Ace Construction of Nashwauk

Answer:We have provided the customer with specific information from our computer system, including screen images and reports, which showed her that our software (STEP in the process) authorized her credit card one time for $against an estimated order total of $Our system authorizes a slightly higher amount than the estimated total because the shipping cost is estimated (and is clearly shown as such on our website) and may rise slightly when we pack and ship the order It's better for the customer if we don't have to authorize an additional amount when we ship and thus create two charges on the same order.We also showed our customer that we shipped her order the same day and our system then captured (charged) the invoice total of $against the $total authorized amount The balance of $would be returned for her use according to the policies of her credit card issuing bank (Bank of America) In addition we provided her with proof that Authorize.net (which handles the authorization part of our credit card processing - STEP in the process) showed exactly the same thing as our systemThere were no duplicate authorizations and the data did not support what Bank of America was showing on her online statement.The final part of the process from our end involves our credit card processor, TSYS We contacted our account manager at TSYS and verified that the process moved through their system (STEP 3) accurately and they verified the numbers were correct At that point our TSYS rep offered to hold a conference call with our customer and her bank, which occurred yesterday (5/2) morning TSYS explained to the Bank of America rep that the numbers they were showing our customer did not match the numbers that were transmitted to them and asked Bank of America to explain the discrepancy TSYS reports that Bank of America representative was not helpful and verged on hostile During that call our customer stated that she did not believe us, did not believe Authorize.net and did not believe TSYS and that it was completely Russell-Hampton's fault regardless of what the data proved.Our TSYS rep subsequently contacted Visa and again verified that the numbers that had been sent to Bank of America were correct and that Visa had received the correct "response" from Bank of America after the transactions were sent to them.No one who has been part of our investigation has any idea what Bank of America has done or why, and no idea why they are being so unhelpful to their customer (and ours) Please note that Authorize.net, TSYS and Visa are major players in credit card processing, and they have resources far beyond ours to investigate exactly what happened up until the moment the transactions were transmitted to Bank of America When Bank of America received those transactions they translated them into something completely different, and they will not say why and they refuse to investigate their part any further.It is also worth noting that no entity has the power to remove or reverse anything on our customer's credit card statement except Bank of America, and they refuse to correct or even acknowledge their mistake What they told our customer about our ability to affect anything on her credit card statement is provably and inflammatory.Summary: [redacted] authorized only one amount of $and then captured $of that authorization the same day upon shipping, which was the exact amount of the invoice for the customer's merchandise and shipping.Those amounts moved through all steps of the system, arrived correctly at Bank of America and were electronically acknowledged by Bank of America.Bank of America somehow turned that into two authorizations - $and $- and a charge of $ They now say that the erroneous authorization of $has dropped off, but they refuse to say when the original authorization of $will be dropped Note that it should have been dropped at the moment they processed the capture (charge) of $- both of those transactions had the same transaction ID.If you need documentation of our correspondence with our customer and TSYS we will be happy to provide it It is clear that our customer's complaint should be filed against Bank of America, not against Russell-Hampton Every piece of data shows that we have done the right thing and we have shown our customer that we would go to extreme lengths to assist her in resolving the issue she is having with Bank of America As a side note, our customer said Bank of America "laughed in her face" That is the same level of arrogance they showed when our TSYS rep tried to get them to explain what they had doneBased on the information we have provided to her, and the level of assistance we have obtained for her from the companies involved every part of the process, it is incomprehensible to us why our customer is not insisting that Bank of America step up and investigate what happened in their system that created her problem, as it is almost certain to happen again Will she blame the merchant the second time? And the third? Based on the evidence that we provided, TSYS has asked Visa to open an investigation of Bank of America's practices relative to their agreement with Visa and the way they are showing information to their customers

