Sony may not refund full $600 to user

So this user gets hacked and the hacker buys $600 worth of content. Sony won't officially "refund" him more than $150 and furthermore threaten a ban if he attempts to reverse the charges through his banks protection. This ban would cause him to lose all of his content.

"I called customer support, hoping for some clarification. The agent informed me that there is indeed a refund investigation underway, but that it will be limited to $150, and that it would be credited to my PSN wallet, not my bank account.

"Furthermore, my account will not be able to activate a new system for 6 months, per Sony policy. I'm completely locked out of my own account until that date. I then asked about what would happen if I got my bank to reverse the charges, and he informed me that it would result in a banned account. I asked if there would be any way to restore my purchases, and he told me that there would not be, but I 'only have the Last of Us and a couple of the monthly free deal games,' so it's not a big deal."

-Gamespot article

Sony is punishing this guy because they want to keep his stolen money. When you accept to deal with stolen money, you're dealing as a criminal.

UPDATE: screenshot of chat shows that Sony fully intended to refund the user, pending a detailed investigation. The discussion points are now the circumstances of the "hacking" and mandatory security requirements on purchases.

Well this seems fucking ridiculous to me. They should at least refund him the full amount to his PSN Store wallet (though this obviously isn't ideal) if they can't through his bank.

That's nuts. My friend's XBL account got hacked a few years ago, and I think Microsoft refunded what the hacker spent.

Banning accounts that do chargebacks is something pretty much every online service does. The fact that they won't just do a refund is pretty shitty though. Happened to a friend of mine too, and caused him to swear off PlayStation entirely.

It's standard across all of these kinds of services (PSN, XBL,Steam) that if you reverse charges via your bank, you get banned. It sucks, but it happens all the time on all these services. It's nothing new and it's not specific to Sony.

Just because everyone does it does not make it right. I wonder why they are only refunding $150 out of the $600.

Sony truly is at fault. They should design their system in such a way, that although people take their own risks by keeping the credit card "on file" so they don't have to enter it every time they buy a micro transaction, and by not using secure password methods, Sony still should have a transaction maximum, daily weekly and monthly maximums for the amount of content you can buy without typing the credit card info in. Anyone buying a $60 game let alone ten $60 games, should be forced to have the inconvenience of typing in their password and full CC details. Sony doesn't do this because they think the time spent digging out your card and the inconvenience typing it in, gives customers time to second guess their purchase as opposed to a 1-Click style system. If doing things that way guarantees Sony tons of more money from impulse buys, they need to have a proper refund/fraud system in place, too.

I'm not trying to defend sony or this guy but when I played mmos a lot of people I knew claimed they were hacked just to restore items on their accounts that they deleted or to get refunds for items they purchased and then didn't like. It can be very hard to prove your account was actually hacked and on top of that if they allowed anyone to file these kinds of complaints they would be "investigating" accounts non stop.

I'm not saying this guy didn't get hacked or is trying to commit fraud but from what I have seen on the internet the second they allow people to do these kinds of things than it will be free reign for all the people to start spamming in that they got hacked just cause they actually want refunds on games they didn't like. Basically I think things like these are a very slippery slope you can either allow almost anyone to get any refunds they want any time they want by just simply claiming they were hacked or spend thousands of man hours investigating cases that may or may not be real or you can just blanket that it sucks. Unfortunately you agree to a user agreement that says they can do this so you know from day one that if you do a chargeback on your card they can ban your account.

And saying they are accepting stolen money makes them a criminal is completely asanine. If I robbed a bank I wouldn't walk into a store and say "I STOLE THIS MONEY" of course they wouldn't let me buy anything. They had literally no way to know the account was compromised. The moral of the story is don't permanently add your card to your account? If you just enter the card every time and not save it then even if your account gets hacked (or whatever) no one can do anything anyway.

tl;dr Companys don't know money is stolen when used to make purchases and people are more than willing to cry "hackers" to get refunds they normally couldn't so just don't save your CC info on your account and enter it every time you make a purchase and you will be much more secure.

