Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.software.firefox > #14357

Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit.

Show all headers | View raw

micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote:
>Sun, 27 Jul 2025 07:02:27 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

>>>FWIW
>>>Two different gas stations, from the same chain, charged me for twice as
>>>much gas as would fit in the tank.  Finally I learned that they tend to
>>>put a hold on a large amount that they reduce later, but since one is
>>>done filling the tank in 5 miniutes, why don't they correct the amount
>>>after 10 minutes, or 30, or when the pump shows that the pumping session
>>>has ended.  Instead it takes them days.  Very strange. 

>>You weren't charged. A hold is not a charge.

>Yes, I know now that it was a hold, but the email and the webpage made
>no distinction between a charge and a hold.

Then you misread something or misunderstood. If you aren't paying it,
it's not a charge. It's a temporary hold on your credit.

>Other gas stations in the same country charged only for the gas I actually
>took.

The gas station in question charged you for the gas you purchased. If
they charged you for gas you didn't purchase, that's fraud.

>And they know
>when the nozzle has been put back onto the pump, because if you try to
>start pumping again, it again wants your credit card, to start a new
>trasnaction.  So by the time you're done pumping, they know you're done
>and what the final charge is. So they could replace the hold with a
>charge then, like the other gas stations did.

It's still not a charge. The hold monies aren't paid to the merchant.
You've gotten this completely wrong.

>>The hold does not go to the
>>merchant. A hold is a temporary reduction of your credit limit. Yes, it
>>should be released once the final bill is known but it's always released
>>by the next banking day.

>Not always that quickly, at least not that bank then.

Dude, if it's not released by the next banking day, then you've got a
complaint against the credit card network as they aren't following their
own rules. It's not the merchant placing the credit hold but its bank.
If the hold hasn't been released, then their bank failed to follow the
rules they are obliged to follow. You make a complaint through your
bank. Even if the banks fail to follow the rules, the merchant still
isn't going to receive money from you because a hold is not a charge.

Back to alt.comp.software.firefox | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

OT by some standards.  Getting a google hit that is not a hit.  micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-26 14:21 -0400
  Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Schugo <schugo@schugo.de> - 2025-07-26 20:28 +0200
    Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-26 14:43 -0400
      Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-07-26 19:52 +0100
        Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-26 15:19 -0400
          Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-07-26 17:24 -0400
            Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-07-26 23:51 +0200
            Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-27 00:05 -0400
          Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-07-26 23:50 +0200
    Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Sam Pichai <Sam.Pichai@gmail.com> - 2025-07-26 20:14 +0000
      Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Schugo <schugo@schugo.de> - 2025-07-26 22:45 +0200
        Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2025-07-26 20:47 +0000
          Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Schugo <schugo@schugo.de> - 2025-07-26 22:55 +0200
            Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. sticks <wolverine01@charter.net> - 2025-07-26 16:18 -0500
  Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-07-26 19:42 +0100
    Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-26 15:18 -0400
      Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-07-26 20:26 +0100
        Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-11-14 23:14 -0500
      Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-26 22:25 +0200
        Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2025-07-26 20:45 +0000
          Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-26 23:55 +0200
            Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2025-07-26 15:51 -0700
              Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2025-07-26 22:58 +0000
            Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2025-07-26 22:53 +0000
              Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> - 2025-07-26 22:58 +0000
              Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-27 00:36 -0400
                Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2025-07-27 07:02 +0000
                Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-27 11:52 -0400
                Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2025-07-27 16:20 +0000
                Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-28 22:06 -0400
                Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-07-29 04:22 +0200
              Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-27 14:40 +0200
          Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-07-26 23:54 +0200
        Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Nobody <jock@soccer.com> - 2025-07-26 15:46 -0700
        Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-07-27 08:41 +0100
          Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-07-27 11:55 -0400
  Re: OT by some standards. Getting a google hit that is not a hit. Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-07-26 20:50 +0200

csiph-web