Any lawyers in the house?

[cj]

Originally posted by Bad Boy Rob@Jul 12 2003, 07:00 AM
If you are a new client and start processing with them now I reckon they can. They can draw out a new contract and say you are not allowed to process with Ibill for future clients. If you then sign you are legally bound by it.

However they are now implenting something that customers prior to this announcement have not signed up to. You could easily tell them to fuck off and then if they cut your service you would win in a court of law as you have an agreement with them for them to process.

this was my initial thought, however, changing the rules is pretty common with processors and their clients ...

the only logical argument i have seen for this so far is hoopers comment ...

I'm never in the know on these things, but if i had to guess, i'd assume that because of some new visa regulations about tracking sponsored merchants across multiple ipsp's that an ipsp's overall portfolio numbers could potentially be affected by another ipsp's customer's fraud scrubbing or lack thereof.

but in this case, if you have separate companies registered with the processors, how can they enforce it?

epoch might be the leader in the biz of processing right now, but with their 'creative' billing methods of the last 12 months, i'm confused as to why ibill is going to cause them any additional grief than they already have from their own actions.

as far as customer service, usability of their admin areas etc, they both suck ass and have a long way to go before either of them can make a move to own the business ... but ibill does have a better track record than paycom.

the lives of 3rd party processors are shortening every day with the new rules in place - shit like this is only going to push more people to their own merchant accounts.

oh well, nobody thought this was going to be a boring future!