QIWI-cheating
I want to tell about my negative experience of getting acquainted with QIWI - about how my payment was delayed, and then illegally “bitten”.
It all started with the regular payment of a landline phone, which I always went to pay to the neighboring Sberbank (although I understood very well that there must be more modern ways, but I confess to look for them lazily). In Sberbank, as everyone knows, the queues are like a lottery: either they are, or they are not, with an impenetrable dependence on the time of the visit. Sometimes it, of course, very strained.
At the same time, I always tried to pay for services without commissions.
Firstly, in most cases, the commission to intermediaries is already included in the cost of the service (either the service provider has put the terminal on his own, or has agreed with its owner - I, as a user, are of little interest) - it can most likely be avoided simply by using the adjacent counter.
')
Secondly, there are certain situations when commissions simply interfere. If, say, to take my cellular operator’s tariff plan, then it turns out that the balance validity time strictly depends on the amount paid. And in this sense, 1000 rubles will be radically different from 999 rubles, and calculating exactly what I need to put the amount in order for the payment to be exactly 1000 - it is trivially inconvenient (and there can only be 1000 rubles with me).
Well, elementary: 50 rubles here, 50 rubles there - for a year you can save a decent amount.
And then my colleague suggested using QIWI. The terminal with access to it was on the first floor of my working business center, payments over 500 rubles - no commission.
My first experience went off with a bang - 1000 rubles were credited to the account and then transferred to pay for a landline phone - without commissions and queues, everything I wanted.
The problem arose with the second. This Saturday I put 1000 rubles on the terminal and went to the computer to pay for a landline phone. But, to my surprise, there were no funds in the account. Since the day was a weekend, I patiently waited until the next day, but to no avail - the funds in the account did not appear.
In the middle of the day I called in support, where the girl, speaking like a robot, first tried to add funds manually, but it did not work. Then she said that you need to wait 3 days to clarify the problem - and they will call me back. It was unpleasant, but not critical - and I agreed.
And today, on Thursday, they called me back. Well, firstly, I must say that the quality of communication was disgusting - I could barely understand two thirds of the words. Secondly, the operator felt obvious hostility and apathy to the problem. Thirdly, he told me that the money on a mobile wallet cannot be credited and I have two options: either make a payment on a mobile phone with a loss of 5%, or negotiate with the owner of the terminal, go to his office (to the question and where is the office - in the hope that he will be on the next street with the terminal - the operator answered “in Moscow”), write the application and get the money back.
From such a scenario, I honestly admit, a bit ofigel. To go to the office, which is not known where - the most expensive (subway, subway back - that's 50 rubles, not to mention time), why they cannot transfer money to the wallet itself - the operator could not clearly explain. I had no choice but to answer: well, to hell with you, put it on your mobile. The operator answered "ok" and disconnected. But, to my surprise, it was not 950 rubles that came to the phone, but 940.5, in other words, QIWI robbed me for 59.5 rubles, deceiving even that 5% would be written off from me. Of course this is a trifle, but a) “with the world on a string” b) the city phone was never paid for c) the mood was rather spoiled.
Later it occurred to me that it might have been worth asking to put money immediately on the city (although I did not plan to put them all) and then perhaps there would be no commission, but due to poor communication and the absurdity of the situation at the time of talking about it I somehow did not think. In any case, in my opinion, such services should be clear, transparent and focused, primarily on (and in favor of) users. And especially - in problematic and controversial situations. In general, be careful!
UPD:
As a result of the debriefing, it turned out that the last conversation took place not with a QIWI representative, but with a representative of the terminal owner, respectively, the deception took place on his part, but under the face of QIWI.
I analyzed my feelings then, during the conversation, and it dawned on me: if I even suspected that I was talking to the terminal owner, I would certainly not agree to the offer to transfer money to mobile and would call back to QIWI for explanations, but because I was sure that it was with QIWI that I communicate (after all, it was there that I called from the very beginning with my problem) - there was nowhere to call back for a different solution.
In addition, at that time I didn’t understand the problem that had suddenly arisen (why can they be credited to the mobile, but they cannot be charged to the “mobile wallet”? Why “now it’s impossible to get a percentage?” Are the new conditions for replenishing the wallet? the conditions affect me - after all, I paid for the old questions? there was a sea, which prevented me from adequately looking at the situation) and honestly tried to get at least some explanation, but the interlocutor in this sense was, in my personal opinion, somewhat inadequate. In the dry residue, it was necessary either to agree, or to refuse and fight in some ways from the series of writing complaints in the state. instances or court appeals.
Now I see this as a definite problem - most people do not even suspect that there is a certain third person between them and QIWI, because they don’t write it in large letters on the screen, and why should they know? Accordingly, in such a situation, the outcome may well be the same as mine. Unless QIWI can somehow pressure the terminal owners to handle such situations more adequately - for example, to carry out another operation with the user's consent, but a) with an open and friendly face b) compensating for all the commissions (what is called "little blood"), or send a courier to return the money, or send by postal order, but in any case, do it at your own expense. At least to preserve the reputation of both firms - first and foremost, QIWI itself.