We always put our customers first...it's good business, it's the right thing to do, and it's the only way we've stayed in business for years over four generations of family ownership If we make a mistake we admit it and do what we can to fix it If it's not our fault we still do everything we can to help our customersThere is literally nothing that we can see to do here to help our customerThere is no transaction we can cancel or reverseEvery number has been verified by every party that has touched the transaction in any way - except Bank of America and what they showed on their websiteEven though the data shows that there is no problem on our end, either in this specific situation or in general, we have preformed several tests of our system's authorizations and captures using different credit cards (issuing banks) In our test Bank of America and one other bank did the exact same thing on a test authorization and capture that they did to our customer, i.eshowed all positive numbers pending when some of them were reversals and should have been shown as negative numbersAlso in our test, two other credit card issuing banks showed the test data perfectly correctly in the pending category - plus and minus where appropriate, and easily understood by a customer.When we called the bank, as a customer, and tried to explain that they were not showing our pending transactions properly, we encountered the same lack of help that our customer did in the conference call with our TSYS rep As a merchant, this is very discouraging - as a bank customer, completely frustratingWe are waiting for a call back from the bank's Product Manager in charge of web programming.Based on the evidence we provided, TSYS opened a ticket and Visa is currently investigating Bank of America regarding this specific case, and the broader issue of how Bank of America is showing pending transactions to their customers on their websiteAt this point, Visa is the only one who can get the broader issue resolved - they have strict guidelines banks must follow if they want to issue Visa credit cards, and they are clearly not being followed by several major banksOther banks are following the rules.Recap of customer web order [redacted] for Interact Member Pins on April 27, 20174-11:Web order estimated total: $- sent customer a confirming email.4-11:CC Authorization: $160.574-16:Order shipped4-16:CC Capture/Charge: $on our Invoice [redacted] - final amount of the order with shipping - copy of paid invoice emailed to customer.Balance of Authorization to be released by bank: $- per Bank of America policy

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Assumed Answered]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:*** *** did explain all this to me, and as they did here, did try to make Bank of America out to be the "bad" company and at fault. I talked to BOA several times (hours on the phone) and each time they clearly stated, that no, *** *** put the pending charges on my credit card, they have no authority to remove them *** *** would not take ownership of this problem They did EXPLAIN to me what they are seeing on THEIR end several times, but each time I told them I was SEEING the pending CHARGES on my credit card. We did work with the third party credit card company, and they were clueless They had assumptions that BOA would take care of this. Any company that works with Credit Cards knows that they are responsible for all charges and pending charges. The order of events from *** *** is not true; and they also sent me an invoice for my purchase that had a DIFFERENT amount than ANY mentioned here! It makes it hard to get the money back from my Rotary Club when I don't even have an invoice for the correct amount
Regards,
*** ***

We always put our customers first...it's good business, it's the right thing to do, and it's the only way we've stayed in business for 97 years over four generations of family ownership.  If we make a mistake we admit it and do what we can to fix it.  If it's not our fault we still do everything we can to help our customers. There is literally nothing that we can see to do here to help our customer. There is no transaction we can cancel or reverse. Every number has been verified by every party that has touched the transaction in any way - except Bank of America and what they showed on their website. Even though the data shows that there is no problem on our end, either in this specific situation or in general, we have preformed several tests of our system's authorizations and captures using different credit cards (issuing banks).  In our test Bank of America and one other bank did the exact same thing on a test authorization and capture that they did to our customer, i.e. showed all positive numbers pending when some of them were reversals and should have been shown as negative numbers. Also in our test, two other credit card issuing banks showed the test data perfectly correctly in the pending category - plus and minus where appropriate, and easily understood by a customer.When we called the bank, as a customer, and tried to explain that they were not showing our pending transactions properly, we encountered the same lack of help that our customer did in the conference call with our TSYS rep.  As a merchant, this is very discouraging - as a bank customer, completely frustrating. We are waiting for a call back from the bank's Product Manager in charge of web programming.Based on the evidence we provided, TSYS opened a ticket and Visa is currently investigating Bank of America regarding this specific case, and the broader issue of how Bank of America is showing pending  transactions to their customers on their website. At this point, Visa is the only one who can get the broader issue resolved - they have strict guidelines banks must follow if they want to issue Visa credit cards, and they are clearly not being followed by several major banks. Other banks are following the rules.Recap of customer web order [redacted] for 45 Interact Member Pins on April 27, 20174-27 11:11 Web order estimated total: $150.57 - sent customer a confirming email.4-27 11:31 CC Authorization: $160.574-27 16:00 Order shipped4-27 16:14 CC Capture/Charge: $149.99 on our Invoice [redacted] - final amount of the order with shipping - copy of paid invoice emailed to customer.Balance of Authorization to be released by bank: $10.58 - per Bank of America policy.

