There's some postal rule about if something is sent to you that you didn't ask for you are not obligated to return it (something like that, maybe somebody either already knows what I am talking about or can look it up?)
So, because I canceled in september.. and now I'm thinking the reason "hugo' told me 'it might take 72 hours for your 99.02 to appear back on your card' was exactly so he could quick backdate the claimed shipping date to one day before I called SE (called and got him on the 15th, spent a LONG time in the phone with Hugo from SE and nothing was said the whole time about 'oh we just sent you out one' or anything).. this was a trick to get me to wait so they could quick send me the thing and have it as an excuse to try to get my 99.02 out of me for keeps.. thats what I think
but I have the proof that it was canceled a full month and a few days before this trickery came... so I am thinking I am NOT obligated to the 99.02 for this thing that was backdated to appear on the invoice as if it was sent on october 14th (one day prior to my talking to SE's Hugo)..
and there's that 'if you got something you didn't ask for' (or whatever, if somebody knows that rule/law please talk about it here)
so I'm thinking I'm okay.
my credit card didn't jsut reverse the charges like I asked, but 'put it into dispute' like I described above and I asked for that card to be closed and a completely different card instead, but still, I am a little sweating this having this stupid unwanted SE Gold One here...
There was no option to return it on the box anywhere.. where I live packages are stored in the complex office for a few days, this came on a saturday, I didn't get it until the following monday...
so I dunno
and if you are supposed to return it and they can finaggle it .. can they just pretend your still 'subscribed' and.. does this have potential to screw up your credit rating etc?
Even if you do send the damned thing back, what keeps them from pretending you didn't send it back/pretending they never got it back and just keeping on and keeping on?
I'm hoping on that post office rule, the fact that I do have proof (even if my stupid credit card 'doesn't do emails' and therefor won't look and see), but kinda sweating this a little too.
I hope the server stops being too busy to let me add this thought:
Isn't there something about being sent something unasked and not being obligated to pay for it?
you know, say Koosh Balls Inc or something sent you a package of koosh balls you didn't ask for, they can't send it then make you pay for it
I'm hoping somebody (especially my credit card) knows this rule I am talking about (because I am kinda sweating the trickery of "hugo' at SE telling me to 'wait 72 hours for the 99.02 to re-appear on your card' when evidently this was a ploy to get me to wait so they could hurry up and send me the stupid Gold One over a full month after I had canceled but pre-dating the invoice to one day BEFORE my conversation with "hugo' about this.. and with my credit card only being willing to 'put this into dispute' and not 'doing email' so I can't show them and prove any of this... )
and what if you even do send the stupid thing back? what keeps them from just pretending you never sent it back? what keeps them from just going 'woops, sorry didn't see that, yes we see you canceled AND sent the thing back" and just... going and going like some evil engergizer bunny trying to dispute and fight you for all eternity?
I hope somebody knows that postal rule I'm trying to talk about and can maybe elaborate on it here and frankly I DO hope SE goes bankrupt and quick (before they can potentially really screw my credit rating and relationship with my credit card over this)
just how is my total (with first $9.95) of about $109.00 "forced donation" (aka the theft of) supposed to help the FDA cause? come again?
Personally the best thing that could happen to us is if SE goes down/goes away and the FDA tries to pick on a reputable decent Electronic Cigarette business, one who doesn't make stupid claims, one who doesn't sink to these 'business' practices -- because it'd be a lot harder for the FDA to take down somebody who's for real and doesn't have this sort of 'baggage' to go with 'em like SE has.