posted on June 14, 2001 08:53:39 PM new
What it means is that for $8.80 they don't want this story to spread all over the internet. But what happens when, like someone said, it happens on a $800 item? or when buyers find out they can charge back after over a year, and there is no longer "online tracking" to protect the seller. You're right, the real questions have not been answered.
posted on June 14, 2001 10:12:35 PM new
Does'nt ANYONE read?
PayPal * IS THE MERCHANT * NOT YOU THE SELLER. Get it?
THEY PERFORM THE CHARGE, WHEN A CONSUMER GETS THE STATEMENT IT DOESNT SAY PODUNK JOES COLLECTIBLES IT SAYS PAYPAL.
This is WHY they continue to add new regulatory content to the terms of services to try and cover the "holes" that folks take advantage of. While I am not a paypal proponent as I feel they should engage in full disclosure of HOW disputes and managed along with timelines at the sametime 99% of the garbage that happens is NOT PP's fault.
Its like blaming eBay cause some character rips you off. They provide a service. With that service they need protect themselves as well.
Since paypal IS the merchant they CANNOT lawfully release to you "results and or information relating to problematic sales, conduct etc"... They COULD release HOW the wheels of "investigation" grind along. I'd guess they dont do that as if they did the service would be a ghost town and thats for any third party payment service, not just PP.
What PP doesnt seem to realize is that by not disclosing true facts, for example a bill of rights for sellers/buyers that they are in fact alienating themselves from businesses BIGTIME and at the sametime giving eBay the perverbial keys to the Porsche. eBay can at anytime say, All external links/logo's go. They can justify it easily. Due to this services affects on eBay's business we can no longer allow..... and that as they say is that and thats exactly where its moving towards. Thats not to say people cant use it, it is to say they cant advertise via a logo etc. So for example you'd never know if the seller is verified or not.
Without eBay PP is a dead duck as no business will touch em' when they realize that policy can be made on the fly. You will never see a card processor making policy on the fly. Merchants, yes, and thats what PP is.
Last I knew Chase was the card processor, the same folks that told us to steer clear of the service.
Chargebacks can go back years, thats a fact.
And yes, thats why businesses keep records.
See... someone buys something from us, we have a merchant account, we are the merchant. When a chargeback occurs we have 30 days to repond to it. We are in the loop as the dispute is worked as is the consumer and their bank. Since PayPal is the merchant YOU the seller ARE NOT. In the case of a chargeback using PP or for that matter ANY third party payment service the buyer IS in the loop the seller CANNOT be in the loop in all reality as, they are not the seller, paypal is. This is where ALLLL the grey area sits.
This should all be CLEARLY displayed to sellers and buyers the MOMENT they sign up but its not.
The fact that the charge back took that long is unusual as Damon stated. Damon's answer may well be right on the money.
Its true that most chargebacks happen within 6 months (actually it fades, the longer the time, the less they happen). In theory PP should be requiring delivery confirmation on all parcels to protect themselves but that would probably cause an exodus of sellers who pinch every possible penny they can.
Its also true (though rare) that some banks are basically slower 'n' snail snots. Regional banks, credit unions etc. can all move very very slow especially concerning $8.
It costs them more to even look at it than that $8.
The fact paypal is willing to say, We'll eat the $8 shows me something in that they recognize this is a very strange circumstance.
But, all the head hunters come out of the woodwork and say WE WANT TO KNOW. If you want to know then get a merchant account and you will know (at least what you need to know, they dont necessarily disclose every little detail either).
PayPal cannot tell you WHY or WHAT determinations are made as they are the merchant, NOT YOU.
The reason you sign off on rights of arbitration and such is because YOU are not the seller... THEY ARE. You by terms of service agree to this and enter into a binding contract with them. In other words this means if you take someones money and ship nothing or cant prove it its perfectly within PP's rights to take the money back, seek legal authorities investigate etc.
Somewhat like consignment but they are not consigning a thing. They operate on trust and thats quite honorable.
If they want to "survive" thats going to all change at some point in time as person to person sales in general are on the wane and if GW Bush gets his way your going to find within a year, two on the outside if you want to run an auction be you a business or private seller you will be required to be licensed by your state just as "in person" auctioneers are required by law to do in most states now.
I have wondered if eBay stores in itself is not a movement by eBay as they see that writing on the wall. When the FTC/DOJ Internet Fraud Center etc. make statements saying 68% of internet fraud is perpetraited via auctions it doesnt take a genious ya know?
