posted on May 4, 2001 09:50:54 AM new
johncarillo is right about one thing. Those critical of Paypal have a clear agenda. Yisgood's poster child, the subject of this thread, stated his agenda very concisely:
"I cant wait to join or instigate a big class action lawsuit that owns or destroys pay pal."
posted on May 4, 2001 09:56:32 AM new
I think I've figured it out. Paypal's entire customer service department is Damon. When users call with a problem, they keep getting told that the guy who can help them can't be reached by phone. That's because Damon is online here. When Paypal announces that their CS department has expanded, it means Damon put on a few pounds.
posted on May 4, 2001 10:21:35 AM newAny business that holds money belonging to others, without offering insurance to protect those customers from loss of the money entrusted to them, has an obligation to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt that their customers are provided with a full, complete, accurate and unambiguous explanation of any of the company's policies or procedures about which they are asked.
The bank account verification has been answered to many people's satisfaction, it is an ID verification that must remain current. As far as offering insurance to protect its customers I feel PayPal has gone beyond what the other email services have offered with their account insurance. Is your statement against just PayPal or do you hold the other email services up to the same requirements?
Have you looked at the insurance the other email payment services offer?
Yahoo PayDirect: Yahoo! and the Bank are not liable for any loss resulting from a cause outside our direct control, including the failure of electronic or mechanical equipment or communication lines, telephone or other interconnection problems, computer viruses, "hacking," unauthorized access, theft, operator error, severe weather, earthquakes, natural disasters, strikes or other labor problems, wars, or government restrictions, or for any information lost due to malfunction or loss of any e-mail systems.
MoneyZap: Lost or Stolen User ID and/or Password. If you believe that your User ID and/or Password has been lost or stolen or that someone has attempted or may attempt to send or receive funds using your User ID and Password, you may contact us using the email address, telephone number or address contained in Section 19 above. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT, PRIOR TO WESTERN UNION'S NOTIFICATION OF THE LOSS OR THEFT OF YOUR USER ID AND/OR PASSWORD, YOU SHALL REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING YOUR USER ID AND PASSWORD.
eMoneyMail: Bank One will not be liable for any loss resulting from a cause outside its direct control, including (but not limited to) failure of electronic or mechanical equipment or communication lines, telephone or other interconnect problems, computer viruses, "hacking," unauthorized access, theft, operator errors, or environmental conditions.
C2it: Citibank will not be liable for any loss resulting from a cause outside of its direct control, including but not limited to failure of electronic or mechanical equipment or communication lines, telephone or other interconnect problems, computer viruses, "hacking", theft, operator errors, unauthorized access, or environmental conditions.
posted on May 4, 2001 10:34:42 AM newIt’s just that some people are just skeptical that everyday folks with no invested interest would spend so much time defending any company.
You once asked me why I supported PayPal in my posts, which I answered honestly. I feel a little qui pro quo is in order. Do you have issues with PayPal because of a transaction problem, or their business model? The reason I ask is their business model isn't unique. Several services use a similar model, but in my mind they are much less refined.
Any business that holds money belonging to others, without offering insurance to protect those customers from loss of the money entrusted to them, has an obligation to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt that their customers are provided with a full, complete, accurate and unambiguous explanation of any of the company's policies or procedures about which they are asked.
It is not the determination of the policies- it is the explanation of those policies, once determined.
I'm not questioning their decision regarding bank account verification, or the level of insurance offered. They are free to choose to run their company however they see fit (within the framework of the legal system, of course).
I am saying that I believe every online payment service (the reason I have mentioned PayPal specifically is that this is the PayPal forum, after all) has the obligation to provide their customers with complete, accurate and unambiguous explanations of the company's policies or procedures when they are asked about them. I do not believe PayPal has been doing so, and based on the posts I have read on several message boards, I'm not the only one with that opinion.
Another way to look at it...
Is PayPal out to screw you? I don't think so.
Does PayPal make it clear how you can be screwed when using their services? I don't think so.
edited... ubb
[ edited by mrpotatoheadd on May 4, 2001 10:49 AM ]
posted on May 4, 2001 12:17:35 PM new
Hi mrpotatohead,
I am going to brutally honest with you. I often feel like you go around looking for my posts to look for a way to parse what is posted----And I feel that you are looking for something sinister in our operations or me.
As an example:
Delivery confirmation is acceptable proof.