It all started with the regular payment of a landline phone, which I always went to pay to the neighboring Sberbank (although I understood very well that there must be more modern ways, but I confess to look for them lazily). In Sberbank, as everyone knows, the queues are like a lottery: either they are, or they are not, with an impenetrable dependence on the time of the visit. Sometimes it, of course, very strained.
At the same time, I always tried to pay for services without commissions.
Firstly, in most cases, the commission to intermediaries is already included in the cost of the service (either the service provider has put the terminal on his own, or has agreed with its owner - I, as a user, are of little interest) - it can most likely be avoided simply by using the adjacent counter.
')
Secondly, there are certain situations when commissions simply interfere. If, say, to take my cellular operator’s tariff plan, then it turns out that the balance validity time strictly depends on the amount paid. And in this sense, 1000 rubles will be radically different from 999 rubles, and calculating exactly what I need to put the amount in order for the payment to be exactly 1000 - it is trivially inconvenient (and there can only be 1000 rubles with me).
Well, elementary: 50 rubles here, 50 rubles there - for a year you can save a decent amount.
And then my colleague suggested using QIWI. The terminal with access to it was on the first floor of my working business center, payments over 500 rubles - no commission.
My first experience went off with a bang - 1000 rubles were credited to the account and then transferred to pay for a landline phone - without commissions and queues, everything I wanted.
The problem arose with the second. This Saturday I put 1000 rubles on the terminal and went to the computer to pay for a landline phone. But, to my surprise, there were no funds in the account. Since the day was a weekend, I patiently waited until the next day, but to no avail - the funds in the account did not appear.
In the middle of the day I called in support, where the girl, speaking like a robot, first tried to add funds manually, but it did not work. Then she said that you need to wait 3 days to clarify the problem - and they will call me back. It was unpleasant, but not critical - and I agreed.
And today, on Thursday, they called me back. Well, firstly, I must say that the quality of communication was disgusting - I could barely understand two thirds of the words. Secondly, the operator felt obvious hostility and apathy to the problem. Thirdly, he told me that the money on a mobile wallet cannot be credited and I have two options: either make a payment on a mobile phone with a loss of 5%, or negotiate with the owner of the terminal, go to his office (to the question and where is the office - in the hope that he will be on the next street with the terminal - the operator answered “in Moscow”), write the application and get the money back.
From such a scenario, I honestly admit, a bit ofigel. To go to the office, which is not known where - the most expensive (subway, subway back - that's 50 rubles, not to mention time), why they cannot transfer money to the wallet itself - the operator could not clearly explain. I had no choice but to answer: well, to hell with you, put it on your mobile. The operator answered "ok" and disconnected. But, to my surprise, it was not 950 rubles that came to the phone, but 940.5, in other words, QIWI robbed me for 59.5 rubles, deceiving even that 5% would be written off from me. Of course this is a trifle, but a) “with the world on a string” b) the city phone was never paid for c) the mood was rather spoiled.
Later it occurred to me that it might have been worth asking to put money immediately on the city (although I did not plan to put them all) and then perhaps there would be no commission, but due to poor communication and the absurdity of the situation at the time of talking about it I somehow did not think. In any case, in my opinion, such services should be clear, transparent and focused, primarily on (and in favor of) users. And especially - in problematic and controversial situations. In general, be careful!
UPD:
As a result of the debriefing, it turned out that the last conversation took place not with a QIWI representative, but with a representative of the terminal owner, respectively, the deception took place on his part, but under the face of QIWI.
I analyzed my feelings then, during the conversation, and it dawned on me: if I even suspected that I was talking to the terminal owner, I would certainly not agree to the offer to transfer money to mobile and would call back to QIWI for explanations, but because I was sure that it was with QIWI that I communicate (after all, it was there that I called from the very beginning with my problem) - there was nowhere to call back for a different solution.
In addition, at that time I didn’t understand the problem that had suddenly arisen (why can they be credited to the mobile, but they cannot be charged to the “mobile wallet”? Why “now it’s impossible to get a percentage?” Are the new conditions for replenishing the wallet? the conditions affect me - after all, I paid for the old questions? there was a sea, which prevented me from adequately looking at the situation) and honestly tried to get at least some explanation, but the interlocutor in this sense was, in my personal opinion, somewhat inadequate. In the dry residue, it was necessary either to agree, or to refuse and fight in some ways from the series of writing complaints in the state. instances or court appeals.
Now I see this as a definite problem - most people do not even suspect that there is a certain third person between them and QIWI, because they don’t write it in large letters on the screen, and why should they know? Accordingly, in such a situation, the outcome may well be the same as mine. Unless QIWI can somehow pressure the terminal owners to handle such situations more adequately - for example, to carry out another operation with the user's consent, but a) with an open and friendly face b) compensating for all the commissions (what is called "little blood"), or send a courier to return the money, or send by postal order, but in any case, do it at your own expense. At least to preserve the reputation of both firms - first and foremost, QIWI itself.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/96126/
All Articles