New NCL cancellation policy 3/6/2020

[pokerpro5]

6 minutes ago, julig22 said:

Friendly fraud is actually the term used when people try to circumvent a refund policy that they don't agree with.  NCL is currently saying "allow 90 days"  so about 12 weeks.  Doesn't mean it will take that long for a simple refund.  But not all are simple - and if you complicate matters by asking for a chargeback, NCL could put your claim on the bottom of the pile.

https://chargebacks911.com/filing-false-credit-card-dispute/

 

I'll admit I never heard that term before.

 

However, there's a difference between "not agreeing" with a refund policy and it being unreasonable.  Both can be true at the same time.  The guy charging back because he won't wait 10 days for a refund is unreasonable.  The guy who doesn't want to wait a quoted 90 days is completely reasonable.

 

NCL is also far too big and busy with their own problems right now to systematically punish those doing chargebacks.  Just about zero chance that happens.

 

I would not accept a 90-day timeframe.  That's actually worse than 12 weeks -- it's 13!  I already won that airline 12-week wait situation, so I have precedent that CC companies agree such a timeframe is unreasonable.  I advise people to charge back once their cruise is officially canceled, if NCL is still quoting 90 days.

 

There's also the possible complication that NCL goes belly up in 90 days, and that would create an additional problem, especially if this is outside the chargeback window (which it usually is).

[julig22]

9 minutes ago, travelinmama said:

When was your cruise? We were booked on the Jewel 5/25 Vancouver to seward

Mine isn't until October - the transition cruise from Vancouver to San Diego.

[pokerpro5]

16 minutes ago, julig22 said:

So when all the people with FCC book, you think prices will be down - not in my opinion.  There will be a rush in the next year to book (FCC lost if you haven't booked).  NCL has a captive audience, they can charge whatever they want and may have little incentive to lower prices. It could go either way.

 

There is no magic time to book - prices go up and down with demand - it all depends on your situation.  If you want a holiday or summer cruise, waiting may cost you more - and cruises do sell out (mine did).  I book when the price and perks are what I want, knowing that I can make adjustments later.  I booked my now cancelled cruise during the BlackFriday sale - got dirt cheap airfare plus a 20/30% discount.  Booked a OV, knowing I would later upgrade (low bid for balcony accepted 100+ days prior to cruise date).  Cruise, without airfare, was always higher than what I paid (and cruise sold out).  I booked an Alaska cruise last December - my cost is still less, but perks have changed - so it's a choice between reduced airfare & more OBC or double excursion credits, which might make up the cost difference.  Time to start looking at airfare costs!

 

I am on the fence between FCC and cash right now but it's a no brainer on the anticipated May cancellation because I'd have to split the FCC with passenger #2.

 

I don't believe that there will be so many with FCC that they will fill ships for two years.  In fact, it's physically impossible, if you think about.  Unless there are two years' worth of cruises with FCC issued to each passenger, then FCC passengers alone won't fill up the ships.

 

As I said, it wouldn't surprise me if "first available" cruises are booked up by hungry FCC people (at high prices), but this will die off quickly, and we will be left with insane bargains.

 

The general public just has no appetite for cruising right now.

 

Also, NCL doesn't want all-FCC cruises when they start operating again.  They need incoming cash, and need it fast.  The whole point of issuing these FCCs is for their usage to be spread over time -- kind of a, "Let us keep your cash now, and you'll get to use it at greater value later" situation.  They don't want to operate fare-free cruises when they restart!  That would be a disaster!

 

The only way to prevent this would be to offer cheap prices to the general public when they restart, thus enticing non-FCC people to also cruise.

 

These are all just theories, of course, but I'd be surprised if I'm too far off.

[Dodgers671]

Our sailing is 5/25 out of Vancouver 

we will wait to get canceled then wait to rebook same cruise end of August depending on all circumstances we received credit from airlines and canceled all tours hotels etc. I think it’s important to cancel everything except the cruise I like the idea of booking 58 days out and always inside cabin that way I can pay the difference once a ocean or balcony price drops 

[julig22]

5 minutes ago, pokerpro5 said:

NCL is also far too big and busy with their own problems right now to systematically punish those doing chargebacks.  Just about zero chance that happens.