It then turns into-"What if the post office doesn't scan it?" This is not an issue caused by PayPal, but I can understand how it would impact the individual user.
Verification:
Why? It is used for identification purposes and it does need to be kept current for anti-fraud efforts. This is a less intrusive methods of running a credit check on a user when they apply for service.
Your answer-you just want access to bank accounts, which are not accessed without user consent and is also covered under Section E of federal laws.
Message board problems are very apparent. How many users come back and post that the problem has been solved? Very few.
How many users can get an answer to their issues in close to real-time? Quite a few. I post some information on procedures, policies and tips on a regular basis. These are often ignored and users gravitate to the headlines of some user(s) expressing their side of a problem. My job is to help fix the problem and advise, where I can, what policy is on matters for the benefit of other users that read the forum.
I think you would find that my answers are quite accurate and truthful. If you want to check on how legitimate the information I post is on any item, please feel free to contact customer service or read the web site (much of the information I post is available in other places). The difference is---I am coming to you and you don't have to take the steps. It is proactive, instead of reactive, service.
I peruse forums to interact with our users and I also take feedback forward on what is impacting them. I take all problems and suggestions forward on behalf of our users to make sure that we are making our policies, and products, with as much consumer input as possible.
I also want to make sure that user decisions are based on the correct information---not hysteria.
posted on May 4, 2001 01:00:41 PM new
uaru: "You once asked me why I supported PayPal in my posts, which I answered honestly. I feel a little qui pro quo is in order".
My interest in Paypal started out as personal but quickly became professional. After a problem with Paypal, I was amazed at how poorly it was handled. I did a quick search for Paypal and found a bunch of message boards and "I hate Paypal" sites. I placed a request with a news service and found many articles going back to Paypal’s modest beginnings. Early articles described a great new service to expedite personal payments. Next came a series of articles about how Paypal went shopping for investors, and how big-name investors signed on. Then came a few articles about how little protection you had with these services and how even non-members got burned. Next came a wave of articles on the flap over the Better Business Bureau rating. Recent articles state that Paypal has assigned a person to work closely with the BBB to resolve complaints, and DRB claims these complaints have been cut in half. There are so many negative feeling about Paypal over the same basic complaints. One woman I spoke with was in tears by the time she was done telling her story. Don’t just think that business people have or had their funds tied up with no explanation. Some of these folks are individuals doing the best they can by their customers, and the money locked up is next month’s rent. The human-interest value of this story is compelling. Wouldn’t it be nice if it were told? Do you think that everyone within the company is happy? This may well be a myth dispelled in the near future.
I don't think you are even reading my posts. You just said:
And I feel that you are looking for something sinister in our operations or me.
while, just 5 lines above your id, I have written:
Is PayPal out to screw you? I don't think so.
What part of that is unclear? Do you believe that I don't mean what I say? If so, why would you expect that I should not view your posts in the same manner?
You also said:
I often feel like you go around looking for my posts to look for a way to parse what is posted----
so I did a site search (mrpotatoheadd paypal) to see if I was indeed guilty of "going around looking for your posts". What I found was that, in the last month or so, there are 9 threads that meet the search criteria indicated. On 3 of them, you never posted, on 2, you posted before me and on 4, I posted before you. As I have been posting comments following yours at only half the rate you have been doing so with mine, that would seem to disprove your "feeling", at least with regards to it actually being a fact.
Since you were brutally honest with me, I will return the favor. I believe that you are so wrapped up in your efforts to put out fires on PayPal's behalf that you are overlooking valuable input that would go a long way towards solving the problems that cause the fires in the first place. The fact that people are critical of your company is no valid reason to dismiss their concerns out of hand.
posted on May 4, 2001 03:00:48 PM newmrpotatoheadSince you were brutally honest with me, I will return the favor. I believe that you are so wrapped up in your efforts to put out fires on PayPal's behalf that you are overlooking valuable input that would go a long way towards solving the problems that cause the fires in the first place. The fact that people are critical of your company is no valid reason to dismiss their concerns out of hand.
Amen mrpotatohead!
Some of us on this board are critical of PayPal because we want the service to be good and we want it to succeed.
No evil motive there.
Some of the posters who are most critical of PayPal started out as bonafide pompom-waving cheerleaders for this service.
Then, as PayPal started changing its TOS -- and in ways that made smart, informed consumers cringe -- the original cheerleaders stopped blindly waving pompoms and started asking questions.
They got a lot of spin and not a lot of answers.
In the meantime, PayPal was tarnishing reputations of honest sellers who'd never done anything wrong and who'd never given the service a moment's trouble --- even while PayPal demanded more and more private information.
PayPal needs to be more upfront in its dealings with its users if it truly wants to expand its user base beyond the online auction biz. The "7-million+" users (or is that just 7-million+ accounts? I have two accounts. I'm sure many other users do, too) that PayPal claims are a drop in the bucket... and will quickly dry up if the online auction market should fizzle.
This is a great forum for PayPal to hash out the problems/potential problems/ideas.
It's a fairly limited group (which limits potential bad publicity) and it's a pretty savvy group as well.
The PayPal critics are a pretty valuable resource for the company. Most companies pay lots of money to invite folks just like us to participate in focus groups.
posted on May 4, 2001 03:10:25 PM new
Hi johncarillo,
I am going to throw my "spin" on this.
Users come to message boards for several reasons:
1. To exchange information.
2. To exchange problems.
3. To give advice.
4. To vent.
At times, the person posting the information is not completely forthcoming about the issue and the why. I am trying to make sure that problems are found and that they are corrected---whenever possible.
While I can't post specifics, several of the account restrictions over the past several weeks on the forum have had to do:
1. Access from a country not supported by PayPal. In order to protect the individual user, the account was restricted. These are cleared up with documentation from the user to prove who they are and to prevent access from countries we do not do business in. This has been several of the account restrictions you have seen.
2. There may be a pattern of claims against the user that have not been resolved. You can find an example in one of threads where the user was told they have 15 claims filed that have not been resolved.
If you do a search on any corporate entity on the web, you will find (more than likely), a series of web sites devoted to hating them or loving them. Some of these users were defrauded by another user at an auction site---even though these transactions occur as the result of an offer on another venue, we end up taking the blame.
Hi Mrpotatohead,
How much more information can I provide on delivery confirmation? All I can tell you is that it is acceptable for the Seller Protection Program.I am not entirely sure of why you keep degrading what I had stated over an issue I have absoloutely no control over, which would be--what would happens if it wasn't scanned? That was my only answer and it is the only answer I can give because it is the correct one ( The same applies to verification). I asked you exactly what you were looking for and I responded with the same answer. You took issue with the answer because you were looking for something that isn't there.
I advised of my reasons for being the forum. I think it is absolutely needed for any company that is internet-based to interact with their users in the forums. I would absolutely prefer that I did not have to handle every case that comes to the boards, but I have no problem tackling it or getting it directed to where it can be resolved.
This is a really good place to get feedback from our users(both good and bad) and I would be more concerned with a company that does not take note of what the customers are saying about them or that does not make changes based on their feedback. I would also be deeply concerned with any organization that does not take steps based on what is perceived as a problem (such as the BBB complaints---we took note, analyzed the information, and we have taken steps where we could---and will continue to do so. It doesn't mean we are still not going to look at the complaints once the company is in a SATSIFACTORY rating).
posted on May 4, 2001 03:17:44 PM new
>>What others pay for, PayPal is getting for free. <<
Maybe Paypal doesn't listen because we have to do it this way:
First we say "always free"
then we say "except for business accounts, but we won't force you to upgrade"
then we put a $500 limit for 6 months
when that doesnt work fast enough to suit us, we change it to a $100 limit in one month
All kidding aside, you hit in right on the head. I was a big cheerleader, arguing with all the bashers until folks I knew personally had their accounts restricted or got ripped off. That's when the blinders came off. Until then, I was also of the school that anyone with a problem must have done something wrong.
But getting beyond the rhetoric, here is the question no one has answered:
Yes, Paypal has the right to protect themselves and their accounts against fraud. My bank might not cash one of my checks if they have reason to believe I didnt write it. My CC company might reject a transaction if they believe I didnt make it. But they won't do this without making an attempt to contact me and they won't use the excuse that the guy who makes the decision doesn't have a phone! It doesnt take months for me to get through to my bank and I don't have to contact the BBB or post on an Internet forum to get their attention.
So all cheerleading aside, name one bank, credit card, service or business that dares to behave this way.