I read about this and find it sorta strange. I guess they might've changed policies or something, but I had about $250 fraudulently charged to my PSN account about a year ago and they just cancelled it with no problem. Maybe it was different as the charges hadn't gone through with the bank yet.

That is a perfectly fine and standard policy that everybody use everywhere.

Just stop using weaksauce passwords and getting infected from scumware sites.

I'm not saying that this story isn't true, but can anyone provide information that can substantiate this story that has thousands of people outraged beyond the information that was provided by a guy under a screen name on Reddit? Multiple people in this thread and on threads on other websites have said that they did not have this happen to them under what sounds to me like similar circumstances.

Edit: And yeah, I saw the image of his chat with Sony, but nothing about that looks like it had to be the real deal.

@dregdon: If his bank finds it beyond reasonable doubt to be fraud and reverses his charges, he shouldn't have to have his account banned. Just content revoked.

Edit: Also, what do you find wrong with fully refunding renctly made large suspicious transactions?

It's $150 because that's the wallet funding limit on playstation master accounts

His money was stolen it should be fully refunded.

But good ol' corporate greed will try getting in the way of it

This whole situation is a PR nightmare. The fact that they couldn't see this coming shows a lack foresight and leadership.

Can you elaborate for me why this affects refunding the whole $600 of the suspicious transactions made? I don't have a good understanding of why this would, or should, affect it.

Wasn't he hacked? And not Sony? A little confused about what happened.

If you get hacked it's on you, end of story. I don't see what the hubbub is about. Unless the hacking is Sony's fault, I can't imagine why they would even give back any money at all.

That's like if a dude pick pockets me and spends my cash at a restaurant, then I run in there and scream Give me my money back! Not gonna happen.

@geraltitude: Shit happens and you shouldn't be punished if somebody hacks you. It's ridiculous that you would support Sony in this.

No, it's more like a business claiming they'll protect you inside from being held up, then security watching it happen to you, and then them saying "we didn't see anything. Here's a couple bucks to ease the sting."

@krullban: He's being level headed and providing counter points. It's how discussions work and should be encouraged.

Sony double charged me for a purchase once. When I called to complain the customer service rep told me to issue a charge back. I did and got banned. I had to buy a points card to get unbanned and they basically told me I had a choice of eating the double charge or having my account with hundreds of dollars in digital purchases banned. I chose to eat the double charge, but weirdly their system reversed it on its own a few days later (I would recommend anyone double charged by Sony to just wait a week.)

The whole thing was a massive pain and made me aware of just how valued as a customer I was, which is to say not at all. This whole thing was entirely their fault; one of their reps even told me to issue the chargeback!

I know Sony gets a ton of love here but their customer service earned a 0/10 from me.

So does Steam, Xbox Live and so on. There is no need to single out Sony for this. A charge-back on digital delivered goods/licenses ALWAYS results in a ban. I'm not condoning this but it's the risk you inherently take with going digital.

@geraltitude: His PSN account was compromised. His card was not stolen, the accused hacker only had managed to get ahold of the PSN handle, and to spend $600 on the PSN store.

On one hand, I blame the user for a weak password or ability to be hacked, on the other I blame the hacker for being a shitty person, and on yet another I blame Sony for not having a security confirmation in place for purchases. Force people to type in their CVV every time or something, even that can deter hackers at least for awhile.

Shitty situation all around.

@hypnotoadbrwowrowrow: If that is the case, I am 100% in aggreeance. But I'm still not clear on how the hacking happened. Was it through the PSN? Inside this "Secure" place? That's my question. Wouldn't many others have been hacked too? No one is going to break into PSN to hack one single account for a measly 600 bucks. It just sounds like he lost his credentials, and someone took advantage of that.

I'm not at all saying it isn't terrible, but your passwords are your responsibility, and no one elses.

Again, I'm not clear on how the hacking happened, and that is what matters here.

@krullban: Maybe you should take a deep breath before going on the internet, duder...

Why shouldn't you be punished if you are hacked? I don't get where you are coming from. If the network is hacked, they should pay every dime. If I am hacked, it's on me.

Let's say I have a PSN account.

Let's say I use my same credentials on scummy websites and via my own activity hackers get a hold of my information, use it to login to my PSN account, and then use my credit card to buy a bunch of shit.