Whats important to realize here is that PP in many circumstances is just as much at a loss as you are and while I can fault such services in many areas I can commend them in many others, in fact, more than I can condem them in. I just wish they'd answer our questions so we might consider using the service and thats never happened.
posted on June 15, 2001 03:26:21 AM new
Hmmmmm. Always fun on these boards to beat on PayPal but credibility of seller is strained a little as well. Way back on this thread someone asked if feedback had ever been exchanged on this transaction. No answer ever posted but if one checks the feedback of candibates1, it definitely raises some questions. A number of complaints state that "item was not received". Standard response is that buyer refused insurance but seller has postal receipt. How is that possible?? Unless this post office is different than ours you only get a receipt for a specific parcel if you insure it. If not insured, yes, you get a receipt but in no way can it be tied to a specific item. Would love to hear a response to that. Second issue: We have shipped 1000's of packages via the post office. Based on our number of feedbacks probably at least twice as many as candibates. We have had 1 package "lost" in the mail. It is good that candibate's post office gives receipts for all parcels because their track record is obviously orders of magnitude worse than the track record of our post office. This whole thread just once again shows that it is difficult to make any judgments given only what we hear because what we hear is certainly slanted. While I would love to see all the "facts" in this case I am confident we never will. Nevertheless, will continue to use PayPal without reservation as we, personally, have never had a problem.
posted on June 15, 2001 05:29:44 AM new
>Nevertheless, will continue to use PayPal without reservation as we, personally, have never had a problem<
As we have never have noticed even a 'bump' in our PayPal road so shall we progress forward without abandon. Very sorry to hear of some of the problems that others have mentioned, but as of yet we have only heard of them, nothing 'first hand'.
Big thanks to PPDamon for hanging around here and trying to help.
I do have a question about this statement.....
"Due to the timeline, I requested that the item be eaten by us."
posted on June 15, 2001 05:48:15 AM new
Tab...regardless if the person got the package or not (and I sure woudn't wait 16 months if I didn't get something I paid for)..the time for a chargeback, is not 16 months later. I don't see where anything but that time frame plays into it. I'm not seeing this as a "side" of a story..but the fact that this could impact all of us, where a buyer suddenly realizes they could do a chargeback after such a lengthly amount of time. However, to address that point of her feedback, if she bought a delivery confirmation, she would know that there was delivery.
Also (although I don't think it goes back 16 months), my post office does give me a recipe with the zip codes printed on it, which shows that I shipped to that particular zip code. This isn't proof to a certain house, but it sounds like your post office doesn't have this service.
posted on June 15, 2001 06:33:25 AM new
It realy dosen.t matter at this point weather the chargeback was justifed or not
Are we vulnarabele forever for every pay pal payment we receive ?
I realize pay pal acts as a intermediary between buyer seller and credit card company. they do collect a fee for this service and part of this fee should go to protect the seller.
since they require dc the chargeback window can not extend beyond the de limits
ppdaman steped in and pay pal ate the 8.80
The chargback should never have happened after this lenght of time.
as someone earlier speculated what if it had been 800.00 ?
would pay pal still have done the right thing ?
food for thought.
posted on June 15, 2001 07:00:05 AM new
Pondering .. Spend 1000.00 a month using PAYPAL every month. Leave no feedback and acknolege no receipt of merchandise from the seller. Starting 13 months from now, do a chargeback on EVERY purchase while still purchasing 1000.00 a month on NEW purchases using PAYPAL. This could turn into a lifetime income and free luxury purchases ....
posted on June 15, 2001 07:03:19 AM new
tabularosa
You are right, we are really struggling in the feedback area. 1988 positives, 7 neutrals and 13 negatives. Even though we have less than 1% negative, we have no control over retaliatory feedback, as well as negatives when a customer doesn't receive their uninsured package. Five of our negatives are because of that scenario.
"Standard response is that buyer refused insurance but seller has postal receipt. How is that possible??"
We receive a receipt from the post office every time we ship packages. On the receipt, it lists the costs to ship each package as well as the zip code to where it was sent. This is what we refer to. We have submitted these receipts to PayPal in the past as proof of shipment, and it has been sufficient.
Oh, and by the way, we have never had any problems with PayPal before this either. But, there is a first time for everything, isn't there?
[ edited by candibates1 on Jun 15, 2001 07:04 AM ]
posted on June 15, 2001 07:30:43 AM new
candibates1-
Sorry to hear of your PayPal troubles, and that some are suspicious of you because of a feedback record with less than 1% negatives. I suppose you are lucky you are not the Walt Disney company. Over 4% of their feedback is not positive, and they have hidden feedback, to boot. Probably a bunch of crooks.
...we, personally, have never had a problem.
I imagine a lot of people who bought Firestone tires can say the same thing. The fact that you have not had a problem is no guarantee that you won't in the future. Or you may be one of the fortunate ones and never have a problem- you never know.
posted on June 15, 2001 07:44:57 AM new
candibates1-
the fact that 1988 peaple had a great experiance with you means nothing to me if I am one of the 13 who say they didnt
If I didnt get my item I don't care that evryone else did
I find it interesting that you fail to address feedback on this particular transaction
were they one of the 13 who left a neg ?
posted on June 15, 2001 08:22:45 AM new
>were they one of the 13 who left a neg ?<
mrspock
I looked up the transaction on PayPal and got the buyer's email address. I plugged that into eBay's Buyer Search and found their userid. I then went to Vrane and did a search on all feedback that they have left. They have not left me any feedback, either positive or negative.
posted on June 15, 2001 08:41:09 AM new
Hmmmm, just thinking here......
Assuming, in fact, that Paypal is a Merchant, then what is prohibiting a Premier/Business Seller from doing a chargeback on the fees being charged to them by Paypal?
Perhaps the loophole is that PP deducts from the transaction dollars PP's fees instead of charging to the credit card a Seller has listed?, i.e., it does not do a running tab for it's fees, rather immediately deducts them from the funds received.
Hmmmm, very clever Paypal. Good way to protect itself without giving any protection to a Seller.
Funny how Sellers can be at the mercy of the Buyer and any complaint filed against him/her (and seemingly within any time frame as well). Paypal automatically puts "on hold" and debits from the Seller's account the dollar amount in dispute BEFORE an investigation is completed and a final analysis is determined. Hmmm, curious indeed.
Query: What does Paypal do if there is a chargeback or some claim against a Seller with no account balance in thier PP account? Do they charge the Seller's credit card for the amount in dispute? If so, couldn't a Seller submit a chargeback on PP's "hold" amount/charged amount claiming it was not authorized by him/her?
posted on June 15, 2001 09:34:30 AM new
>>Funny how Sellers can be at the mercy of the Buyer and any complaint filed against him/her (and seemingly within any time frame as well). Paypal automatically puts "on hold" and debits from the Seller's account the dollar amount in dispute BEFORE an investigation is completed and a final analysis is determined. Hmmm, curious indeed.
Query: What does Paypal do if there is a chargeback or some claim against a Seller with no account balance in thier PP account? Do they charge the Seller's credit card for the amount in dispute? If so, couldn't a Seller submit a chargeback on PP's "hold" amount/charged amount claiming it was not authorized by him/her? <<
No, PP does not charge the seller's credit card and except for a few payment reversals made in error, PP does not access the seller's bank account (yet. But we all know how quickly their TOS can change and be made retroactive.) Your second paragraph explains the reason for the first. Since a seller can empty their PP account and leave PP with no way to recover, therefore PP freezes funds in the seller's account BEFORE a determination is made.
The problem is that this solution is self-defeating. A crooked seller out to cheat folks, will open a PP account, quickly list some high end items, grab the money and run. By the time PP acts, it is too late. An honest seller expects to have a long-term relationship with PP. He won't empty his account so quickly or even if he does, another payment will be coming along soon. But this is the guy who will suffer when PP freezes funds on the word of a lying customer. So PP's currently policy, intended or not, has the effect of rewarding the guilty and punishing the innocent.
I would like to see something implemented where buyers have to present some proof that they made a good will attempt to solve it BEFORE PP acts. They should have to forward emails to and from the seller. Right now PP accepts the buyer's word and then makes the seller jump through hoops. Or, if they do want to freeze funds, half those funds should come from the buyer. If the buyer makes a $100 claim, PP should say "Put up $50 of your money and we will freeze $50 of the seller's money. If you win, you will get $150 back, if you lose, you will get your $50 back." Right now in a claim, buyer risks nothing. There are buyers who charge things back or make claims just because they have nothing to lose.