I think most of Paypal's problems would go away with one little fix that they promised me they would do at least 6 months ago: give the guy in the fraud department a phone! If they can't afford that, it makes you wonder how solvent the whole company is.
posted on May 4, 2001 03:25:27 PM newpaypaldamon writes:
How much more information can I provide on delivery confirmation? All I can tell you is that it is acceptable for the Seller Protection Program.I am not entirely sure of why you keep degrading what I had stated over an issue I have absoloutely no control over, which would be--what would happens if it wasn't scanned?
This little bit of information needs to be added to PayPal's TOS for its seller protection program. All it takes is a cautionary phrase added to a sentence.
Much of PayPal's customer base is made up of novice sellers who have no clue how the post office works. Go stand in line at your local PO --- most of America is clueless as to how the system works in general. That's one reason the lines at the PO are so long -- you have to stand behind person after person who has no clue whatsoever what they're supposed to do to mail a package to Aunt Annie! Clerks spend an inordinate amount of time with these folks.
A bunch of these folks are also PayPal users. They sell an odd item on eBay here or there and signed up for PayPal to collect the money.
Learn your customer base, PayPal --know who your users are! You (meaning PayPal, not Damon personally) have to be crystal clear in your TOS. You have to spell out that users have to be sure their local PO scans in the delivery confirmation form in order to be protected under PayPal's seller protection program.
You can't expect people to just "know it."
Once again, PayPal is getting for free what other companies pay megabucks to learn.
posted on May 4, 2001 03:59:04 PM new
Hi vargas and mrpotatohead,
You hit the nail on the head--
"Some of us on this board are critical of PayPal because we want the service to be good and we want it to succeed."
I think I alluded to why I come in the forums. I can take customer complaints,suggestions, product ideas directly to the organization in a minute---not months, as you would find in most organizations.
Here are the some of the ideas that came directly from the forums:
1. Seller Protection
2. Buyer Protection
3. The wording on the web site regarding registering your bank account.
3. Reasons why an account can be restricted in the terms of use.
4. Isolation of transactions and not an account restriction.
5. Policy changes on the web site.
6. A last modified date on the web site for policy changes.
7. New mail preferences for receiving PayPal notices.
8. TOS changes in as far in advance as possible. I think you will find most changes have at least a two-week, or longer, window before implementation.
I could keep going, but I am trying to show that things do change as a result of the feedback, It may not occur overnight, but things do happen.
Often, which is part of the role, I become a target for certain users because of their experiences with issues in the past. I can deal with that, but I don't have to be called names in a public forum and repeatedly answering the same question to the same posters about the same issue can actually delay my responses to other users that have not had their questions asked.
I try very hard to be as clear as possible in what I post, but it isn't always going to get past an individual's perceptions or fears. If I can't answer a question in a different manner---it is not because I don't care, but the answer can't be phrased in a different manner because there is no other answer.
I broke down the information on bank account verification to try and condense some of the concerns. This still drew criticism from some parties because the answer wasn't what they wanted to hear. To put it mildly, it was more than just a little frustrating---because those are the only answers available.
I have nothing to gain by lying to any member of this forum. I have a lot more to lose by doing so, so I will state that my answers are honest and correct. If I make a mistake, I will come back and correct it.
All I ask for in the forums is a little discretion (on the part of the reader) in what they read. The company is not always to blame for every customer issue...issues that are our fault will be corrected as quickly as possible. Can individuals make mistakes? Yes. Can a company make mistakes? Yes. Can all problems be solved? For the most part--yes.
posted on May 4, 2001 04:09:20 PM newMy bank might not cash one of my checks if they have reason to believe I didnt write it. My CC company might reject a transaction if they believe I didnt make it. But they won't do this without making an attempt to contact me... So all cheerleading aside, name one bank, credit card, service or business that dares to behave this way.
name one? Ok, how about C2it.
Under certain circumstances, the law allows us to use the money from any Citibank Account in your name or that you jointly own with another person to pay any amount you owe to us. This is called the "Right of Setoff." We are not required to give you advance notice of our intent to take such action; if we do take such action, we will notify you afterwards.
posted on May 4, 2001 04:24:39 PM new
C2it is very clear about what it can and cannot do in its TOS.
That is notice to users.
Forewarned is forearmed.
Does/will C2it actually take this kind of action against the average user?
Or is this wording simply cover-every-base-just-in-case required by Citibank's lawyers to be sure Citibank does not lose its right to recover in large, blatant cases of fraud?
posted on May 4, 2001 04:44:14 PM newto be sure Citibank does not lose its right to recover in large, blatant cases of fraud?
Of course they don't want a thief running off with the money in cases of fraud. Lets be honest here, how many financial services would give a warning like, "We're going to be looking for a possible fraud issue on your case, we trust you not to withdraw the money where we can't get it before we've concluded our investigation."
First National Lobotomy Savings and Loan might give such a warning, but I doubt you'll find many others as accomidating. How much warning would you give someone you suspected of fraud before you took action?
posted on May 4, 2001 04:58:16 PM new
I must be a masochist- I'm actually going to try one more time...
Damon-
I am not entirely sure of why you keep degrading what I had stated over an issue I have absoloutely no control over, which would be--what would happens if it wasn't scanned?
I am not repeat AM NOT degrading what you are saying about delivery confirmation. You keep saying over and over that items must be scanned, and I am not disagreeing!!! You keep telling me you have no control over that, and I am not disagreeing!!!
Reread the post by vargas on May 4, 2001 03:25:27 PM- not everybody is an expert on USPS policies and practices. I have no doubt that were you to ask any USPS employee if you can go online and look to see if a package sent with delivery confirmation has been delivered, the answer would be "Yes". That being the case, I would suggest that nearly every USPS customer would then believe, if he has a stamped delivery confirmation receipt, that he has fulfilled PayPal's requirement for making a shipment which can be tracked online.
As was previously stated by a poster on this board who is a USPS employee, not all packages get scanned. Do all of USPS's customers know this? I'll bet not- I wouldn't, if I had never read the messages here. Even if I didn't see the clerk scan the item when I mailed it, I would have figured that it would get done, since I paid for the service. I am sure that many other people would think the same thing.
You previously posted this comment:
What happens if the post office doesn't scan it? (not a PayPal issue).
Although scanning the package is not PayPal's responsibilty, whether or not it is done has a direct impact on the seller with regards to the protection plan you offer, and this is a PayPal issue. If you are aware of a fact which would invalidate a seller's claim under that policy, it is your obligation to be sure that sellers know how they will be affected by the actions (or inactions) of the USPS (or any other third party). Anything less is unacceptable.
You said in a previous post that you were "kind of hoping that many people would understand that on their own". Why waste time playing "20 Questions" with your customers, hoping they figure things out on their own? Why not just give them the information they need in order to protect themselves right off the bat? Better yet, why not put this information on your "Terms of Use" webpage? Wouldn't it make your job easier if you didn't have to address this issue repeatedly?
Question: Is USPS Delivery Confirmation acceptable as proof of shipping?
Answer: USPS Delivery Confirmation is acceptable as proof of shipping, provided the package is scanned into USPS's system and can be tracked online.
Caution! Sellers need to be sure that the package is scanned at the time of mailing. Failure to do so may result in loss of coverage under the "seller protection plan".
posted on May 4, 2001 05:10:03 PM new
Hi mrpotatohead,
I had indicated in my previous post that I will do that from now on--if you think it is needed.
However, as I had mentioned before, I would be under the impression that most users would use common-sense about the matter of tracking.
Our terms state that the user must present the trackable method, not that the organization tracking your packages is not going to have an error in doing so. This is why I mentioned I can only state what we need---not what could happen to the tracking of the package in the hands of an entirely separate organization.
posted on May 4, 2001 05:39:31 PM newpaypaldamonsays However, as I had mentioned before, I would be under the impression that most users would use common-sense about the matter of tracking.
Common sense would indicate that if I paid for delivery confirmation, I would get what the post office promises -- the ability to go online or call a phone number, enter the number on my delivery confirmation receipt and see/hear whether or not the package has been delivered.
It's more than reasonable to assume that nearly all people believe that is what they are getting when they pony up their extra pennies for DC.
In reality, it does not work that way.
Again, PayPal needs to study its market -- which at this point in time is majority online auction users -- and learn the follies, foibles and pitfalls that face its customers as they relate to PayPal's services and guarantees.
Doing so will help PayPal understand that it is not dealing exclusively with professionals who understand how shipping systems work.
Online auctions are a service for the masses and you know the old saying "the masses are
--ses."
In order to protect itself and its reputation, PayPal has to do more handholding than the service originally intended.
