Ja, min sagde, at det var åbent, men kunderådgiverne havde heller ikke en anelse om, hvad der foregik, selv da jeg gav ref-numre og endda gennemgik hver transaktion. Jeg rejste endda 2 klager over inkompetencen, som blev lukket med det samme på min app. du kan se, hvor mange gange det er blevet aflyst og åbnet 4 gange for at være helt præcis. Det er derfor, rådgiveren fortalte mig, at det er blevet lukket, og den endelige beslutning var truffet, det var sent i september, så jeg sagde nej, det er stadig åbent, da det står åben på min app, det var da hun sagde, at jeg ville tale med min leder og vende tilbage til dig ,da hun kom tilbage, det var da hun fortalte mig, at sagen helt sikkert var afsluttet, men nogen bliver ved med at rejse den, men den bliver ved med at blive afvist. Lige efter den samtale modtog jeg en e-mail om, at de stadig efterforsker SMH. Så beslutningen var allerede truffet, og jeg føler, at de bare trak den ud for at få det til at se ud, som om de gjorde noget uvidende om den samtale. Jeg tror ærligt talt ikke, at det nogensinde er blevet rejst som varer, der ikke er modtaget, da årsagerne bag det var den samme grund til det oprindelige afslag på ip-adressen for bedrageri. Men hvem ved, alles sag er forskelligt baseret. Jeg håber du har mere held end mig fingre x for dig hun
Yeah mine was saying it was open but the customer advisors either didn't have a clue what was going on even when I gave ref numbers and even went through every transaction .I even raised 2 complaints on the incompetence which was closed immediately on my app you can see how many times it's been cancelled and opened 4 times to be exact. That's why the advisor told me it's been closed and final decision had been made this was late Sept so I said no it's still open as it says open on my app that's when she said I am going to speak to my manager and get back to you ,when she came back that's when she told me the case was definitely closed but someone keeps raising it but it will keep getting rejected. Straight after that conversation I received an email stating they are still investigating SMH. So the decision had already been made and I feel they just dragged it out to make it look as if they where doing something unaware of that conversation. I honestly don't think it was ever raised as goods not received as the reasons behind it was the same reason for the inital refusal for fraud the ip address. But who knows everyone's case is based differently. I hope you have more luck than me fingers x for you hun
Automatisk oversættelse: