vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
It depends, generally for consumer goods it is advisable to pay money in one go and avoid paying installments as there are charges for it.
You do know that people already receive many benefits? Rather than just handing out cash we use other forms of payments to limit fraud &amp; abuse of taxpayers funds. Its not working. You would think with the huge increase in entitlement spending over the last 10 years that things would get better. We had our universal income study in America,it failed.
Not exactly the *best* reminder that PayPal is an arbitrary and capricious payment system with far too little oversight and far too much influence, but hey, I have room in my heart to hate Illinois Nazis and Peter Thiel on the same day.
If Apple uses the customer's bank's prefix, then the bank gets the charge sent directly to themselves and Apple is not a payment intermediary Yes as part of adding a Card to Apple Pay, the details are sent over to issuing Bank along with device details and other info. Based on verification, the Bank sends a DAN[Device Account Number] and other codes. After you show your phone at Point of Sale, DAN gets transmitted. This is similar as Card Number getting transmitted, there is additional info encoded. Visa then sends this back to Issuing Bank and based on DAN the actual card is charged. So yes Apple doesn't know your Card Number once it gets the DAN. it's entirely possible that organized-criminals could devise even harder-to-find NFC skimmers Right now criminals have found the easy step ... as part of set-up Apple Pay sends info the Issuing Bank to Verify. If you are frequent user of iTunes and have used the same card for years, etc, its auto approved. Else they use alternative method, i.e. call the customer, etc. It is easy here to spawn. I get card details, no need to spend time in duplicating stuff [mag or chip]. Just try registering on Apply Pay, some one less experienced from Customer Service calls up and I am approved. Use this for few places and then just delete this card and add a new one. As Apply Pay doesn't store my card, they don't know new from old ...
And if *society* were paying them, there is a legitimate discussion.  But *society* doesn't pay them. Their employers and/or their customers pay them. And I'm certain there is a very strong relationship between the amounts written on the checks and the worth of that product or service to the person with the pen.
While I'm not an accountant, this is how I do this for my personal   accounting: Note, if you don't want the expense to take effect right away meaning   it'll affect your Profits, then the transaction date here needs to be   something in the future, then when you hit that date and the bill is   still not paid, you just unpost the bill and repost again with a new   date . So you end up with something like the following:   4. Now you post the invoice to Liabilities:Accounts Payable:The Cable Company, the invoice due date should reflect what you had in the invoice. This is important as gnucash will warn you that your bill is due if you want to pay it every time it starts:  When you're ready to pay the bill, just find the bill and click pay invoice. If it's already paid and you imported transactions from your bank, find the transaction then right click and click assign as payment then choose your invoice. Note: I've being using this to also record cheques that are given to   people but not cashed yet. I hope that helps.
They are valid checks, but you're going to get hassled when you try to use them. There's a perception that people using starter checks are more likely to bounce or otherwise be troublesome. When more payments were made with checks, some vendors would not accept checks with low numbers either! Checks are very cheap to get printed these days, save yourself some trouble and get some printed.
"Ok, now if someone could explain to my why Argentina didn't do the following:  * Set out a schedule of payments for the 100% of the debt, and pay everybody (Mr. Singer included);  * When they hit the haircut % amount, declare ""default"".  The parties that had agreed to the haircut would be fine, as they had already agreed to the haircut.   Mr. Singer would be left out to dry for the rest of the money, due to the default.   It would technically count as a default, but only the vulture-funds would experience the actual default, and so the markets would see that haircuts for the majority actually apply for everybody, and henceforth encouraging all bond-holders to negotiate hair-cuts rather than encourage vultures to buy nonds for a nickle and demand the full dollar."
I had a client that BoA forced escrows, and then forgot to pay their insurance company, and during the period the client's policy lapsed. While the policy was lapsed, a tree fell on the roof during a storm creating a huge hole. When they contacted their insurance, they were of course told the policy was cancelled for non payment. When they contacted BoA they admitted to their mistake and apologized, but accepted no responsibility in helping the homeowner with repairs. Instead, they gave them back the 2 months of escrows, and stopped collecting escrows for insurance and taxes all together.  My client spent all the money they were reimbursed, and had saved up fixing their roof, and couldn't make payments that following month. BoA threw their hands up and said oh well, not our problem. They explained why they weren't able or prepared to pay them on time, and eventually ended up falling 3 months behind, when BoA decided to foreclose on them.  Being average consumers that didn't know their rights, they lost their home, but have now filed suit. One could only hope the court awards these people maximum damages. BoA needs to be taken down, and has no business being in existence after all they have done to the consumers.