But the biggest problem with PP is still their complete lack of responsible customer service. I think a company that claims to have 8 million users should have more than one person handling customer service. (I dont count the untrained, lazy or rude clerks who sometimes answer the phone or send a meaningless email.) Recently PP had no customer service at all because Damon was on vacation.
posted on June 15, 2001 10:01:05 AM new
candibates1: You sent copies of your USPS receipts to PayPal? I am in the middle of the same situation you are in (except mine is from March, 2001) where I shipped an item and the buyer claims it was never received. I told PayPal I had a receipt but they ignored me and took the funds out of my PayPal account. I have written them back but have not received a response yet. The items I sent were shipped by Media Mail as it would have cost a fortune to ship by priority mail in order to get delivery confirmation (2 large lots of craft books which were quite heavy). I did what I was supposed to do which was to ship the items; why should I be responsible for USPS' screw-ups?
I took a digital picture of the receipt and emailed it to PayPal. I totally agree with you concerning shipping things media mail. I too ship books and use media mail, which is why I put the burden of insurance or delivery confirmation on the buyer (and clearly state this in my auction terms and EOA email).
posted on June 15, 2001 11:53:21 AM new
"I put the burden of insurance or
delivery confirmation on the buyer (and clearly state this in my
auction terms and EOA email)."
I think I remember reading about this topic on a previous thread and if I am not mistaking, even if you state that in your TOS, it does not matter with a credit card transaction. If the buyer refuses to pay for coverage, they can still do a charge back regardless of what your TOS say.
posted on June 15, 2001 05:47:25 PM new
Again... chargebacks can go back considerable lengths of time whether via paypal, billpoint or your own merchant account.
They ARE a fact of life and if you dont like that then the only solution is to not accept credit/debit card payments.
We have only had 3 chargebacks with thousands and thousands of card transactions via our merchant account.
Now simply put, International orders whether to Canada or East China can file a chargeback and you basically have "no hope". End of story. Even via UPS or FEDEX.
PayPal is actually in this regard MORE forgiving than a merchant account. Banks do NOT recognize postal confirmation delivery even WITH a signature as a valid form of proof of delivery. UPS/FEDEX only though word has it that policy is now under review by the card companies. DOES confirmation delivery guarentee in any way prevent chargeback? Yes, only if they say they did not recieve it.
If however they say its not what I thought, its not what I want, its broken, it broke 16 months after I bought it banks will review the dispute.
Understand, when you accept payment via a credit card you are basically saying you accept what Walmart and every other retailer need deal with. Granted, PayPal IS the merchant but they do have a legal and binding contract with the seller. Since you sign off on them being arbitor of dispute you are allowing them to make the determination as to resolving dispute. If you sell someone a PC camera for $300 and 3 months later its not functioning they have every legal right to dispute charges. If the manf. warrants the product then the warranty carrier will cover the repair/replacement.
When you accept card payments there is NO SUCH THING AS "AS IS". Doesnt exist. Just as sellers yell about their protection consumers have rights too. In accepting credit card payment the consumer has EVERY right to dispute charges even if its just cause "I dont like it". Doesnt mean the dispute will be honored but they can make such a claim.
They can claim its Misrepresented in whcih case I presume PayPal investigates the advertisement vs what the consumer recieved and they have every right to perform the chargeback. Its nothing that Amazon, we, Buy.com or Walmart doesnt deal with.
Its not a "payPal" specific gripe. If you are going to accept card payments period then yes, people can perform chargebacks and it IS monitored. If they do too many, flares go up. If a seller recieves too many chargebacks they can almost be assured authorities are going to be taking a look at them.
We had a local seller who recieved 12 chargebacks in a month and the authorities somehow or another were informed. They showed up on her doorstep saying "where are your business papers" basically. She was buying stuff in Yard sales and flea markets and reselling it for profit. States consider purchase of anything for resale w/ intent for profit to BE a business whether the "seller" thinks they are or not. I dont know what happeend from there, presumably she'd be charged with operating an illegal business, sales tax fraud etc. She used some third party service though I know it was not PP.
But yes... chargebacks can and do happen all the time and as a seller thats a risk you take in acceptance of such payments. PP probably doesnt have lots of options relating to chargeback. Its probably NOT even determined by them since they are "the merchant". The cardholders bank and paypals card processor make that determination I would presume.
The only difference is as a "merchant" we are in the loop at least somewhat when chargebacks do occur. We've had 5-8 attempts 3 of which stuck. I am sure PP as the Merchant is in the loop just as we are to a certain extent with our merchant account. PP cannot however put the actual "seller" in the dispute loop other than asking for the "information" delivery confirmation in case of dispute over reciept of goods for example. They cannot however put the seller "in the full loop" I presume as the seller is NOT the merchant, they are.
In accepting credit cards EXPECT it. It will happen just a matter of when. With a merchant account you are allowed a percentage of total charges vs chargebacks. Its like 1 or 2%, we have a coupla merchant accounts and they differ a bit. But, if say its 1%, that means if total you made $1000, and 1% of that thousand has resulted in chargebacks they can terminate your merchant account and odds are you wont get another.
I presume paypal has some sort of similar mechinism for its sellers.
Just clarifying this thread, as yisgood's page is not cleary demonstrating what happened here.
We have a processing system for chargebacks (from the vendor). The vendor had an error that impacted a small number of users with chargebacks. The system was checked to make sure that these items were valid or that they were backed out if they were not.
I apologize for any confusion this may have caused. I believe around 16 users were impacted by the error from the vendor.
posted on August 21, 2001 04:22:47 PM new
If you would clarify it, I will edit my page. What exactly happened? Did the customers make charge backs after 16 months and the CC company allowed it? Or did the charge backs occur long before but it took the vendor many months to inform Paypal and then when Paypal got these long overdue notices, they just went ahead and charged back the sellers until the sellers complained? Your clarification isn't really very clear.
posted on August 21, 2001 04:25:07 PM new
Hi yisgood,
No, the vendor (apparently) erroneously reported chargebacks, which were processed (and corrected) by us once they came to our attention.
I will also get numerous testimonials from buyers and sellers for your claims of Buyer/Seller Protection not working. Much of the information presented on your web page is incorrect, which I will be reviewing shortly and asking for a correction.
posted on August 21, 2001 05:02:59 PM new
No, there has never been any intimidation. Damon has at times asked me to correct something on my page and if justified, I did. I once reported that Citizens Bank was not accepting Paypal after verifying this with the bank. Later they began accepting Paypal and Damon asked me to change this and I did. Of course, the Paypal cheerleaders attacked me for reporting an incorrect story and then taking it down when challenged, which is not what occurred. So to clarify, I had to put the story back up with a disclaimer. Kind of silly if you ask me, to report on something no longer true just to say it is no longer true.
Damon, you know from our emails that I am not looking to trash Paypal, just to get a little more honesty and customer service out of them. For every story I report, there are at least ten I choose not to report because I believe there is more to it that the poster isn't saying. Folks have emailed me with their PP complaints and I have often responded that it was their own fault (as in a recent case where a seller threw away her proof of shipping and was upset that PP allowed a charge back). But the problem here is that we never hear Paypal's side and then you chastise me for not presenting it when you haven't either. I'm sorry but "I can't comment" is not an answer. I'm sure that some of the stories I reported were actually the users' fault, just as I'm sure that there are many more stories that were Paypal's fault that I didn't report. And I don't believe that every single one of the hundreds of complaints made were the users' fault. If just once in a while you said, "Sorry, we goofed," I could accept it. But we are expected to believe that Pope-pal is infallible and that I can't swallow. Particularly when some of the victims are people I know personally and whose integrity I would trust any day.
By the way, on the forum of which I am the mediator, there will be very little censorship on either side. You are free to post there as well.
posted on August 21, 2001 06:38:07 PM new
That sounds like the best reason possible to
not leave money in your PayPal account. Or
can they pull it from your linked checking
account if you don't have enough in the PP
account to cover the charge-back? Anyone...
Z
---
"Cannot say. Saying, I would know. Do not
know, so cannot say". -- Zathras (Babylon 5)
posted on August 22, 2001 09:05:29 AM new
>>They allegedly will not take it from your brick and mortar bank account, BUT
The terms of service allow them to charge your credit card on file for money owed them.<<
There have been a few (very few, maybe two or three) reports of Paypal taking money out of a bank account. In each case, it was an error either by Paypal or the user and it was corrected. In any case, you can go to the bank and file an affidavit to have the funds returned. It is similar to a charge back only a little more serious since doing this falsely is a crime.
There have been no reports of Paypal charging a seller's credit card for a charge back. It wouldn't make any sense. Since no merchandise is being sent, the seller could easily charge this back.
I would guess that emptying your paypal account would protect a seller against small charge backs if you rarely use paypal. If you use it on a regular basis, they will just take the money from the next payment you get. Then what do you do? DO you walk away from the account and tell your customer who has paid you "tough luck but Paypal has your money?"
If a seller gets a large charge back, Paypal can decide to go after that seller through legal means. I only know of one seller this happened to but we are talking about Paypal claiming over ten thousand dollars.