I wouldn't expect punishment other than a delay in the actual refund because of the added processing time.  Very easy to rubberstamp a letter to the bank that outlines the refund process.  However, it would be irresponsible to just allow chargebacks to go through without verification that they are legit - easier to deny it first and then process the refund through in the order it was received or however they process. Remember that there are scammers and unhappy passengers who cancelled instead of waiting and are trying to get around the choices they made.  Or booking with FCC and requesting refunds.  And who knows what other creative attempts at fraud.

When you get a chargeback on your credit card it is a temporary credit.  In most cases, the bank is obligated to give you that credit until the dispute is resolved - it doesn't actually mean that they agree with you, it is their obligation.

https://www.elliott.org/blog/do-not-sail-list-banned-from-cruising/

[pokerpro5]

2 hours ago, julig22 said:

So when all the people with FCC book, you think prices will be down - not in my opinion.  There will be a rush in the next year to book (FCC lost if you haven't booked).  NCL has a captive audience, they can charge whatever they want and may have little incentive to lower prices. It could go either way.

 

There is no magic time to book - prices go up and down with demand - it all depends on your situation.  If you want a holiday or summer cruise, waiting may cost you more - and cruises do sell out (mine did).  I book when the price and perks are what I want, knowing that I can make adjustments later.  I booked my now cancelled cruise during the BlackFriday sale - got dirt cheap airfare plus a 20/30% discount.  Booked a OV, knowing I would later upgrade (low bid for balcony accepted 100+ days prior to cruise date).  Cruise, without airfare, was always higher than what I paid (and cruise sold out).  I booked an Alaska cruise last December - my cost is still less, but perks have changed - so it's a choice between reduced airfare & more OBC or double excursion credits, which might make up the cost difference.  Time to start looking at airfare costs!

 

I am on the fence between FCC and cash right now but it's a no brainer on the anticipated May cancellation because I'd have to split the FCC with passenger #2.

 

Actually, there is a magic time to book in most cases.  It's an inexact science, but it's typically between 30-60 days before sail date.  You need to watch every day and jump on the deep discounts before others do.  It's almost NEVER before final payment date, unless it's a holiday cruise or "rare" itinerary.  Almost all cruises eventually sell out -- it's a matter of when.  Your typical cruise will not sell out before prices fall big time, unless there's something special about the cruise itself (a holiday or a cruise which rarely takes place).

 

If you routinely book before final payment date, you're not getting that great of a deal -- no matter what other tricks you do in the background, such as upgrade bidding.

 

Of course, we're soon about to enter a whole new world of cruise booking, where the old rules don't apply anymore.  But prior to this mess, the 30-60 days before method was consistently best, unless you were on a cruise likely to sell out early.  This stuff was actually fairly predictable.  You would be shocked at some of the deals I scored on balconies and upper-deck insides (as a second room) right near the balcony rooms.

[pokerpro5]

1 hour ago, julig22 said:

I wouldn't expect punishment other than a delay in the actual refund because of the added processing time.  Very easy to rubberstamp a letter to the bank that outlines the refund process.  However, it would be irresponsible to just allow chargebacks to go through without verification that they are legit - easier to deny it first and then process the refund through in the order it was received or however they process. Remember that there are scammers and unhappy passengers who cancelled instead of waiting and are trying to get around the choices they made.  Or booking with FCC and requesting refunds.  And who knows what other creative attempts at fraud.

When you get a chargeback on your credit card it is a temporary credit.  In most cases, the bank is obligated to give you that credit until the dispute is resolved - it doesn't actually mean that they agree with you, it is their obligation.

https://www.elliott.org/blog/do-not-sail-list-banned-from-cruising/

 

Interesting discussion we are having here.  Clearly you are knowledgeable about a lot of this stuff, but in this particular case you are incorrect.

 

The burden of proof to show fraud is on the business facing the chargeback.  They get mailed a chargeback claim, and they are required to respond to it in a relatively short timeframe (often 30 days).

 

If it's fraud, it's up to them to explain it and prove their point.  If they fail to do this, the chargeback is approved, even if it's fraud.

 

If NCL admits to the bank that they're quoting a 90-day timeframe (even "up to" 90 days), then it's pretty much game/set/match for them.  Most banks would immediately rule against them, as one cannot collect payment for a service, cancel the service, and then take an additional 3 months to give the money back.

