this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
659 points (99.1% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
13090 readers
488 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article
--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I have never seen a more clear cut example of a perfect use case for a credit card chargeback.
Fun fact: You can't dispute part of a charge. If you charge this back and win (you probably will) the hotel loses out on everything, for your entire stay. It also stacks up against them and raises their rates the more they get. An even vaguely concerted effort by people who have been ripped off by this would probably get the hotel in question booted from their credit card processor.
I imagine it's damn difficult to run a hotel if you can't accept credit cards. Just saying.
They disputed it with their bank, the bank sided with the hotel because of the sensor report. Just saying.
Sounds like they also need to find a new bank, then. Or more people need to file — Once banks get wise of a particular scam, they'll start taking a more dim view of it.
STOP USING BANK CARDS TO PAY FOR SHIT.. Credit cards are the way, they are SOOOOOO much easier to deal with than a bank. Also fuck banks.
Edit: a word
Simply put:
If something gets fucked up and you used a debit card, you're the one screwed until it is sorted out (if it is sorted out). Also debit disputes can take 8+ weeks I've heard.
If something is screwed up and you used a credit card, then the bank is on the hook until it is sorted out. And typically they'll credit you the amount until the investigation is complete and it is usually complete within 30 days. I've had chargebacks remain credited simply because the other party never responded.
The commenters are saying "bank" but the original article says she disputed with her credit card company so I don't think that's the case here.
I think without actually talking to the people in question we won’t know for sure. I still feel like they used a bank debit card personally but I guess it’s up in the air.
I see no reason to doubt the original reporter who did actually speak to her. The dispute was denied by her CC after the hotel provided the report. Is that really unbelievable to you?
How do you prove to the bank or in a court of law that you didn't do something? The hotel is alleging that their algorithm detected smoking.
Besides setting up a camera which seems to be very invasive, how would you fight this?
The burden of proof that the sensors cannot provide false positives falls on the hotel chain, not the person getting charged. There is also the question of whether the sensors can be triggered by someone else, or an adjacent room.
You fight them by filing a lawsuit for fraudulently charging you.
Ah yes, the system keeping the poors in their place.
Most people can't afford the time and money required for this, so they don't bother. So corporations and corrupt people get away with all kinds of things.
This seems like a good point. That said, the bank is the failure point here. I don't know if they are actually bound to any laws, or if it's just the bank policy?
If I were them, I'd bitch the bank out and threaten to leave. This is such a clear case of fraud they aren't fighting.
Surprise, banks also pull disgusting shit. Who would have thought about that.
They tried that. If the credit card denies it you could have a lawyer send a letter threatening legal action but that's all going to be at an extra cost unless you know an attorney or they think they could make enough to o do it on spec.
Unfortunately, at a certain point their "data" will just trump your affidavit that you didn't smoke. You'd really have to press the issue to get beyond that, and pay to have expert testimony and technical reviews of the sensor.
A lawyer will send a demand letter, not an affidavit.
An affidavit is for sworn testimony given under oath by someone who is unwilling or unable to appear on the witness stand.
A demand letter is a formal written request for action or payment prior with a threat of legal action for noncompliance.
If they ignore the demand letter then the next step is a civil suit. Depending on the amount this might end up in small claims. Also, tort cases only require a preponderance of evidence.
A preponderance of evidence essentially means you only have to prove something is more likely than not which, in this case, would be pretty easy. The big issue is the expense of this process almost makes it not worth it.
The American legal system favors those with resources.
That's what I'm saying though - it will come down to sworn testimony, and their data from the sensor will likely constitute a preponderance of evidence.
The burden is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. Whomever brings the suit needs to prove that it's more likely than not that they're were incorrectly fined.
Since these devices seem to basically be VOC sensors it wouldn't be that hard to do this.
To a non-technically literate judge/jury. Many people just trust "the data" or "the authority" or "the technology".
I understand that, but bringing one of these sensors into the courtroom and turning on a Dyson air wrap, spraying hairspray, using baby powder etc. and then comparing the results would show the susceptibility of these to be wrong.
It's a demonstrably flawed system so you just need to demonstrate the system in action.
Or you pay monthly for a law service. Those types of letters are exactly what those programs are intended to cover.
In two different cases where I've disputed part of a charge/order, the credit card company returned the money for the entire order like you said. I was surprised they did that, and didn't realize that was the norm.
On the one hand, I never wanted anything I extra that I didn't deserve. On the other hand, both times this has happened to me, the companies at fault really, really went out of their way to deserve it. Not necessarily scam level deserved it like this hotel's smoke detector scam, but still.
Many credit card software providers also charge for the investigation of chargebacks, to the tune of hundreds of dollars, even if the chargeback is reversed.
Accumulating a history of chargebacks against you as a merchant, even if the consumer ultimately loses them, also counts against you and will raise your rates. The processors don't like dealing with merchants that they perceive as excessively risky.
I have to deal with this in my business and the whole thing is really a pain in the ass.
That’s not where it ends though. They can send you to collections.
Happened to me from Verizon after I returned their modem and they said I didn’t.
Many different collectors called and wouldn’t the same track# and photos to show it was returned. It eventually went on my credit, which took a slight hit for all of 2 months.
This is why it's great to belong to the 90% of the world without credit scores. Something similar happened to me, I just sent the company an email that told them that they bought bad credit after a washing machine manufacturer charged me for an in-warranty repair that they didn't even perform.
Haven't heard from them since.
Then they just threaten to take you to court.