Why should Sony pay me back? It was my actions that resulted in me being hacked.

It's not only Sony doing this but every digital storefront, including the praised and worshipped Steam platform. A chargeback always results in a ban, no matter the service. It would be much fairer to remove digital licenses individually but at some point Sony has already payed the distrubitor of the license. Sony isn't a charity either and banning an entire account is much faster than to pay an employee to sort out which digital licenses need to be revoked. Sony has already payed the license distribitor its cut so getting back that money is impossible.

You are solely resonsible for your account and any fraudulent purchases made with it. If this hack was truly Sony's fault, then Sony must fully reimburse him. Stories like these always involve more details that the, in this case redditor, purposly witholds to try to make a big story out of this.

To Capitalism!

@geraltitude: I think you're looking at it from the wrong angle. At the root it's a credit card security issue. If banks didn't allow you to challenge charges on your cards then credit cards would be a HUGE gamble, and we would have to use a completely different system for how we use credit cards. And then from there it's a case of the agreement between Sony and credit card companies, which I would assume involves some kinda clause when it comes to this stuff.

What? Do you apply the same logic to every person that's the victim of a crime?

Oh your house was burgled? Fucking sucks to be you, should have installed more dead bolts you fuck wit. Don't bother reporting the crime to the cops, you will be fined.

@hypnotoadbrwowrowrow: I'm just saying where they pulled the 150 number for a wallet refund from, that being the max a wallet can hold. Someone earlier asked why that number.

Absolutely the dude should have the money refunded to his bank and wallet totals shouldn't matter. Personally, I'd be escalating like a motherfucker with their billing support and I've even been the csr in situations like this. I guarantee they have a way to reverse charges.

Bad example...

If your house gets burgled your insurance may cover it. Insurance *you pay for*.

If you don't have insurance no one is going to pay you back for what you lost. Not in any country on earth.

I didn't say you shouldn't report the crime or that it doesn't suck. But if your house gets robbed the police aren't going to give you a brand new TV to replace the one you lost. You lose the TV, you don't get reimbursed, and that's that.

So yes:

You should have installed more deadbolts.

Same as you you should have a better password.

Agreed, these are the questions we should be asking. Sony needs to at least use this as a learning experience and put more more security thought into their wallet services (i.e. at least require CVA and expiration date on transaction).

You are right; Sony does not have to support customer service. It is in their right to do the bare minimum. It is in their right to not support the customer who has supported them.

Could it be argued that PSN is a payed service that should be secure? Again, we're talking about the circumstances of the hacking, which we just don't know. Either way. The purchasing process should be more secure. In the end, I believe the right course of action is to recognize the lack of security, fully refund this guy his money, and require some credentials on purchases.

Does Sony offer two factor authentication on PSN accounts? I think anything that stores your credit card information should at least offer two factor authentication.

Either way, this seems like a case where Sony should just be good to their customer and refund his money. That is, assuming his story is accurate.

I think that's the hard part here... easier said than done. How you do prove that someone who used your PSN account and logged in with your password, used your credit card, was not you?

Raises a question:

I wonder if Sony can tell where the PS4 is that made the purchases? Seems an easy way to prove it was you or not. But then again it would be a bit weird business wise if they were storing Purchase Location IPs somewhere.

But what would be the harm in just refunding him his money, revoking his licenses, and being done with it? ya, know. Okay, you pay your customer service guy money to get it done, but these are the situations that you pay your customer service for.

At least, AT LEAST, give him the full refund in PSN credit.

Again, ya'll are right; Sony does not have to support customer service. It is in their right to do the bare minimum. It is in their right to not support the customer who has supported them.

This is something that literally every digital storefront does.

@cameron: @hypnotoadbrwowrowrow: I think definitely we can think of PSN as a secure place that should offer protection, the question as how to manage that protection:

I'll double check this when I get home but I am 99.9% sure that users turn on/off the process that allows them to check out without re-entering security info (Code and/or Expiration Date). Maybe I'm thinking of PS3 though. It's a setting under account control, where you go to input your credit card info the first time. Maybe we could argue that it should be mandatory? I dunno.