Another reason to think it's a scam: fake paypal email notifications are a thing.  I've seen one that was quite convincing (but it wasn't mine to properly analyse or report), so the intial payment may be a fake from another account belonging to the scammer, and you've just transferred money to the scammer. The fake email can include links to log in to a fake paypal website, which can be quite convincing as the mark will give the login details which can be used to scrape data.  Links not going to where they say is the giveaway here.
"Yes, there is a slight reason to worry as the debit card contains  1) Account Number 2) of course a the Debit Card number  3) CSV code at the back of every debit card and  mostly these three parameters are being followed to verify the authenticity of the cardholder, but there are some other parameters like ""password of your debit card"" and even address in some cases. So stay chill the manager will not be able to make any online payment using the credential of your debit card without password and other details..."
Even where national law might allow such a practice, the law in an individual province or state (either for issuing or receiving bank) might not; or if that does then the receiving bank may have its own regulations or compliance practice which may not permit them to accept an altered cheque.  In any case, printed numbers are usually machine-readable, and a corrected cheque would not be.  The question needs a specific answer which addresses the specific circumstances involved (which are not stated, at the time of writing this), but for the general question “Should I alter a printed cheque?” the answer must be no. Cheque numbers are used for identification of the cheque. In many cases, there is no verification of uniqueness and it would be perfectly acceptable simply to use cheques with duplicate numbers: a cheque is merely an order to the bank to make a payment. But you would not be able to identify a particular payment on your statement, and neither would the issuing bank if you wanted one stopped. Where the number is verified as unique, then clearing the payment may be refused or at best delayed in order to be queried. Making an obvious amendment to a cheque’s details is likely to raise a red flag. The receiving bank would not be able to tell if you did it, or the payee; they would not know why. They may suspect that it was done in order to render the cheque unidentifiable [even though the opposite is in fact the case] and refuse to accept it. They may refuse to accept it because it could not be read automatically. Any refusal would sour your relationship with your payees. Presumably your printing house (or your bank, if they printed them) has made the error: raise it with them and have them reprint the batch. Ask your bank what to do with the incorrect cheques: they may want them returned to the bank, or they may be happy for you to keep (and even use) them. If the latter, I suggest you shred them.
Personally, it is the tenant's stupidity to leave cash and not get a receipt. If it were me, I would demand payment. But then $750 to me is a lot more than it may be to others. This is entirely a personal decision, legally I don't think the tenant has a leg to stand on because they have no proof they actually paid you, regardless of how or where they 'left it'.
"&gt; PayPal isn't even the largest, let alone the only processing company,  You could say the same about any public utility. (except the one largest one, technically)  &gt; And Visa/Mastercard don't control the issuing of cards to individuals, banks do.  My point was that VISA/MasterCard have stepped in to block on the merchant side, in the case of WikiLeaks. Are you saying they are unable, *both* contractually *and* technically, to affect the consumer side?  But also by selectively quoting me you are (deliberately?) side-stepping what *actually happened* in the WikiLeaks case, to focus on the consumer side.  &gt; No one is denying legal use of money and PayPal is nowhere close to having a monopoly.  You must buy things in different corners of the Internet than I do. The customer experience (to me) is that there is ""the store"" or you can pay with PayPal. Yes, ""the store"" is actually a payment processor but this is a quick slippery slope to ""what? You can just set up your own payment processor once they've all blocked your legal business""."
Obviously, the credit card's administators know who this charge was submitted by. Contact them, tell them that you don't recognize the charge, and ask them to tell you who it was from. If they can't or won't, tell them you suspect fraud and want it charged back, then wait to see who contacts you to complain that the payment was cancelled. Note that you should charge back  any charge you firmly believe is an error, if attempts to resolve it with the company aren't working. Also note that if you really ghink this is fraud, you should contact your bank and ask them to issue a new card number. Standard procedures exist. Use them when appropriate.
Ask your bank or credit union. Mine will let me issue recurring payments to anyone, electronically if they can, if not a check gets mailed and (I presume) I get billed for the postage.
All I am saying is that I would pay $.50 in order to not deal with automated check out.   I'm sure that once we reach the point of automated check out that there will not be a checkout, like the Amazon convenience store.
Once you accept payment for an insurance claim, the insurance company has discharged its obligation to you.  You could burn the money in a barrel and they would not care.  There is no expectation or requirement that you repair or restore the insured item.  You can do whatever you wish with the money.
"We change it every so often to reduce fraud. If you're absolutely sure you didn't just send money to a scammer impersonating a landlord, this has nothing to do with fraud-- they're playing a game with you. By changing the account number frequently, it makes it more likely you make a mistake in entering the payment account. When they come back to you a few days past due saying ""we never received your rent,"" you'll eventually realize it got sent to the wrong account. Now you owe them late fees, and there's really nothing you can do about it-- you did not in fact pay them on time; you sent it to the wrong account! It's an easy way for them to collect an additional few thousand dollars a year. Anytime a small business or landlord says they have to do something ""weird"" to reduce fraud, chances are it's a pretense to you getting hosed in some way."
I don't know if they did or didn't, but my thinking is they did not.  But saying 'they didn't pay taxes' is only literally correct, and not correct in the way that people will receive it as.  In other words, it's not telling the whole story and letting people draw erroneous conclusions as a result.    Basically, if a company takes a loss one year, then they get that loss reduced from their taxes the next year.  I assume GE took losses in 2009 due to the 2008 crash and thus did not pay taxes in 2010.
There are thousands of processors. But I explicitly mentioned the customer experience, which is completely different and no matter how much you want your industry experience to matter for that, it doesn't affect it.  This you did not read and comprehend.  Could you clarify for me how VISA/MasterCard managed to block a merchant, who presumably wasn't a direct customer (but instead a payment processor customer), but cannot block a card holder? (yes, this is an honest question)  &gt; Visa and Mastercard prohibited payments to Wikileaks on the basis of WL allegedly facilitating illegal activity. How is that relevant to what PayPal's doing?  The WikiLeaks blockade was clearly political. What makes you say otherwise? And this is political.  &gt; No one is unable to accept payments if they're barred from PayPal.  In this case, yes. So who is morally and/or legally responsible when everyone does the same thing?
"&gt; The main issue is that anonymous payment is strongly opposed by banking and governments.  The US government [prints nearly half a trillion dollars](http://www.moneyfactory.gov/uscurrency/annualproductionfigures.html) of anonymous money *a year* for use by the public, and banks spend untold billions maintaining a network of machines to dispense it at the time and place of your choosing. In what way is that ""strong opposition?"""
This is really a question for the paypal folks. as I understand it however, when you setup a paypal account, you are granting it access to your back account, so when you make a payment using paypal, it takes money directly from your bank account, and if you get paid for something via paypal, the money goes directly into your account. If that's not how they paypal account you have is working, then you need to get help from paypal to figure out how to make it work for you.
You should check directly with the seller. I suspect you will find they have not recieved any money. Paypal tend to hang on to money as long as possible in all transactions, and will do anything to avoid giving out cash before it has come in.
&gt; But I pretty much followed the procedure I was told to, its just I don't know why we wouldn't get the money back.  First, you're in the wrong spot. Go to /r/personalfinance.  Second, does it *really* make sense that you'd still get paid?   If someone stole your wallet and bought something for $100, can you not go to the store and demand your $100? Or do you have to go and find the thief THEN get back *that* item and THEN return it to the store and THEN get your cash back?   It's easier both logistically and logically to stop the payment going to the store, and have the store consider it a theft of their merchandise.
Thank you for letting me know because I didn't realize that it's been covered in this sub before.  Not everyone is a seasoned veteran of the sub so I had no idea.  I'm not sure what's wrong with posting a non-paywall link for those who don't have access to WSJ. I wasn't trying to shit on anyone or make some kind of statement or anything.  I was just offering up what I found because I think WSJ is a total ripoff and I refuse to pay for their site.  No big deal.  Anyway, sorry my post from 8 days ago annoyed you.
I've got a card that I've had for about 25 years now.  The only time they charged me interest I showed it was their goof (the automatic payment failed because of their mistake) and they haven't cancelled it.  No annual fee, a bit of cash back. The only cards I've ever had an issuer close are ones I didn't use.
The answer to your question is very simple: The preauth and the shipment of the goods have no connection within the credit card system. It is possible to process a payment that does not cancel a preauthorization. This is needed for the case where you place two orders and the one you placed second ships first. A preauth can remain active for some time unless it is captured or cancelled. So in your case a preauth was placed and remained active. That you were shipped and billed for some goods had no effect on the preauth because one side or the other failed to attach them.
Better suited to /r/personalfinance, but you definitely owe the money. Unless you had something in writing that they were going to send a bill to a certain address, it's your responsibility to pay. Hell, even if you did have something in writing that said they'd send the bill somewhere else it's still your responsibility to pay even if the bill doesn't show up. You know you owed them money.  When your parents didn't get the bill, you should have called the company to ask about it. It's your responsibility to follow up since you're the one that owes the money.  What did you think would happen when you went 5 months without paying $312 that you knew you owed?