 

Or even if NCL doesn't admit it, if the customer submits documentation of the 90-day timeframe, again, NCL will lose, regardless of what they try to say in response (if they respond at all, which I think they might not, given all that's happening!)

 

Will you get banned from NCL for this?  Very unlikely.  That would be an absolute PR nightmare for NCL.  Imagine a family, everyone suddenly unemployed, in desperate need for money which charges back because NCL can't process the refunds in a timely fashion.  Imagine if they get banned for that.  There would be a riot over this.  NCL needs all the positive press it can get right now, between their call center coronavirus shenanigans and the general backlash against the cruise industry.

 

NCL will typically only ban someone who is showing a pattern of poor behavior or fraud.  They wouldn't ban innocent families attempting to get their money back in these times of crisis.  Zero point zero chance that happens.

[julig22]

2 minutes ago, pokerpro5 said:

 

Actually, there is a magic time to book in most cases.  It's an inexact science, but it's typically between 30-60 days before sail date.  You need to watch every day and jump on the deep discounts before others do.  It's almost NEVER before final payment date, unless it's a holiday cruise or "rare" itinerary.  Almost all cruises eventually sell out -- it's a matter of when.  Your typical cruise will not sell out before prices fall big time, unless there's something special about the cruise itself (a holiday or a cruise which rarely takes place).

 

If you routinely book before final payment date, you're not getting that great of a deal -- no matter what other tricks you do in the background, such as upgrade bidding.

 

Of course, we're soon about to enter a whole new world of cruise booking, where the old rules don't apply anymore.  But prior to this mess, the 30-60 days before method was consistently best, unless you were on a cruise likely to sell out early.  This stuff was actually fairly predictable.  You would be shocked at some of the deals I scored on balconies and upper-deck insides (as a second room) right near the balcony rooms.

Believe what you wish and do what works best for you.  Many many CC discussions on the subject will disagree with you.  It just depends on what you consider a deal - some people are picky and would never buy a gty or sail-away cabin. My best cruises were all booked well before final payment.  I am retired, so I don't have to worry about scheduling, but I also don't live near a port city, so I have to factor in the best time to buy airfare.  A cheap cruise and a premium air ticket isn't a bargain.  I don't deny that there are deals to be had, but sometimes there are other factors to consider.

[njhorseman]

3 minutes ago, pokerpro5 said:

 

Interesting discussion we are having here.  Clearly you are knowledgeable about a lot of this stuff, but in this particular case you are incorrect.

 

The burden of proof to show fraud is on the business facing the chargeback.  They get mailed a chargeback claim, and they are required to respond to it in a relatively short timeframe (often 30 days).

 

If it's fraud, it's up to them to explain it and prove their point.  If they fail to do this, the chargeback is approved, even if it's fraud.

 

If NCL admits to the bank that they're quoting a 90-day timeframe (even "up to" 90 days), then it's pretty much game/set/match for them.  Most banks would immediately rule against them, as one cannot collect payment for a service, cancel the service, and then take an additional 3 months to give the money back.

 

Or even if NCL doesn't admit it, if the customer submits documentation of the 90-day timeframe, again, NCL will lose, regardless of what they try to say in response (if they respond at all, which I think they might not, given all that's happening!)

 

Will you get banned from NCL for this?  Very unlikely.  That would be an absolute PR nightmare for NCL.  Imagine a family, everyone suddenly unemployed, in desperate need for money which charges back because NCL can't process the refunds in a timely fashion.  Imagine if they get banned for that.  There would be a riot over this.  NCL needs all the positive press it can get right now, between their call center coronavirus shenanigans and the general backlash against the cruise industry.

 

NCL will typically only ban someone who is showing a pattern of poor behavior or fraud.  They wouldn't ban innocent families attempting to get their money back in these times of crisis.  Zero point zero chance that happens.

In the end, this discussion is being made far too complicated. To put it simply of course your chargeback claim is going to be approved if it's for a cruise where the cruise line has already agreed to make a refund. All you're doing with the chargeback is speeding up the process of getting your refund. It's nothing remotely fraudulent and NCL or any other cruise line isn't going to oppose it because they can't...they have already agreed to refund your money. I've done it in the past with a company that was taking its sweet time to refund a payment. It was approved and the case closed very quickly.

