{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-04T08:04:38.041Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"refund","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"contextual","evidence":"","year":"","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":1,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":1,"contextualRelations":2,"mixedRelations":1,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2026-openai-ai-support-assistant-refused-chatgpt-pro-refund-requested-minutes-after-renewal-first-person","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'my ChatGPT Pro plan renewed for $200'; 'I forgot to cancel beforehand and did not intend to renew'; '13:32:55'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'approximately six minutes after the charge'; 'Tbilisi, UTC+4'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The poster says their ChatGPT Pro plan renewed for $200 on 3 October 2026 after they forgot to cancel, and that they requested a refund in the Help Center about six minutes after the charge.","causal_attribution":"Poster's account."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The AI declined without giving a reason specific to my account'; 'This case is closed. Create a new case to receive support.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'The Help Center assistant gave a generic refusal without identifying which eligibility requirement I failed'; 'When I asked for escalation, the case was closed'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The poster says the Help Center AI assistant declined the refund without a reason specific to their account and, when they asked for escalation, the chat showed the case as closed.","causal_attribution":"Poster attributes the refusal to an AI assistant; whether the decision followed fixed policy rules or human configuration is not known."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'I opened another case specifically requesting a human billing specialist. Same generic refusal.'; 'another refusal arrived, explicitly marked as generated with AI support'; 'That also received an AI-generated refusal'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'A second chat specifically asking for a human produced the same refusal'; 'also received responses explicitly labeled as AI-generated'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The poster says a second chat asking for a human billing specialist produced the same refusal, and that two email requests received refusals marked as AI-generated.","causal_attribution":"Poster's account."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'seven-day discretionary refund policy is conditional, not an automatic entitlement'; 'I still have no explanation specific to my case and no confirmed human review'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'I also explicitly agreed that refunded subscription access would end'; 'I find this an appalling way to treat a paying customer'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The poster acknowledges that the refund policy is discretionary and conditional, says they agreed that refunded access would end, and says they still had no case-specific explanation or confirmed human review.","causal_attribution":"Poster's account."}],"effects":[{"label":"refund of an unwanted $200 renewal refused by an AI support assistant without a case-specific reason (poster's account)","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"requests for a human review closed or answered by further AI-generated refusals (poster's account)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1wwjs10/i_requested_a_chatgpt_refund_6_minutes_after_a/","kind":"forum_post","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-04: full self-text and the thread's 6 comments (none by the poster), retrieved through the arctic_shift archive API by post ID. The attached screenshots were not retrieved. The poster handle is not recorded.","independence_group":"reddit-chatgpt-pro-refund-poster"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/1wwjyfk/chatgpt_pro_renewal_refund_request_within_minutes/","kind":"forum_post","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-04: full self-text and the thread's 15 comments (none by the poster), retrieved through the arctic_shift archive API by post ID. Same poster as s1, posted about eleven minutes later and linking s1; not independent.","independence_group":"reddit-chatgpt-pro-refund-poster"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["finance","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["Whether the poster was eligible for a refund under OpenAI's discretionary policy, including any usage in the minutes after renewal.","Whether any human reviewed or set the refusals, and whether a later human review or bank chargeback recovered the $200.","Where the poster lives; the timeline is given in Tbilisi time only."],"geography":{"basis":"The poster gives their timeline in Tbilisi time (UTC+4) but does not say where they were or live; no country is recorded.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter's public-forum rule as a concrete first-person account of an AI support system refusing a refund and blocking escalation to a human, described with attribution and without corroboration. The poster's handle is not recorded.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-04"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The poster says the Help Center refusals came from an AI assistant and that the email replies were explicitly labelled as generated with AI support; the screenshots they describe were not retrieved. Whether a human reviewed or set the refusal is not known.