TransFirst

Mr. [redacted], As an additional courtesy, we will refund you the additional $276.61. You should see these funds in your account tomorrow. We hope this satisfies your request. Regards, [redacted]

We have reviewed your account with TransFirst and apologize for any poor experience you may have received with the collection agency. We confirmed the equipment has been returned and you do not have any outstanding debt with TransFirst. The Collection Agency has been notified to no longer contact...

you.  Customer satisfaction and ensuring we maintain the highest integrity with our customers is extremely important to us.  With the chain of events that transpired, we fully understand your concerns and apologize that you had to go through the Revdex.com process to resolve. We hope this response resolves all outstanding items.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2015/12/14) */
Merchant account has been dormant more than a year. The average transaction historically has been sporadic, but in the $2,000 range.
On 11/25/15, TransFirst, Inc, received a transaction totaling $12,554.50. We attempted to contact merchant...

client by phone on Wednesday, 11/25 and again on Friday, 11/27 (due to Thursday being holiday).
Both attempts were unsuccessful due to no answer. On Monday, 11/30/15, merchant contacted TransFirst, Inc. At that time, it was determined the phone contact information on file was inaccurate by one digit and thereby caused our inability to reach the merchant via phone. Had we not received a call on Monday, 11/30, a Fedex letter would have been sent to the merchant. The funds were verified and released to the merchant client. We apologize for any inconvenience.
Thank you,
[redacted]
Director Risk Management
TransFirst, Inc

5/31/2016   [redacted] RE: Revdex.com Case [redacted],  We have received your response in regards to your case with the Revdex.com regarding your rate increase and the claim that TransFirst was changing the terms by increasing the rates. Per the terms...

of the conditions of the contract TransFirst can increase the Processing Fees with a 15 day advance written notice, TransFirst provided the rate/fee increase notice on the April 2016 Statement that would be effective July 1 2016.  On May 24, 2016 TransFirst offered a rate review to help absorb the card association increases.  At that time you declined the offer to review and decrease your rates. The terms of the contract did not change per section 16.1:Section16. PROCESSING FEES.16.1 Fee Schedule. Merchant will pay Processing Fees in the amount specified in theFee Schedule attached to the Merchant Application or as otherwise provided for in thisMerchant Agreement or an Addendum thereto. Monthly recurring Processing Fees will beassessed upon approval of the Merchant Application. Bank may increase the ProcessingFees, including, without limitation, introducing new products or services, by givingMerchant fifteen days advance written notice effective for Transactions submitted on andafter the effective date of the change. The Early Termination fee was debited from your account due to your request to close the merchant account prior to the end of the termed contract and will not be reimbursed. Per section 11.2(i)(2):  Bank and Merchant acknowledge and agree that in addition to allother remedies available to Bank under this Merchant Agreement or as otherwise available in law or equity, if this Merchant Agreement is terminated prior to the expiration of the applicable Term of the Merchant Agreement for any reason other than for a material, uncured breach by Bank, Merchant agrees to pay Bank damages (the “Damages”) determined by adding an account closure fee as follows: (1) $250 for Merchants with less than twelve months remaining from the date of termination to the end of the then current Term, or; (2) $500 for Merchants with more than twelve months remaining, or such portion of the foregoing as may be permitted by applicable law.   Regards, [redacted]Operations Manager, Account SpecialistsTransFirst LLC

In response to Revdex.com case #: [redacted], TransFirst, Inc., concurs with statement of merchant client with regard to necessity to close the account as it is considered exclusionary, third party business model. The application was initially auto-approved based on details in the application and average...

transaction of $5,000 and monthly volume of $10,000.   On August 22, 2016, the merchant submitted two (2) [redacted] transactions totaling $19, 636.50. In researching these transactions, it was determined that the business model was exclusionary and the account needed to be closed.  The transactions were reversed to the cardholder(s).  There are fees assessed by TransFirst and the card brand, in this case, [redacted].   Attached please find statement for reference.  Merchant requested refund of all fees in the amount of $1,254.26.  While TransFirst agreed to refund all fees that it assessed or passed through, [redacted] policy is not to refund fees associated with reversed transactions. That said,  TransFirst has made a business decision to absorb the loss for the [redacted] fees in order to satisfy the concerns of the merchant.  TransFirst, Inc. has already refunded its fees totaling $627.58 that the merchant should have received by September 20, 2016. TransFirst will initiate another credit today for $626.68, thereby fully satisfying the merchant’s concern with a total of $1,254.26.  The additional credit of $626.68 should appear in the merchant account by September 22, 2016.   TransFirst, Inc, is committed to providing premier customer service and regrets this event that has caused the merchant inconvenience.   Sincerely, [redacted] Director – Risk Management

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

TransFirst has validated that our mobile application functioned exactly as it should have but unfortunately when [redacted] set up their merchant account, they declined to go through our training.  This resulted in the merchant pressing the wrong button when entering their sales...

causing everything to capture as a cash sale instead of dialing out to get an authorization and processing as a credit card sale. TransFirst recognizes what an unfortunate situation this is and is actively working with the merchant and their bank to obtain proof of all of the cash sales so that we can discuss possible solutions that are reasonable to all parties.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

We have reviewed your account and confirmed that you were assessed a fee for the TransLink Insights Product on your November 2016 merchant processing statement. We have confirmed you were removed from the product in December and have not been assessed any fees since. We have issued a full refund for the November 2016 charges in the amount of $29.99, which we electronically deposited into your bank account that we have on file on February 13, 2017. We apologize for the issue and are currently reviewing the refund request process in place for the TransLink Insights product to identify opportunities for improvement.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
Like we can see here transfirst told me that We lost the case with visa and we should recover the motorcycle ! This is unbelievable...they just wrote in previous msg that they are waiting our approval to forward this case to visa! Transfirst is a shady business ...and the lawsuit will be against them. They never answered about why they illegally holding/blocking all our money via card reader. The dispute with visa for chargeback is zero based on lies, but the transfirst actions and position against us is obvious.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/07) */
Dear Sir/Madam,
In response to Case #XXXXXXXX, TransFirst offers the following information. In August 2015 a merchant processing account was opened for [redacted] is a face-to-face and online retailer of pet supplies and is...

owned by [redacted] of [redacted] On 9-10-2015 an ACH debit was sent in the amount of $10.00 for the August 2015 monthly service fees. The debit was sent to the checking account provided by the merchant on the application. On 9-14-2015 the ACH was returned due to non-sufficient funds, and was resubmitted. The ACH returned a second time on 9-21-2015. Attempts have been made to contact the merchant, however the telephone numbers provided have been disconnected. The merchant processing account has now been closed, but a debit will be sent for the September monthly fees.
[redacted]
Periodic Review - Collections
TransFirst, LLC
Toll Free: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Direct: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Fax: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/10/12) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
No, the phone number is not disconnected and we do not use any form of credit card processing, other than [redacted]
Final Business Response /* (4000, 11, 2015/11/02) */
TransFirst is in receipt of your communication dated October 12, 2015.
TransFirst did attempt to return the $12.00 fee to your bank account on October 8, 2015, but your bank returned this on October 15 as the checking account is closed with the bank. Please advise as to the best process to return these funds to your business.
The merchant account for Puppylicious was opened with the owner of [redacted] on August 11, 2015.
TransFirst, Inc. is committed to abide by Revdex.com accreditation standards which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve consumer complaints or concerns. However, we also have a responsibility to the cardholder to protect their rights and financial interests in funding all disputes received on the merchant account.
Respectfully,
[redacted]
Director ~ Credit Underwriting
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 13, 2015/11/04) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

We apologize for any poor service or support you may have received. TransFirst works extremely hard to ensure that every interaction with our customers is a positive one.  Our records indicate that your account was setup via an Independent Contractor of TransFirst ([redacted]).  We...

are actively researching the issue with Mr. [redacted] to identify the root cause of your account setup issues and will work to ensure those issues do not occur again. In response to your dissatisfaction, we will provide a full refund for all fees assessed to your account by TransFirst. In addition, we will need account information on the remaining 5-6 stylists you reference in your original complaint. Once received, we will issue a full refund for TransFirst assessed fees on those accounts accordingly. Unfortunately, we cannot provide a refund for fees not assessed by our organization. If Mr. [redacted] committed to either closing your previous account or absorbing any fees associated with closing that account, you will need to work with Mr. [redacted] directly. Although Mr. [redacted] is not an employee of TransFirst, we will make every attempt to try to get Mr. [redacted] to contact you to resolve. Please let us know if there is anything else we can do to ensure your issue is resolved.

Application received on 12/07/2015 and according to application, business model was to perform background checks for landlords, property managers. The application submitted and attached is to perform background checks, not sell shoes, as referenced in complaint. At the time of application,...

TransFirst, Inc. is required to submit an inquiry to the [redacted] MATCH system. This was completed and a positive response that a previous processor listed this legal entity, [redacted] Corporation (of Buffalo, NY) on the MATCH listing for chargeback activity. We are prohibited from processing for entities listed on the [redacted] database. Previous historical processing statements were not indicative of processing without negative ACH or chargeback activity. The authorizations submitted with the sales were declines, meaning not approved by card issuing financial institutions. In such a case, TransFirst, Inc, is not able to settle said sales without clearly approved authorizations. Merchant began to submit sales on or about 12/14/15 for 2 days totaling $1,738.13. All funds totaling $1,738.13 were held and reversed back to the cardholders with the knowledge and consent of the merchant, [redacted] (12/18/15). TransFirst, Inc., did request a third party site inspector to visit the address. The site inspection vendor was unable to validate the business.
Due to inability to validate business, legal entity listed on [redacted] MATCH database for exceeding chargeback parameters and declined authorization requests, we are unable to process said transactions and the account has been closed.
TransFirst, Inc, has no funds on hold to release. The funds were reversed and returned to the cardholders with the knowledge of the merchant.
Thank you,
[redacted]
Director Risk Management
TransFirst, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

An additional $33.95 will be credited to your account via ACH since the $209.55 was submitted previously.  Again we apologize for any inconvenience this matter has caused.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

We have reviewed your account with TransFirst and apologize for any poor experience may you have received from the Independent Sales Agent who facilitated your account setup with TransFirst. We have confirmed that your original application stated .40%, however the Sales Rep data entered your rates...

into the system at .50%. As a result, we will immediately lower your rate to .40% and provide a refund for any over-charges you would have received. In addition, your original application does not disclose the $49.95 annual administrative fee. Although this is a standard customary fee, as a result of the oversight of not disclosing on your original application, we will be waiving this fee going forward and provide a full refund for any previous billings. We believe these errors were a result of a data entry error by the sales representative and was missed during our quality control processes. In an effort to ensure your full satisfaction, we will eliminate the contract term and allow you to seek an alternative provider should you opt to do so. We will be addressing the sales and application process with the Independent Sales Agent, who is not a TransFirst employee, and ensure he understands your concerns in hopes of preventing this from occurring in the future. Customer satisfaction and ensuring we maintain the highest integrity with our customers is extremely important to us. With the chain of events that transpired, we fully understand your concerns and apologize that you had to go through the Revdex.com process to resolve. We hope that you will reconsider finding an alternative provider, however at a minimum, we hope this response resolves all outstanding items.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 10, 2015/11/17) */
In response to Revdex.com# case XXXXXXXX, TransFirst offers the following reasons for retention of funds to date. Sales, in many cases, exceeded average ticket approved on application of $1,400.
Our research indicates all emails from merchant have...

been responded to by TransFirst, Inc, as well as multiple phone calls received. Requested documentation with cardholder name/address and contact information not provided. Without this information, we are unable to validate the sales.
Many sales are processed using international credit cards with declines for authorization which increases risk exposure. TransFirst, Inc, agreed to review the account and the funds (45) days post-closure, which would be end of November. Merchant has been made aware of this target on multiple occasions. That said, we are amenable to reviewing at this time and although we have not received any chargeback activity, there continues to be trailing risk. The current amount of funds retained by TransFirst,Inc., is $10,915.40. The difference in the amount noted by merchant is that September monthly processingfees were not honored by merchant bank due to a 'stop payment' and had to be deducted from held funds. We will release 50% at this time or $5,457.70 and review again in 30 days.
Thank you,
[redacted]
TransFirst, Inc.
Risk Director
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 12, 2015/11/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
THIS BUSINESS OWNER WORKS ON A PERSONAL DRIVE SINCE THE WOMAN CRYSTAL [redacted] THAT WORK THERE DIDN'T LIKE THE FACT THAT I HAVE CALLED HER AND ASKED FOR MY MONEY AND SHE DIDN'T LIKE THIS FACT ( I KNOW THIS SINCE ONE OF THE AGENT OF THIS COMPANY HAVE TOLD ME THAT NAMED JUSTIN )
I HAVE ISSUED ALL PAPER WORK NEED FOR A CREDIT CARD TRANSACTION THIS ARE ALL EXCUSES NOT TO RELEASE MY FUNDS THIS FACT OF HOW THIS BUSINESS WORK I HAVE REALIZED I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THIS BUSINESS HAD DONE THE SAME THING TO . A SIMPLE SEARCH ON GOOGLE REVIEWS SHOW MORE PEOPLE LIKE ME .
THE TIME FRAME TO MAKE SURE MY TRANSACTION IS GOOD IS PAST AS WELL AND STILL DIDN'T GET MY FUNDS .
I REALLY HOPE YOU GUYS CAN HELP ME GET THE FUNDS ASAP
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE HELP !
Final Business Response /* (4000, 14, 2015/12/03) */
In response to rebuttal received with respect to Revdex.com# case XXX-XXXXX, TransFirst released $5,457.70 on 11/10/2015. Pursuant to TransFirst response on 11/17/2015, we made a commitment to review the balance after 30 days (or 12/10/2015). We have assessed the risk exposure on the account and are amenable to releasing the remainder of funds at this time totaling $5,457.70. As of 12/4/2015, TransFirst, Inc., will not be in possession of any funds related to this matter.

At the center of this issue is an ongoing dispute between Mr Manolache (Merchant) and his customer.  Our company has reviewed the rules with him that govern any Visa card transaction, rules he agreed to comply with when signing his Merchant Processing Agreement.  We have presented all the documentation that the Merchant has provided to us, sending everything through Visa to his customer/and/customer’s bank (Chase).  The totality of this does not adequately address the issue to compel his customer/and/Chase to reverse the chargeback and reinstate the transaction under Visa dispute rules and regulations.     His customer has both the $6000 from the chargeback and the motorcycle.  We recommend that [redacted] attempt to retake possession of the motorcycle since under Visa rules there is no recourse to recover funds from his customer.  However, [redacted] must fund this chargeback with TransFirst and maintain an adequate balance in his checking account to cover all fees for processing and any future customer disputes should they arise.   As for the other issues, [redacted] raises questions of evidence regarding matters that can only be addressed in a court of law – video surveillance (to prove what is unclear), federal and state laws governing returns, even blackmail.  These issues need to be dealt with in a legal venue.    Please feel free to call us at [redacted], option 1, 3, then ext 3009 for Collections or ext 3011 for Chargebacks, for further assistance.

The TransFirst issue was resolved and they refunded my money.  The $325 problem is with [redacted].  You have combined the two problems.  [redacted] is a different problem.