[julig22]

5 minutes ago, pokerpro5 said:

 

Interesting discussion we are having here.  Clearly you are knowledgeable about a lot of this stuff, but in this particular case you are incorrect.

 

The burden of proof to show fraud is on the business facing the chargeback.  They get mailed a chargeback claim, and they are required to respond to it in a relatively short timeframe (often 30 days).

 

If it's fraud, it's up to them to explain it and prove their point.  If they fail to do this, the chargeback is approved, even if it's fraud.

 

If NCL admits to the bank that they're quoting a 90-day timeframe (even "up to" 90 days), then it's pretty much game/set/match for them.  Most banks would immediately rule against them, as one cannot collect payment for a service, cancel the service, and then take an additional 3 months to give the money back.

 

Or even if NCL doesn't admit it, if the customer submits documentation of the 90-day timeframe, again, NCL will lose, regardless of what they try to say in response (if they respond at all, which I think they might not, given all that's happening!)

 

Will you get banned from NCL for this?  Very unlikely.  That would be an absolute PR nightmare for NCL.  Imagine a family, everyone suddenly unemployed, in desperate need for money which charges back because NCL can't process the refunds in a timely fashion.  Imagine if they get banned for that.  There would be a riot over this.  NCL needs all the positive press it can get right now, between their call center coronavirus shenanigans and the general backlash against the cruise industry.

 

NCL will typically only ban someone who is showing a pattern of poor behavior or fraud.  They wouldn't ban innocent families attempting to get their money back in these times of crisis.  Zero point zero chance that happens.

Agree to disagree.  It is fraud to claim a refund, using the refund policy, and then turn around and claim a chargeback.  It is fraud to claim a refund if FCC is the policy.  There is nothing that I know of that prohibits a merchant  from implementing a 90-day refund policy.  I do not agree that a bank will agree it the merchant is following their posted cancellation policy - I would venture to guess that somewhere in the small print in the contract you signed when you booked your cruise that they outline their refund policy.  I'm sure that their highly paid attorneys have approved their policy.

 

Will NCL ban people - probably not, unless they see it as a way to cancel out refunds.

 

And again, up to 90 days does NOT mean you won't get your refund for 90 days.  I don't know what is reasonable, as everyone's refund is not going to just be a simple CC charge reversal.  But people who are doing chargebacks 5 minutes after they put in their request for a refund are doing nothing but making it more complicated for everyone.

[pokerpro5]

9 minutes ago, julig22 said:

Believe what you wish and do what works best for you.  Many many CC discussions on the subject will disagree with you.  It just depends on what you consider a deal - some people are picky and would never buy a gty or sail-away cabin. My best cruises were all booked well before final payment.  I am retired, so I don't have to worry about scheduling, but I also don't live near a port city, so I have to factor in the best time to buy airfare.  A cheap cruise and a premium air ticket isn't a bargain.  I don't deny that there are deals to be had, but sometimes there are other factors to consider.

 

Yes, there are other factors.  I found that airfare doesn't tend to jump sharply in price until about 3-3.5 weeks before flying.  Sometimes not even then.  Yes, there's some gamble involved, but overall I've come out way ahead with this 30-60 day method.  This is especially true if you approach the cruise with the attitude that you're willing to not go if something unexpected like super-high airfare happens.

 

I don't usually buy GTY rooms -- and I'll absolutely never get an inside GTY because you often end up on dreaded deck 4.

 

I agree it's about personal preference.  If you're super-picky about room location and MUST have a mid-ship room on deck 11, my strategy isn't a good one for you.  However, at the same time, you can still have reasonable standards for rooms (such as no GTY rooms, and only a balcony or beter), and still do great with my strategy.

 

As I said, if you are typically buying before final payment date, you aren't getting a good deal.  This upsets people to hear because nobody wants to feel like they aren't a smart shopper, but it's the truth.  There are exceptions for specific cruises, but for the most part, this is 100% true.  Or at least it was.  Nobody knows what awaits us on the other end.

[julig22]

6 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

In the end, this discussion is being made far too complicated. To put it simply of course your chargeback claim is going to be approved if it's for a cruise where the cruise line has already agreed to make a refund. All you're doing with the chargeback is speeding up the process of getting your refund. It's nothing remotely fraudulent and NCL or any other cruise line isn't going to oppose it because they can't...they have already agreed to refund your money. I've done it in the past with a company that was taking its sweet time to refund a payment. It was approved and the case closed very quickly.

