[Asterisk-Users] VoiPSupply Dot Com

[The VoIP Connection]

I know I'm running the risk of fanning the flames on an already belabored
thread here, but there is some misinformation flying around.

Credit card fraud is an unfortunate fact of life, and it costs everyone who
isn't perpetrating it money.  There is no single universally agreed on
process that will guarantee a merchant protection.  If there was, somebody
would figure out how to game it.

Different banks have different merchant account requirements, e-businesses
use different procedures to protect themselves, and of course different
businesses tolerate different levels of fraud.

Some vendors require that items be shipped to an address on file to protect
themselves. Others (like us) do not. We have a process for validating the
card for these cases which our bank has agreed is adequate in most cases.
It's a little more time consuming but it is something that many of our
customers require.

There was a misunderstanding, let's move on. I am really tired of seeing
"VoiPSupply Dot Com" every time I open a digest email... 

Michael Crown
Managing Partner
www.thevoipconnection.com
321.989.6728 ext. 611
sip:611 at voiceserver.thevoipconnection.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt [mailto:mhoppes at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 8:00 AM
> To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
> Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] VoiPSupply Dot Com
> 
> He is right Karl.   Without the ship-to being on file with the bank..
> the company can be held responsible for fraudulant purchases.
> 
> On 5/31/05, Karl J. Vesterling <kjv at ken-ton.com> wrote:
> >  
> >  I'm amazed that this thread keeps going... 
> > 
> >  About the claim of Ship-To being on file with bank...
> > 
> >  CDW doesn't have a problem with it...  Ingram Micro doesn't have a 
> > problem with it.  Merisel doesn't have a problem with it.  Digi-Key 
> > doesn't have a problem with it...  Why would Voip-Supply???
> > 
> >  We accept packages every day with the same Ship-To address 
> specified 
> > to Voip-Supply...
> > 
> >  Additional comments dispursed throughout....
> > 
> >  At 02:32 PM 5/27/2005, you wrote:
> >  
> > On 5/27/05, Karl J. Vesterling <kjv at ken-ton.com> wrote:
> >  >  At 08:59 AM 5/27/2005, you wrote:
> >  >
> >  > [ snip for brevity ]
> >  >  I just wanted to clarify ... this isn't a 
> voipsupply.com problem 
> > at all,  > but  >  rather a courier screwup... which 
> happens anywhere 
> > and at anytime...
> > right?
> >  >
> >  >  TWO screw ups in the shipment.
> >  >  1.) It was shipped to the Bill-To address.  Since there 
> is no one 
> > there  > during the day I had to sit and wait for it lest 
> it not be delivered.
> > 
> >  This screw up has to do with the person that ordered it, 
> because they  
> > didn't have the ship to address on file with their bank.
> >  This was not a paypal transaction.
> >  The PO had BIG BOLD LETTERS - "Ship To:"
> > 
> >  I'm unaware of any practices with the bank that requiring Ship-To 
> > addresses to be on file with them.
> >  Perhaps your financial institution is a bit different?
> > 
> >  
> >  
> > >  2.) when an order is placed on a Tuesday AM (or) Monday PM, and 
> > > it's
> >  > priority overnight, and it's across town, and the 
> tracking number 
> > was  > supplied on Wednesday one would expect that it would show up 
> > Thursday, not  > Friday.
> > 
> >  See above, again this is a screw up that happened because 
> of the one  
> > that ordered it, by NOT having the ship to address on file 
> with their  
> > bank.
> >  Where do you get this Ship-To on file w/ Bank idea?
> > 
> >  
> >  
> > Anyhow, you were already answered before that it had to do 
> because YOU  
> > didn't have the address on file with your bank. Why are you 
> repeating  
> > this lie that it is voipsupply.coms fault?
> >  Be repeating it you make yourself look more like a politician or 
> > media  person, but certainly not someone that is in the electronic  
> > engineering business. No I will not believe it because I read it  
> > twice, so stop it.
> >  No lie...  Fact.  There is a difference...
> > 
> >  
> > > 
> >  >  So, what we have here is one problem compounded by 
> another, none 
> > on behalf  > of the courier.
> > 
> >  Exactly, but on behalf of the ordered.
> > 
> >  If you give a Ship-To address that is NOT on file with 
> your bank, you  
> > will NOT get it to that address, and it WILL delay shipping.
> >  Gosh dang spin doctors...
> >  Where does it state this???
> >  Prove it.
> > 
> > 
> >  
> >  
> > 
> >  Best Regards,
> >  Karl J. Vesterling
> >  E-Mail: kjv at ken-ton.com
> >  ________________________________
> >  Telephone:
> >  Washington DC: (202) 448-3009 Extension 0  Annapolis MD: (240) 
> > 524-6706 Extension 0  Bethesda MD: (301) 576-3014 Extension 
> 0  Niagara 
> > Falls NY: (716) 286-9175 Extension 0  Buffalo NY: (716) 608-1121 
> > Extension 0  ________________________________  Yahoo Messenger: 
> > karl_vesterling
> >  ICQ: 1548052
> >  AOL Instant Messenger: n2vqm
> >  ________________________________
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> >   
> > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > 
> >
> 
>