The chances of chargebacks is slim to none; I would be HIGHLY surprised if there ever was a single one. This is for customers under contract for a service, who are already happily paying monthly. We just want to give them a way to pay online, rather than by check.
This is for a corporate entity, and the top people balked when told they would have to be guarantors. Maybe the corporate officers don't understand what they are agreeing to. I suppose I could have something in the proposal that explores the issue and makes it less scary, but at this point I would like to provide the information they asked for, one of the requirements being no guarantors. Perhaps if I could find a gateway that will discuss the option of both, I could present the price difference between the two and let them decide. I just need to know who will do it so I can start the dialog. Thank you. On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Justin Scott <jscott-li...@gravityfree.com > wrote: > > > Now, here is the thing: The client REFUSES to sign > > as a guarantor on the account. > > As an aside, HUGE red flag there. Why won't they guarantee their own > merchant account? Are they expecting high rates of complaints or > chargebacks? If they won't do it, you certainly should NOT do it for them. > Many merchant providers won't service a new business without a guarantor, > and those that will are going to be looking hard at the kinds of products > they sell to gauge risk and you can expect higher fees and percentages or > even a reserve balance requirement as a result. > > > -Justin > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:333223 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
