Hacker News Reader

Comment by cabirum | Hacker News Reader

It's not like they intentionally "tricked you" into buying something, it was just a bug in a web form. Bugs happen.

But you're responsible for your bugs, so it's their job to offer easy refunds in that case.

Indeed, but the article doesn't say they refused a refund. The bug seems deeper than just their front end, their back-end is showing the "wrong" (actually right) subscription selected, but their payment provider clearly charged for the wrong one.

So I guess they now need to consolidate their payments received (likely via a payment provider) with their own system to see if this or any other orders are inconsistent.

They should refund the OP, and I suspect we'll see them do just that. But they also need to both fix their front end but also add automated systems to consolidate payments with orders to see if they match.

OP here. They haven't refused of a refund per se, but since I am unable to reach them with the second request - it is comparable to "let's leave this be and maybe it will go away".

If it's really just a front-end bug, chances are they're getting lots of calls just like yours. You may just be part of a pile of callback tickets once the bug is fixed and all the refunds are processed. Or, they could still be trying to track down the root cause of the bug in the first place.

There is also a branch of optimization aimed to produce "bugs" like this. I wouldn't be too surprised if they knew about this and just don't want to fix it as it produces orders.

http://searchengineland.com/evil-conversion-when-optimizatio...

Perhaps. But if they are aware that their system has a bug, and that bug results in them getting extra money from customers without the customer's consent, then you're entering into a lot of tricky waters. The clock has started ticking for them before they enter "fraud" category.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com