Answer:We have provided the customer with specific information from our computer system, including screen images and reports, which showed her that our software (STEP 1 in the process) authorized her credit card one time for $160.57 against an estimated order total of $150.57. Our system authorizes...

a slightly higher amount than the estimated total because the shipping cost is estimated (and is clearly shown as such on our website) and may rise slightly when we pack and ship the order.  It's better for the customer if we don't have to authorize an additional amount when we ship and thus create two charges on the same order.We also showed our customer that we shipped her order the same day and our system then captured (charged) the invoice total of $149.99 against the $160.57 total authorized amount.  The balance of $10.58 would be returned for her use according to the policies of her credit card issuing bank (Bank of America).  In addition we provided her with proof that Authorize.net (which handles the authorization part of our credit card processing - STEP 2 in the process) showed exactly the same thing as our system. There were no duplicate authorizations and the data did not support what Bank of America was showing on her online statement.The final part of the process from our end involves our credit card processor, TSYS.  We contacted our account manager at TSYS and verified that the process moved through their system (STEP 3) accurately and they verified the numbers were correct.  At that point our TSYS rep offered to hold a conference call with our customer and her bank, which occurred yesterday (5/2) morning.  TSYS explained to the Bank of America rep that the numbers they were showing our customer did not match the numbers that were transmitted to them and asked Bank of America to explain the discrepancy.  TSYS reports that Bank of America representative was not helpful and verged on hostile.  During that call our customer stated that she did not believe us, did not believe Authorize.net and did not believe TSYS and that it was completely Russell-Hampton's fault regardless of what the data proved.Our TSYS rep subsequently contacted Visa and again verified that the numbers that had been sent to Bank of America were correct and that Visa had received the correct "response" from Bank of America after the transactions were sent to them.No one who has been part of our investigation has any idea what Bank of America has done or why, and no idea why they are being so unhelpful to their customer (and ours).  Please note that Authorize.net, TSYS and Visa are major players in credit card processing, and they have resources far beyond ours to investigate exactly what happened up until the moment the transactions were transmitted to Bank of America.  When Bank of America received those transactions they translated them into something completely different, and they will not say why and they refuse to investigate their part any further.It is also worth noting that no entity has the power to remove or reverse anything on our customer's credit card statement except Bank of America, and they refuse to correct or even acknowledge their mistake.  What they told our customer about our ability to affect anything on her credit card statement is provably false and inflammatory.Summary:[redacted] authorized only one amount of $160.57 and then captured $149.99 of that authorization the same day upon shipping, which was the exact amount of the invoice for the customer's merchandise and shipping.Those amounts moved through all 3 steps of the system, arrived correctly at Bank of America and were electronically acknowledged by Bank of America.Bank of America somehow turned that into two authorizations - $160.57 and $149.99 - and a charge of $149.99.  They now say that the erroneous authorization of $149.99 has dropped off, but they refuse to say when the original authorization of $160.57 will be dropped.  Note that it should have been dropped at the moment they processed the capture (charge) of $149.99 - both of those transactions had the same transaction ID.If you need documentation of our correspondence with our customer and TSYS we will be happy to provide it.  It is clear that our customer's complaint should be filed against Bank of America, not against Russell-Hampton.  Every piece of data shows that we have done the right thing and we have shown our customer that we would go to extreme lengths to assist her in resolving the issue she is having with Bank of America.  As a side note, our customer said Bank of America "laughed in her face".  That is the same level of arrogance they showed when our TSYS rep tried to get them to explain what they had done. Based on the information we have provided to her, and the level of assistance we have obtained for her from the companies involved every part of the process, it is incomprehensible to us why our customer is not insisting that Bank of America step up and investigate what happened in their system that created her problem, as it is almost certain to happen again.  Will she blame the merchant the second time?  And the third? Based on the evidence that we provided, TSYS has asked Visa to open an investigation of Bank of America's practices relative to their agreement with Visa and the way they are showing information to their customers.