the account, i.e. one way ticket) - one way.
Don't get too excited. There's no enemy for honest sellers.
There's no doubt about that. What's troubling is, as soon as the need arises. Is this a one-off concession from MQ, or is it on a permanent basis? Or maybe every time you need to withdraw money, you have to bow down? What if it's urgent? And if there's trouble, ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh....
Maybe it's still better to take and once to fix the situation after the seller's appeal to ServiceDesk with a request to cancel this unfortunate entry from the card? The money entered from the card, all to a cent spent inside the service itself. Well, let them cancel the card input already. Maybe it will require some amount of money to be entered from webmoney, which can then be withdrawn, and then forget everything like a bad dream, and quietly continue to use the input / withdrawal, rather than thinking - what does it mean "... as soon as you have such a need". It has already appeared from the moment of registration by the seller with all passport data and debiting the amount entered from the card. There is no more money that could be exchanged in such a situation, using this resource.
There's no doubt about that. The other thing that's troubling is: as soon as the need arises. Is this a one-time concession on the part of MQ, or on a permanent basis? Or maybe every time you need to withdraw money, you have to bow down? What if it's urgent? And if there's trouble, ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh....
Maybe it's still better to take and once to fix the situation after the seller's appeal to ServiceDesk with a request to cancel this unfortunate entry from the card? The money entered from the card, all to a cent spent inside the service itself. Well, let them cancel the card input already. Maybe it will require some amount of money to be entered from webmoney, which can then be withdrawn, and then forget everything like a bad dream, and quietly continue to use the input / withdrawal, rather than thinking - what does it mean "... as soon as you have such a need". It has already appeared from the moment of registration by the seller with all passport data and debiting the amount entered from the card. There is no more money that could be exchanged in such a situation, using this resource.
And maybe just order the withdrawal of $1 and calm down? Why fight with windmills?
I agree, this point is not thought out, but apparently there are not many such fly-in sellers, so they are not in a hurry to fix it.
Can't we just order a $1 withdrawal and calm down? Why fight with windmills?
I agree, this point is not thought out, but apparently there are not many such fly-in sellers, so they are not in a hurry to fix it.
And here we go again. A man entered money from Webmoney. The output works great. He registered as a seller, works, earns, withdraws. And if you need to enter money from the card? Entered and ..., that's it, ... it's over?
For me - it is better to freeze the amount of money entered from the card for withdrawal, and the rest of what is in the account - withdraw as much as you can. With each new spending of credits, reduce the frozen amount for withdrawal by the amount of money spent. Everything is clear, simple, controlled and transparent.
Can't we just order a $1 withdrawal and calm down? Why fight with windmills?
I agree, this point is not thought out, but apparently there are not many such fly-in sellers, so they are not in a hurry to fix it.
It has already been done, but as an exception. Now again withdrawal is impossible and all because of the first top-up. If after this one appeal it would be possible to withdraw again, but no - again it is impossible. People just do not want any withdrawal to be "as an exception" with an obligatory appeal to the service desk.
There's no doubt about that. The other thing that's troubling is: as soon as the need arises. Is this a one-time concession on the part of MQ, or on a permanent basis? Or maybe every time you need to withdraw money, you have to bow down? What if it's urgent? And if there's trouble, ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh....
Maybe it's still better to take and once to fix the situation after the seller's appeal to ServiceDesk with a request to cancel this unfortunate entry from the card? The money entered from the card, all to a cent spent inside the service itself. Well, let them cancel the card input already. Maybe it will require some amount of money to be entered from webmoney, which can then be withdrawn, and then forget everything like a bad dream, and quietly continue to use the input / withdrawal, rather than thinking - what does it mean "... as soon as you have such a need". It has already appeared from the moment of registration by the seller with all passport data and debiting the amount entered from the card. There is no more money that could be exchanged in such a situation, using this resource.
I think I voiced above a good solution to improve the service. Try to address to servicedesk with a similar proposal. Justify it, argue it. If they will agree - it will be good for everyone.
The coolest solution, if they have logistical problems would be this (considered as a suggestion of the administration) : "Zero" records in their database of the method of the first deposit of funds to the user's account, if it was from a card and big red letters to write the following verbatim when entering from Kiwi or Card - "After this method of replenishment you will not be able to withdraw earned or transferred funds from the account, regardless of further methods of replenishment".