You only pay VAT if you buy from a VAT-registered company; if they are not registered, you don't pay. So, thinking about your supplier, if they are VAT-registered they will charge you VAT, if they are not they won't. The buyer's status makes no difference, the seller doesn't get involved in whether the buyer is able to reclaim or not (based on their VAT-registered status).
Are you sure the payment has actually posted and isn't sitting in a pre-auth status?  If it is, it'll fall off in a few days and they're probably telling the truth. If not, and it has fully posted to your account, I agree with the others.  It's very appropriate to initiate a chargeback.  You can provide documentation showing they confirmed a cancellation, further, you can show proof that they had no intent of charging you. Good luck!
Thats a good point but they are still not giving the companies cash.  I think some people read these headlines and think their taxes are literally being handed to these companies as a check which is not the case.  I did note that one company near me is getting actual cash to help with their move which is the first time I have heard of something like this: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/12/01/2816928/chiquita-payout-called-unique.html
I defaulted on my federal loans, as have over 8 million others. I have a ton of money in savings from not having paid the loans for several years. I work for myself, so all they can do is make calls asking me to sign up for their payment plans.
You should do both: Contact the bank abroad and tell them the payment may have been misdirected and ask what they can do to trace or recall the payment. Contact HSBC, show them the sheet with the incorrect details, and ask them to help you fix the problem. International payments are generally hard to trace and fix so it's important to get things going from both ends as soon as possible. Make sure you keep the sheet or a copy of it so you have evidence you can use later if it comes to a dispute with HSBC. Keep any other documentation or letters you get from them. Also, if you're not already doing it, start keeping notes of what's happening as it happens so you have a contemporaneous record of events - those are generally much more convincing to other people than anything that was constructed from memory a long time after the event.
Why not?  Couldn't one assume that if a person does not go to college then they'd go straight into the work force?  Given that college usually takes 4 years to complete, that worker would only have to save $6,250 per year for the down payment and would be debt-free.
"Banks do NOT lend money they don't have. I don't know where you get that idea. In your view what stops a bank from lending a quadrillion dollars? Banks do need to have savings in the bank - learn about reserve requirements, which I mentioned above. Banks (just like you and me) can have assets and debts, but they account for them and they net to (almost) zero, just like you and me.  Fed does not pay government as I stated above. The Fed buys goods from the open market (Treasury Bonds, for example, which are IOUs the government has sold to investors who purchased them freely), and the Fed pays for this with ""new"" money while holding the bonds, which then pay out just like they were being held by you or me.  Finally, M2 is about 10 times M1, for the reasons I gave. Your claim of M2 increasing regardless of M1 is not true. [See here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Components_of_US_Money_supply.svg) for example and note that M2 is about 10x of M1, with the variations being for the reasons I gave above."
It is possible that the person you were on the phone with was in possession of the credentials of a paypal account that was not actually theirs.  The sad truth is that there are a lot of scammers out there and they can be very convincing while talking to you on their burner phone.     Then they send you money and before the actual owner of the account can do anything the scammer gets you to surrender your goods.  Then the payment gets reversed and when you call that phone number they used no one answers, or the phone is not in service. For this reason do not release the product until you actually have the money.  For software work use an escrow account at a reputable bank to ensure that the funds will be available when you complete the work.
Varying the amount to reflect income during the quarter is entirely legitimate -- consider someone like a salesman whose income is partly driven by commissions, and who therefore can't predict the total. The payments are quarterly precisely so you can base them on actual results. Having said that,  I suspect that as long as you show Good Intent they won't quibble if your estimate is off by a few percent. And they'll never complain if you overpay. So it may not be worth the effort to change the payment amount for that last quarter unless the income is very different.
Yeah, just ran across one talking about making payments for 20 years and getting screwed. I feel terrible that these people were taken advantage of, but I also want to grab these people by the lapel, shake them, and ask them what the hell they were thinking :|
Entitlement mentality. Agriculture payment is (generally) structured so that the harder you work, the more potential you have to make. It's generally a minimum wage job with a piece rate stacked on top of it.   You make minimum wage, but if you harvest like a boss, you'll have the potential to make upwards of $20 an hour.   Please research before you make assumptions
Yes. I have a US based website that accepts payments via PayPal and can confirm we have many customers from India. Here is a list of countries PayPal supports. Note typically there are some additional fees associated with currency conversion.
20year olds- a lot of debt from college --&gt; don't want to add mortgage debt--&gt; less new houses being bought.  baby boomers--&gt; don't want to add mortgage debt, not worth it--&gt; downsize--&gt; less new houses being bought.  It's pretty simple. Where's my blog article businessinsider?