> "a promise to reverse the charges as long as the family agreed not to sue us"

This is something i don't think i'll ever get used to. What are you suing for after receiving restitution? Emotional damages for receiving a large bill? Bugger off.

Apart from the fact that there wouldn't be any legal basis for a lawsuit where i live, i don't understand why as a person you wouldn't accept a "sorry, our bad, here's your money back", especially when they also reverse the charge of services you actually made use of.

You would, in a lot of places, be responsible for correcting the consequences of wantonly emptying people's bank accounts. Taking $1000 that isn't yours is this kind of thing can lead to evictions, damaged credit ratings, loss of jobs, etc. This wasn't a 10 cent overcharge.

The money was taken from a credit card, it was returned to the credit card, absolutely zero harm left outstanding, therefore no right to sue in any normal country...

It was a genuine mistake that the company immediately rectified once the claimant brought it to their attention. The UK has clear requirements to be proven in order to sue for damages* and, whilst it would be possible to sue in this case, it’s unlikely the outcome would be worth the hassle. The more normal situation here is that the company would volunteer a (modest) compensation payment. Unlike in the USA, you can’t sue for punitive damages (although the court may separately impose something). Fortunately, for those of us living in the UK (and not just the UK) we don’t measure everything in $.

*IANAL, but have taught law on business courses. Summarising (and simplifying):

1) The defendant owed a duty of care; and

2) The defendant breached that duty of care: and

3) The breach led to the damages claimed.

I'm amazed at these "Do you have a diesel car ? YOU are owed compo!" ambulance chasers .

neither they , nor the people jumping on that bandwagon can explain how they've been injured.

They own cars that cheated their way into a lower road tax bracket - bonus!

The latest being this car financing thing

the key seems to be that the the car dealer my have got a commission , and apparently thats bas for some reason .

They were offered a deal of n payments of x $$$ , and took it . end of story .

it doesn't matter how that money was divvied up afterwards

You've missed two big things in the DieselGate comment:

1. Resale values of the cars were significantly affected.

2. People made a choice that they thought would be less polluting, and this was something they valued. VW cheated them of this.

The original £1k, yes, complain, withold payment from the CC.

Him not getting a bonus certianly has grounds here and maybe from what he was saying could have landed the company in hot water, so he had a bargaining chip.

Dieselgate. I got a diesel as it was deemed to be good, blah blah. I chose it for a few reasons. i would not bother with the claims, but after Khange and the ULEZ and having to get rid of a perfectly good car as I chose diesel (because of the legistlation at the time), then I may as well have ago. I do think that the car companies are to blame as they *HID* what they were doing, but anyone who looks at cars knows the WLTP figures are fantasy. Plus I should have guessed that the gvt would screw diesel over again as they did it years ago in one budget where the tax relief was removed and diesel went from being cheap to most expensive that petrol. with these, you have got to have signed up to be part of the claim, even if you get £10. No part of a claim, then probably nothing doing for you

Car loans - It is down to you to read and understand. some of the original claimants could not get a loan for the car but a dealer would give you one at an inflated price. Probably tells you something*. Others like the one whose claim was upheld, 55% commission.. Nice littler earner and is under DCA's that were banned

Next will be the CC's that charge ridiculous amounts of interest (seen one on TV at over 1000%)

For those that signed up, could get interesting. May have to pay the ambulance chasers for nothing (worst case), or if you are one that is a DCA claim so in line for that £950, you may lose that to the ambulance chasers instead

Personally, I hunt around to get the best deal for what I need/want. Be it CC and a transfer in a few months, taking out a loan way larger than I need to get the lower interest rates and payback the amount I do not need immediately.

* if you have never had debt or a Credit Card, you can struggle to get a loan. I found this to my cost when I was young. I was always taught to save and buy when you had the money. first time I needed more I went and asked and got next to nothing. Pleaded my case - no loans, no CC's, no phone and was told that *IS* the problem. No credit score.

In fairness, if the dev knew that they had to abnormally terminate the session, checking how much the customer was charged should be obvious. If the charge had been reversed before the customer noticed then most of the anger and embarrassment would have been avoided.

This is other people's money. A dev that is careless with that doesn't get much sympathy from me.

(And yes, I've done development in payment processing systems.)

well , y'know in theory bonuses are just that , to be awarded for outstanding performance .not an automatic bolt on .

The boss is right .

.. unless you're s banker or CEO or something , and the its presumably a money laundering loophole .

So, the company is still in business? No satisfaction, no bonus, no happy ending?

Sadly, sounds absolutely believable to me.

Learnt a valuable lesson; when you discover you are working for arseholes - go early (it never gets any better) and go often (the industry is carpeted, wall to wall, with arseholes.)

When the enterprise consists of one developer and two mother bonking arseholes (MBAs) who is supposed to do the code reviews, functional testing etc ? It's a POC, not a product !