I've been with PayPal long enough to know its original intent --- beaming money to friends and co-workers for lunches out, repaying friends for sports/concert tickets, collecting fees for the team soccer uniforms.
The online auction business wasn't even mentioned in PayPal's original pitches.
Online auction users found and latched onto PayPal... and completely changed the nature of the service and how it needs to serve its customer base.
On one hand, it's darned lucky for PayPal that it worked out this way. Without the auction userbase, PayPal would very likely be a drip in the wave of dot bombs over the last year.
On the other hand, it's created new problems and challenges for PayPal. One of those problems/challenges is to deal with newbies who have no real experience in the business/retailing/shipping world. It's a user base that requires a greater degree of handholding.
PayPal needs to be prepared to hold those hands.
Hire some auction pros to go over the seller/buyer protection policies and point out the holes -- and to show you what needs to be written more clearly.
But above all, never assume your users just know anything. You gotta tell 'em.
Thanks..and points will be taken on how I can improve certain aspects of my messaging. As an FYI, we do have someone that is considered an auction pro and he does write some of the materials in our newsletters.
This was from the most recent newsletter---Skip McGrath writes regular items for us--
FYI-EMail that went out last night-PayPal news and info
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debit Card and Cashback
The company that created email payments is pleased to announce a new tool to give you instant access to your cash - the PayPal Debit Card. With the PayPal Debit Card, the money in your PayPal account is much easier to utilize. The Debit Card lets you withdraw your balance from ATMs - that means you can spend your money without having to wait for electronic transfers to clear your bank.
You can also use the Debit Card to make purchases everywhere MasterCard is accepted. Use it to pay at restaurants, the Post Office, wholesalers - the list goes on. You can even pay your eBay™ fees with your PayPal Debit Card! Plus, PayPal gives all PayPal Preferred sellers 1.5% cashback on purchases - that's like having your Business/Premier fees reduced from 2.2% down to 0.7%.
If you're a U.S. user and you haven't received a Debit Card notice yet, keep an eye on your Overview page - we'll post some instructions for you within the next month. And if you're already eligible for a Debit Card, be sure to give it a try!
POWER SELLING TIPS
By Skip McGrath
Editor: The Auction Seller's News
Organize Your Selling Tools To Grow Your Business
If you are placing four or five auctions per week, you may be able to manually track your auctions, notify your bidders, confirm delivery, and post feedback. But if you want to grow your business to Power Seller™ levels, a more organized and automated system will be critical to your success. Here are easy ideas for getting organized:
Automate your winning bidder e-mails and send payment instructions with PayPal's free Winning Bidder Notification.
Combine Winning Bidder Notification with an on-line customer relations system for an easy-to-use email management solution.
Use an auction management service (such as Andale) to place your auctions, store images, track inventory, accept PayPal and communicate with your bidders all from one location. Such services typically charge a small fee, but this pays off quickly in time saved, a professional image, and improved feedback.
This Month's Power Tip
Only 50% of buyers bother to post feedback. Everyone appreciates the personal touch. A short hand-written thank you note, included with your shipment, will dramatically improve your feedback numbers.
posted on May 4, 2001 08:06:01 PM newUnder certain circumstances, the law allows us to use the money from any Citibank Account in your name or that you jointly own with another person to pay any amount you owe to us. This is called the "Right of Setoff." We are not required to give you advance notice of our intent to take such action; if we do take such action, we will notify you afterwards.
There is a big difference between C2it and PayPal. C2it is a service provided by Citybank. Citybank is a REAL BANK (one of the country's largest). As a REAL BANK, Citybank is regulated and the "setoff" is a provision under the BANKING laws that allow ALL banks to take money from one account (after certain specific actions are taken and specific conditions are met) to offset balances owed on another account OWNED BY THE SAME ACCOUNTHOLDER. Compare this to PayPal, who can (and does) freeze the account of a recipient of a payment sent by a seller SUSPECTED of being a fraudster.
While the "Right of Setoff" may sound like a big advantage for C2it, there are all kinds of hoops that a bank must must jump through and specific steps that they must take prior to performing a setoff.