Or slowing it down.  Not every chargeback is going to be approved because not every chargeback request will be valid.  So they can choose to refuse every chargeback request because they have a refund process or they can add processing time because they will still have to research each and every claim that comes through.

[pokerpro5]

9 minutes ago, julig22 said:

Agree to disagree.  It is fraud to claim a refund, using the refund policy, and then turn around and claim a chargeback.  It is fraud to claim a refund if FCC is the policy.  There is nothing that I know of that prohibits a merchant  from implementing a 90-day refund policy.  I do not agree that a bank will agree it the merchant is following their posted cancellation policy - I would venture to guess that somewhere in the small print in the contract you signed when you booked your cruise that they outline their refund policy.  I'm sure that their highly paid attorneys have approved their policy.

 

Will NCL ban people - probably not, unless they see it as a way to cancel out refunds.

 

And again, up to 90 days does NOT mean you won't get your refund for 90 days.  I don't know what is reasonable, as everyone's refund is not going to just be a simple CC charge reversal.  But people who are doing chargebacks 5 minutes after they put in their request for a refund are doing nothing but making it more complicated for everyone.

 

A "refund policy" is meaningless.  I could sell you a room at my hotel, and bury it in the fine print that, in the event that I cancel on you, your refund will take up to 20 years to receive.

 

Do you think you'd win that chargeback?  Could I simply claim that you are too impatient and that you agreed to the 20-year-refund policy?

 

Obviously not.  90 days is excessive.  You can say it isn't, but you're wrong.  People have a right to a timely refund when a service provider cancels on them, and 90 days is not timely.

 

It is not "fraud" in any way.  You are making the "Terms of Service" mistake, of which many consumers fall prey.  They assume that, if a company has a policy, then they are bound to it no matter what.  They also assume that, if they agreed to some term, they are bound to it, even if it's illegal or unenforceable by law.

 

NCL's lame "refund policy" is not relevant when it comes to chargebacks -- especially in a situation where THEY cancelled the cruise.  The only relevant question is, "How long is too long for a customer to wait for a refund when the company cancels on them", and the answer is "Much less than 90 days".

Edited March 29, 2020 by pokerpro5

[Dodgers671]

Thanks for the useful information on when to book 

[pokerpro5]

2 minutes ago, julig22 said:

Or slowing it down.  Not every chargeback is going to be approved because not every chargeback request will be valid.  So they can choose to refuse every chargeback request because they have a refund process or they can add processing time because they will still have to research each and every claim that comes through.

 

Again, the burden of proof is on the cruise line to prove fraud.

 

As njhorseman said, they cannot claim fraud on a refund they already offered but are too slow to process in a timely fashion.

 

It is baffling that you are finding every far-fetched scenario possible to make your point, rather than just admitting that most of these chargebacks will be quickly approved, and there wil be no further consequence to anyone.  That is, by far, the most likely result to occur.

[julig22]

Just now, pokerpro5 said:

 

Again, the burden of proof is on the cruise line to prove fraud.

 

As njhorseman said, they cannot claim fraud on a refund they already offered but are too slow to process in a timely fashion.

 

It is baffling that you are finding every far-fetched scenario possible to make your point, rather than just admitting that most of these chargebacks will be quickly approved, and there wil be no further consequence to anyone.  That is, by far, the most likely result to occur.

Well, just call me a considerate human being who doesn't try to jump the line just because I don't want to wait.  Again, NOBODY SAID IT WILL TAKE 90 DAYS to get your SIMPLE CC refund.  It might.  And it might take those of us who wait in line longer, thanks to the line-jumpers.  And we might get ours sooner because there aren't any flags on our account.  Time will tell (assuming I request a refund).

And yes, they can claim fraud.  Probably won't, but they can.

[njhorseman]

2 hours ago, julig22 said:

Well, just call me a considerate human being who doesn't try to jump the line just because I don't want to wait.  Again, NOBODY SAID IT WILL TAKE 90 DAYS to get your SIMPLE CC refund.  It might.  And it might take those of us who wait in line longer, thanks to the line-jumpers.  And we might get ours sooner because there aren't any flags on our account.  Time will tell (assuming I request a refund).

And yes, they can claim fraud.  Probably won't, but they can.