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with","made_decision_about"]},"name":"First-person forum account: a ChatGPT Pro subscriber says OpenAI's AI support assistant refused a refund they requested about six minutes after an unwanted $200 renewal, closed the case when they asked for escalation, and answered further chat and email requests for a human review with more AI-generated refusals","summary":"In public posts to r/ChatGPT and r/OpenAI on 3 October 2026, a person says their ChatGPT Pro subscription renewed for $200 that day after they forgot to cancel, and that they cancelled auto-renewal and requested a refund in OpenAI's Help Center about six minutes after the charge. They say the Help Center's AI assistant declined without giving a reason specific to their account, and that when they asked for escalation the chat showed that the case was closed. A second chat asking specifically for a human billing specialist produced the same refusal, they write, and two email requests, one with five redacted screenshots, received replies marked as generated with AI support. The poster acknowledges that OpenAI's seven-day refund policy is discretionary and conditional, and says the unresolved problem is that they received no case-specific explanation and no confirmed human review. OpenAI's handling is described only by the poster, and the account is uncorroborated.","incidentDate":"2026-10-03","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-10-03","aiSystem":"OpenAI Help Center AI support assistant (chat) and AI-generated email support replies handling a ChatGPT Pro refund request","aiProduct":"OpenAI Help Center assistant","aiCompany":"OpenAI","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The poster says OpenAI's AI support assistant refused a refund of an unwanted $200 ChatGPT Pro renewal that they requested within minutes, closed the case when they asked for escalation, and that further chat and email requests for a human review produced only AI-generated refusals, leaving them without the $200, a case-specific reason or human review (first-person account, uncorroborated).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the poster. A commenter who says they had the same refund problem is not counted. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"unknown","platformType":"chatbot","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1wwjs10/i_requested_a_chatgpt_refund_6_minutes_after_a/","primarySourceLabel":"r/ChatGPT, 3 October 2026: \"I requested a ChatGPT refund 6 minutes after a $200 renewal. The AI rejected it and closed the case.\"","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-04T03:22:06.262385+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-04T03:22:06.262385+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["first-person","reddit","openai","chatgpt","ai-customer-support","refund","billing","no-human-review","made-decision-about","communicated-with"]},{"id":"2025-us-manhattan-airbnb-damage-claim-photos-disputed-as-manipulated-guest-refunded","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"the host told Airbnb that she had caused more than £12,000 worth of damage, and submitted pictures of an apparently cracked coffee table as part of his case.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Airbnb initially told her “after careful review of the photos”, she would have to reimburse the host a total of £5,314. She appealed against the decision.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The host told Airbnb the guest had caused more than 12,000 pounds of damage, submitted pictures including an apparently cracked coffee table, and Airbnb initially told the guest after reviewing the photos that she must reimburse 5,314 pounds.","causal_attribution":"The Guardian relays the guest's account of the host's claim and Airbnb's first decision. Airbnb's ruling and the photos were not inspected. New York Post and Fox Business rewrite this account."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"A close examination of two pictures of the coffee table appears to show differences in the damage, leading the woman to believe they were digitally manipulated or generated by AI.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"He did not respond to a request for comment.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Guardian reports that a close examination of two pictures of the coffee table appears to show differences in the damage, leading the guest to believe they were digitally manipulated or generated by AI. The host did not respond to the Guardian.","causal_attribution":"Guest's belief and the Guardian's description of her comparison. The photos were not inspected and no forensic finding was reported. Whether an AI tool was used is not established."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Airbnb said he had been warned for violating its terms and told he would be removed if there was another similar report. The company told him that it could not verify the images he submitted as part of his complaint.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"We have taken action with the host, and we are reviewing the original handling of this case.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Airbnb told the host it could not verify the images he submitted, warned him for violating its terms and said he would be removed if there was another similar report.","causal_attribution":"Airbnb statements to the Guardian and to Fox Business. Airbnb did not state a finding that the images were AI-generated. The company's review of the photos is described only as 'careful review' with no mention of AI tools."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Five days after Guardian Money raised questions about the case with Airbnb, the woman was told it had accepted her appeal and credited her account with £500.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"the company offered an £854 refund – a fifth of the cost of her booking. She refused to accept this","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"was refunded the full cost (£4,269) of her booking, and a negative review that the host had placed on her profile was taken down.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Airbnb apologised and said there would be a review into how her case was handled.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"After Guardian Money asked Airbnb about the case, Airbnb accepted the appeal, credited 500 pounds, then refunded the full booking cost of 4,269 pounds after the guest refused a partial offer, the host's negative review on her profile was taken down (the Guardian does not say by whom), and Airbnb apologised.","causal_attribution":"The Guardian relays the guest's account and Airbnb's statements. The refund and review removal were not documented by Airbnb records seen here."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"experience fell below our usual high standards.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"assure them that they will not be charged for the reported damage","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Airbnb said the guest's experience fell below its usual standards and that she would not be charged for the reported damage.","causal_attribution":"Airbnb's own statement to Fox Business."}],"effects":[{"label":"Guest told to reimburse the host on the strength of photos she says were manipulated; reversed on appeal","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/02/airbnb-guest-damage-claim-refund-photos","kind":"news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"guardian-report"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://nypost.com/2025/08/06/lifestyle/airbnb-guest-accused-of-causing-16k-in-property-damage-claims-host-used-ai-to-create-fake-photos/","kind":"news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"guardian-report"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/airbnb-apologizes-superhost-allegedly-ai-doctored-photos-claim-16k-fake-damages","kind":"news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"airbnb-statement-to-fox"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["everyday_life","finance"],"unknowns":["Whether the host's photos were altered, and by what tool, is unknown: no forensic finding, host statement or Airbnb finding on AI is reported.","Airbnb's own review of the photos is described only as a 'careful review'. No source says Airbnb used an AI system to assess them.","The stay dates, the day of the damage claim and the outcome date are not stated beyond 'earlier this year' and the Guardian's 2 August 2025 date.","Whether the guest paid any part of the reimbursement before the appeal succeeded is not stated.","The US outlets give the claim as about 16,000 dollars (Fox Business) and the Guardian as more than 12,000 pounds. The inspected sources do not itemise the claim."],"geography":{"basis":"The Guardian places the apartment in Manhattan, New York, and describes the guest as London-based. Airbnb's location and the Guardian's publication are not used.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["GB"]},"publication":{"basis":"The Guardian report and two rewrites were read in full. The host and guest are not named and the apartment address is not given. The AI element rests on the guest's belief and Airbnb's statement that it could not verify the images. Claims stay at reported status.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The guest says differences between two photos of one table lead her to believe they were manipulated or AI-generated. Airbnb told the host it could not verify the images. The host did not respond, and no source shows an AI tool was used. Fox Business and the New York Post headlines state AI use more strongly than the Guardian body supports.","status":"suspected"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Manhattan Airbnb: guest says host's damage-claim photos were manipulated or AI-generated, Airbnb first ordered payment then refunded her","summary":"The Guardian reported on 2 August 2025 that a London-based academic who rented a Manhattan apartment through Airbnb in 2025 was accused by the host of more than 12,000 pounds of damage, supported by photos including a cracked coffee table. She says differences between two photos of the table show they were digitally manipulated or AI-generated. Airbnb first told her to reimburse 5,314 pounds after reviewing the photos, then, five days after Guardian Money asked about the case, accepted her appeal, credited 500 pounds and, after she refused an 854-pound offer, refunded her booking cost of 4,269 pounds, and the host's negative review of her was taken down. Airbnb apologised. Airbnb told the host it could not verify the images he submitted and warned him. The host did not respond to the Guardian. No source establishes that AI was used.","incidentDate":"2025-01-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-08-02","aiSystem":"None identified (guest suspects the host's damage-claim photos were digitally manipulated or AI-generated; no tool or forensic finding is reported)","aiProduct":"Unidentified image tool (suspected)","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["other_material_harm","reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The Guardian reports Airbnb initially told the guest to reimburse the host 5,314 pounds on the strength of the host's photos and the host placed a negative review on her profile; Airbnb later refunded her booking cost in full and the review was taken down.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One guest reported subjected to the damage claim. Other Airbnb customers who might face similar claims are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/02/airbnb-guest-damage-claim-refund-photos","primarySourceLabel":"The Guardian (2 Aug 2025)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T13:28:51.915494+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:19.206649+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["historical-2025"]}]}