[lassiter]

Originally posted by Rand

3) Epoch and ePassporte are two sepearte companies. I don't know why you insist there is some sort of plot going on to earn interst on ePassporte account set up fees. If you can not afford $100 to open an account, then Epassporte may not be the solution for you.

Rand, why do I feel like I've just entered the twilight zone here?

Let me rephrase your statement in what seems to be a more accurate rendition from my viewpoint.

"If you cannot afford to pay whatever fees we decide to set up for you after the fact, as a precondition for getting paid for sales to your own website (in addition to the 15% we already charge you), then ____ may not be the solution for you."

Well, you're right about one thing. Epassporte is not the solution for me, and to force me to open an Epassporte account as a unilateral, arbitrary condition of getting paid for sales processed through Epoch is no solution at all. I never signed up for such an arrangement, never agreed to it. And if I'm judging your tone correctly, there appears to be a misapprehension about just whose sales these are and who is working for whom (hint - the person getting the commission is the employee, not the employer).

Denied trans are dead unless YOU are doing something with them, which, you have the option of doing.

There were no options presented to me. Funds were unilaterally withheld from me by Epoch until I phoned to enquire about the disparity. It was then, and only then, that I was told I would not receive the funds due me (only $15 at that point) unless I agreed to pay Epoch/Epassporte an extra $100 first. I see a problem here. It's curious that you do not.

Sending dead trans to Epassporte is a winning situation as it's money you would never otherwise realize.

No, sending dead trans to Epassporte when Epoch has unilaterally decided not to release funds from those transactions unless I open an Epassporte account (which, as you now claim, is a totally separate company and not part of Epoch) is a losing situation.

I might add that the transaction in question was dead for a reason - the customer was already in your fraud database for fraudulent chargebacks. These kinds of customers are just trouble, IMO, and I could probably live without 'em.

I REALLY don't understand your issue.

This is obvious. I don't understand your lack of understanding. Let me put it "country-simple" as we say in Texas:

I want and expect Epoch/Paycom to pay me for ALL transactions incurred through them, minus a mutually-contracted for commission, by check. I don't care, and it should not matter to the client, whether the customer pays Epoch via credit card, electronic check, dialer, Epassporte, or sacks of copper pennies. To withhold funds due me until I agree to open a separate account (to the tune of a hefty fee) with a separate company as a precondition of Epoch paying me funds already due me is extortion. It's not the $100 (well, it is, too - like I said that's 8 signups I don't get paid for). It's the unilateral, arbitrary, nonsensical, and backhanded way it's being implemented. That, and the failure to straightforwardly respond to my questions.

Let me ask you one more time - WHY is Epoch refusing to pay me via check for transactions THEY chose to handle via EPassporte? Why am I not forced to accept payment from Epoch by credit card, since the customer paid Epoch by CC? If this is a regulatory issue, please cite chapter and verse. Otherwise, Rand, the burden is on Epoch to make their case.

I don't appreciate this "if you can't afford it you shouldn't be doing it" attitude one damn bit. I already pay Epoch 15% of all transactions. That's not what this issue is about.

Write to me if I can help you get an account set up. I know you'd be glad you did.

I'm breathing slowly, and counting to 10. No, 20.