You're stuck on this "can claim fraud" idea, which is false. Conclusions drawn from a false premise can lead to incorrect conclusions...and yours is an example of that.

 

 

[julig22]

51 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

You're stuck on this "can claim fraud" idea, which is false. Conclusions drawn from a false premise can lead to incorrect conclusions...and yours is an example of that.

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.  I have made statements based on research that I have done, both for this and with regard to another situation.  Believe what you want.  Should I chose to take a refund and I don't get that back within the 90 day time-frame that I agree to when I press the enter button, then I will contact my CC.  Not a day earlier.

[pokerpro5]

17 hours ago, julig22 said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.  I have made statements based on research that I have done, both for this and with regard to another situation.  Believe what you want.  Should I chose to take a refund and I don't get that back within the 90 day time-frame that I agree to when I press the enter button, then I will contact my CC.  Not a day earlier.

 

Good luck with that.  Many credit cards don't let you charge back more than 60 days after purchase.

 

Some people may be over that limit already, because obviously final payment date was awhile ago.  Some exceptions might be made here, but the longer you wait, the less chance such an exception will be made.

[julig22]

8 minutes ago, pokerpro5 said:

 

Good luck with that.  Many credit cards don't let you charge back more than 60 days after purchase.

 

Some people may be over that limit already, because obviously final payment date was awhile ago.  Some exceptions might be made here, but the longer you wait, the less chance such an exception will be made.

I think you will find that the normal (could vary by bank, info is based on MC) timeline when a cruise or other travel arrangements are cancelled by the merchant, the filing period is 120 days after the scheduled event does not happen.  It is not based on purchase date when goods or services are not delivered.

[gstrick99]

My friend who was going with me on the 4/18 Epic TA talked to someone at NCL in early March. They told her if NCL has to cancel, we would get a refund instead of future cruise credit as we would get if we cancel it ourselves. Knowing there has now been some cancelled, I wonder if anyone can verify that's what they are doing? That isn't in writing to my knowledge, but we are planning to wait it out and see if they cancel it. I feel sure they will, now that guidelines have been extended. When it's all settled down, I see cruises being the last to get going with the bad publicity they had.

 

Edited March 30, 2020 by gstrick99

[luv2kroooz]

23 hours ago, julig22 said:

Well, just call me a considerate human being who doesn't try to jump the line just because I don't want to wait. 

90 days is excessive and at least 30 days - in some cases - 60 days longer than the competition. It's an unnecessary delay in a time of pandemic to preserve cash flow because they need cash. And that is wrong for many reasons. I don't wait up to 90 days for a refund. I may wait up to 30 days, though.

[julig22]

35 minutes ago, blcruising said:

90 days is excessive and at least 30 days - in some cases - 60 days longer than the competition. It's an unnecessary delay in a time of pandemic to preserve cash flow because they need cash. And that is wrong for many reasons. I don't wait up to 90 days for a refund. I may wait up to 30 days, though.

You might find this discussion enlightening - so much for your comparison to the competition.  HAL seems to be quoting 60 days, again per an easily researched CC discussion on the subject.

 

[pokerpro5]

julig22 seems to thinking that a refusal to accept a 90-day refund time is "fraud" and "cutting in line".

 

It's not any kind of fraud, and you're not cutting any line, because it has nothing to do with a line.  The credit card company simply takes the money away from NCL and gives it back to you, as it should.

 

It is foolish to worry about what "policies" are, or what other cruise lines are doing.  NCL would not have allowed you to pay 3 months late, so you should not grant them that courtesy, either.

 

They could easily process these refunds far faster.  They're choosing not to -- either on purpose, or by being cheap with staffing.

 

Either way, that's their problem, not ours.

[travelinmama]

Well said pokerpro5... I had an issue with them with our deposit a few months ago. We had made a deposit and then had to change our reservation so they had to refund our deposit and then we made another deposit. Well that refunded deposit was supposed to be back to me within 10 days. And I believe it took them close to a month to get it back to me. I have to look back on my notes but it was a very very long time. When I was finally able to reach someone in that department, I was told that it was taking so long because they don't have the staff to process the refunds. In addition I had used a virtual account number and they had a question about that but nobody reached out to call me. I basically felt like if I didn't stay on top of that issue and check on my refund every other day, they could have cared less

Edited March 30, 2020 by travelinmama