De m?ste utel?mna viss information, eftersom de s?kert skulle ha f?tt en del korrespondens fr?n Wise ang?ende att tvisten st?ngdes eller att deras konto st?ngdes. Ocks? varorna som inte mottagits till dessa kasinon har bara n?gon form av sk?l om ett felaktigt MCC har anv?nts, de sa att de inte visste n?got om MCC som anv?nds vilket f?r mig att tro om de faktiskt har g?tt vidare med en tvist , de kunde ha gjort det mot en legitim processor som har anv?nt r?tt MCC, vilket korrigerar mig om jag har fel, ?r det f?rmodligen d?r de skulle ha avvisat tvisten och placerat en CIFAS?
They have to be leaving some information out, as surely they would have received some correspondence from Wise in regards to the dispute being closed or their account being closed. Also the goods not received approach to these casinos only really has any sort of grounds if an incorrect MCC has been used, they stated they didn't know anything about the MCC used which leads me to believe if they have infact gone forward with a dispute, they could have done it against a legitimate processor who has used the correct MCCs, which correct me if i'm wrong, is probably where they would have rejected the dispute and placed a CIFAS?
Automatiskt ?versatt: