As requested by @GSOrefunds I will show pictures of the conversation I had with him regarding this specific dispute. I also discussed with @palet811 and he assured me he does not need the ''store credit'' because the services offered by @GSOrefunds are not worth the price (he would be overpaying just to get something out of this which is not at all the point) and he prefers that we decide what to do with him instead of accepting a resolution he does not strictly speaking need.
Some things to keep in mind:
1) Customer paid, and less than 24 hours later, @GSOrefunds confirmed his method was no longer working.
2) @GSOrefunds confirmed he would refund several times, but didn't.
3) @GSOrefunds thinks he is too smart for this but he made (abusive) terms to protect him in this exact scenario. Terms that are not allowed on this forum (or anywhere else where sellers are held accountable for their actions) Making terms for specific scenarios to ensure you get paid is a clear abusive decision.
Closing argument (apparently, I need to explain the exact reason for his ban or else I'm abusing my powers): The customer paid for a specific service, which in GSO's own words, ''died''. This means keeping store credit to order this same service would be pointless since the service may not be offered again in the future. The customer cannot be forced to accept a credit refund rather than his money back when a specific service was ordered which could not be provided for external reasons. The customer has no reason to overpay for other services offered by GSO, just because he thinks he has the right to create terms that guarantee any money that enters his wallet is his forever no matter what. The customer refuses to pay 10, 20, 30% more than what he would pay others for the same services GSO offers as 'alternatives' for the originally ordered service. The customer is right and should have been fully refunded, no questions asked.
Users like GSO are not needed on this forum.
Judge for yourselves.