Not a free new TV, however the police will endeavour to recover the stolen property and return it. In this instance evidence of fraud has been presented, however Sony is actively trying to keep stolen goods (or money as the case may be). To use your example Sony is the guy who's bought that stolen TV out of the back of some dodgy dudes van in a car park and claims he should be able to keep it when the police come knocking.

We'll see how the story develops, if Sony buckles to PR-pressure it might mean something else was going on. If Sony stands by their decision, it means this guy was a chump and a liar.

@hypnotoadbrwowrowrow: if the world was full of good people, there would be no harm at all! Give the money back! But think of it likes this too:

1) someone calls in and says someone hacked their account
2) as far as evidence tells you, there was no network hack
3) what do you? Believe them, or not?

Then take this situation and repeat it a million times over, with a million different people. If you were a company that had to systemize these responses, your solution may not be far from Sony's.

Ultimately I think the credit card company will make the major decision of "Did the owner of this card make this purchase?" and then pass it on to Sony, because ultimately it is the credit card corps money that may change hands. Possibly they pay Sony on your behalf. Imagine if this wasn't a digital game but a physical game. Would GameStop give you the money back knowing the game was gone forever? Or would the Credit Company pay off GameStop, and double down and pay you back too?

When my credit card was stolen years ago many physical items were purchased with it. Those items can't be returned. Not sure how it was resolved between the CCC and vendors, but hard to imagine the vendors weren't compensated for their purchased goods.

@korwin: I think you're pretty much right about that, but you are jumping to the conclusion that it was in fact fraud. We don't know that for sure either way right now. That's really the major problem here. Where is the evidence one way or the other? All we have (supposedly) is some guy's word. Unless we can trace the purchases by IP, or some other way, the truth is literally impossible to ascertain at the moment. Would your solution, if you were running Sony, be to always, 100% of the time, refund people for whatever amount they said was fradulantly purchased? If the answer is Yes. Things are cut and dry. If the answer is no, what would you do?

@hypnotoadbrwowrowrow: The guy was already told how to get a full refund if he wanted it. The issue at hand is mostly if it's ok for Sony to have a policy beyond that where they ban accounts that challenge their charges through the bank.

@hypnotoadbrwowrowrow:

I'm responding to your statement about PSN being a paid service that should be secure, but I can't be bothered to format the quote so it looks nice. All the fancy encryption protocols in the world don't mean a thing if social engineering can be used to deduce a user's password. If that happens, it's on the user. Would it be super nice if Sony reversed the purchases? Well, yes, but doing so would open the floodgates to thousands of claims of 'hacks' that Sony would have no choice but to respond to.

If what the user is saying is true, then it sucks to be in his situation, it really does, but I'm betting that somewhere in the User Agreement there is a statement that states that Sony is under no obligation/only has to do a bare minimum to help you out if a security failure happens on your end, rather than theirs. That's business for you, and this is the risk you take with digital distribution.

So Sony intended to fully reimburse him pending an ongoing investigation and did NOT threaten with a ban. You should edit the topic title accordingly.

But the games aren't "gone forever," they're licensed on his account. Also, sure you don't just refund everybody that demands it; you look at the amount spent, the time that it was spent in, and the response time of the complainant (the investigation). If it looks suspcicious, revoke the license, refund his money, make a small margin of it as PSN credit to "reimburse" Sony for the customer service, and wam bam thank you ma'am, that's customer service done right in an ideal world.

By "secure," I refer to mandatory CVA and expiration date input for save billing information.

Honestly... the more I think about that screenshot, the only thing I see possibly being handled wrong is that it could be interpreted as them not wanting to refund his full $600, but even that seems like they fully intend to refund it all... so really... I think the gamespot article was just trying too hard to make a mt out of a molehill and I fell for it.

Reading through the chat thoroughly shows everything proceeding, well, as it should be.

No one gets hacked. They get phished and that's thier fault. Sony needs to provide the tools to block the fraud once identified but the user needs to call his/her bank and report the fraud themselves to get their money back. That and they need to google what phishing is and realize how stupid they are.