As an unregulated company (not a bank) in a new area of commerce (email payment services), PayPal has few real regulations to follow and can pretty much do as they please, include take money from a bank account at any time. They can (and HAVE done this, more than once). And they don't have to jump through hoops to do it.
posted on May 4, 2001 08:16:01 PM newAs an unregulated company (not a bank) in a new area of commerce (email payment services), PayPal has few real regulations
Tell me what banking regulations C2it has that PayPal doesn't have? Do you think funds in a C2it account are insured? Yes, CitiBank is a bank, no C2it isn't. PayPal has several partners, many of them are REAL banks as some would like to put it. Who do you think PayPal's debit is issued from? Bank One. Who do you think is releasing PayPal's credit card? Providian Bank. Who do you think is PayPal's money market fund is offered by? Barclays.
So tell me exactly what banking regulations you think C2it falls under that PayPal doesn't?
PayPal thrives in what many consider a dangerous form of legal limbo. Though it looks more and more like a bank with each passing week -- offering money market accounts and as of this month, credit cards -- PayPal remains outside the strictures of banking laws. Consumer accounts have neither the protection of federal insurance systems like FDIC nor the assurance of regulatory oversight. Even agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission and Better Business Bureau, which have recently started familiarizing themselves with several e-payment providers, appear to have limited power. Since PayPal is privately held, they don't even have the outright authority to scrutinize the company's finances. As one FTC lawyer put it, "if they filed for bankruptcy tomorrow, no one knows what would happen to their accounts."
posted on May 5, 2001 08:07:02 AM new
dubyasdaman,
Hopefully C2it at some time will supply a rep to this message board. Then you can ask point blank about what banking regulations they fall under making them different. There are many email pay services, you will find regulation wise they all are on the same playing field. However one does offer hacking and theft insurance and it isn't C2it.
In the long run C2it will never be able to compete against the services that are free for the buyer.
posted on May 5, 2001 08:32:41 AM new
"Our terms state that the user must present the trackable method, not that the organization tracking your packages is not going to have
an error in doing so. This is why I mentioned I can only state what we need---not what could happen to the tracking of the package in the
hands of an entirely separate organization."
Damon, let's say as a new seller, I read the terms of Seller's Protection, purchase DC on a package, and the buyer files a claim with Paypal for non-performance.
Paypal sends me email requesting the Proof of Shipment - and I fax them a copy of the DC receipt I have.
If they try to pull that DC# up and its NOT in the system because of the postal service's error in not scanning it, does that mean I as the seller am going to lose my claim? I have provided you proof of acceptable shipping methods to the verified address (visible on the form), but the PO dropped the ball.
If that is the case, I agree some text should be added to the Seller's Protection section re: DC or any other trackable form of shipping - that the seller should ensure that all items are properly scanned by the shipper to ensure accurate online tracking is available.
I know enough about the system to know this through my own experience, but given the # of errors made by newbies - more info is probably just good sense.
On the flip side, how many newbies READ the policies enough to even know they should be using DC in the first place??
posted on May 5, 2001 02:38:14 PM newThere are many email pay services, you will find regulation wise they all are on the same playing field.
Uaru, with all due respect, you could not be more wrong. Since you don't take our word for it call the Federal Trade Commission at 877-FTC-HELP and ask them.
posted on May 5, 2001 05:46:00 PM newI broke down the information on bank account verification to try and condense some of the concerns. This still drew criticism from some parties because the answer wasn't what they wanted to hear. To put it mildly, it was more than just a little frustrating---because those are the only answers available.
Damon - I have to take offense at this. I was one of the posters trying to get you to answer the question about verification with online banks. While we all appreciate the Verification FAQ that you posted, you did not address the question that was being asked. After repeated attempts, you just keep reiterating the boiler plate answer (which does not address the issue). I can infer quite a bit from the information that you provide, ut only if it can be logically inferred. The information in your "Verification FAQ" did not allow me (or anyone else) to logically infer they answer to the question "WHY"?
Please, do everybody a favor and take a step back to look at this from our point of view. It isn't that your answer "isn't what we want to hear" that is a problem, it's the fact that there is no "method to paypal's madness" on the verification issue. Just explain to us WHY. Any answer that doesn't explain the "why's" simply hurt Paypal's credibility.
posted on May 5, 2001 07:46:03 PM new
I spoke to C2it and they told me that while they are looking for a way to post on this site, it will not be soon and it will not be as prolific as Damon. Because they are owned by a real bank and subject to real laws, their legal department does not like the idea of having a rep here make statements which can then be interpreted in different ways. