Heather Bishop - If we pick the snake up from the hub we will kill it...intentionally

Originally Posted by Michael Brown

Credit card company's give credit cards to people under 18?? I think not.

Could've easily been a debit card

As far as the credit/debit card, my son has one that is linked to my PayPal, I got it for him when he was 17.

Do not let the fact that Square took your money stop you from appealing, banks nearly ALWAYS side with their customer at the start.
I had a situation with an ebay sale where they claimed never received and their bank claimed the money back from their paypal payment.
Fortunately I had tracking info AND it had been signed for on delivery so I filed an appeal presenting my evidence and the decision was overturned and my monies were rightfully returned.

Present your bank with all of the very well documented evidence you have posted here and there is a good chance you could get it all back, all you have to lose is a few minutes of your time.

Originally Posted by Michael Brown

Credit card company's give credit cards to people under 18?? I think not.

I work in credit cards and technically a minor cannot apply for a credit card, but you can add anyone as an authorized user, even if they are a minor. So she's either lying or she's an authorized user.

So, here's a little bit of disputes insight. With the bank, most of the time it's done through Visa or MasterCard, they do ultimately make the decision, not the actual bank (Visa and MC work for both since they get paid from merchants). Even if it's Amex or Discover, same deal, they are working for both sides, so they have equal share in wanting to please both. Now, with Square, I'm not sure how they do it cause they should be sending you the dispute paperwork and you have 45 days to respond and present your side. Might be something to contact the disputes area at that actual bank or check how Square will process the paperwork.

The fact of the matter is Mr. Internet, thats why we have small claim ct. Why should the shipper loose anything. As indicated if the snake perished and this whole ordeal turns out to be a nothing other than a scam some one is responsible ! The purpose here is if in fact this was an under aged person who uses a credit card not belonging to them, then the parents or whoevers name is on that card will have to deal with it, as well as their dumb child. It could have been substantially more than $ 140.00 , then what would you say Mr Internet... Come off it !

An authorized user will make both responsible. Even though the user may be underage, any negative information if there is a ss # for that underaged person will NOT be forgotton when they are old enough to get there own card. The parent when giving authorization is automatically liable for whatever the authorized user charges...

Not a good idea. Originally intended as an easy method when dealing with young adults going to college and needing to purchase school related materials including eating, etc. The bill comes to Daddy, and if he is delinquent, in the end somewhere it will reflect on the user as well !!!!!

In todays world of credit cards, many banks insist that being an authorized user, requires them to be included on the checking account. I dont know if all banks require this, but because of all the credit card fraud, this makes it more difficult to use a card as an under aged person unless there is a greater liablity to attach the card holders checking account because of potential use of unauthorized purchases including and not limited to ATM withdrawals . Allot has changed, so the answer is to check these things out carefully .

Originally Posted by KNOBTAIL

The fact of the matter is Mr. Internet, thats why we have small claim ct. Why should the shipper loose anything. As indicated if the snake perished and this whole ordeal turns out to be a nothing other than a scam some one is responsible ! The purpose here is if in fact this was an under aged person who uses a credit card not belonging to them, then the parents or whoevers name is on that card will have to deal with it, as well as their dumb child. It could have been substantially more than $ 140.00 , then what would you say Mr Internet... Come off it !

I think under the circumstances, and for $140, Mr. Internet is correct. Voidable underage purchases can be complex and we do not have all the facts here. Add to that the filing fee, and the fee to properly notify the defendant, in a case where there may not be an automatic win, and suits for such small amounts can be a questionable choice. And of course even if there is a win, which is not guaranteed, further legal action with additional costs may be required to actually attempt to collect, and that attempt is not guaranteed successful either.

Originally Posted by KNOBTAIL

In todays world of credit cards, many banks insist that being an authorized user, requires them to be included on the checking account. I dont know if all banks require this, but because of all the credit card fraud, this makes it more difficult to use a card as an under aged person unless there is a greater liablity to attach the card holders checking account because of potential use of unauthorized purchases including and not limited to ATM withdrawals . Allot has changed, so the answer is to check these things out carefully .

I work in credit cards and I don’t know any banks that require this. Hell, I don’t know any banks that require you to have a checking account to have a credit card with them. Even the credit union that I’m apart of only requires you to have a savings account to be a member, but they don’t require you to have a checking and they don’t require the AU to be on that account. What bank is this that has this requirement?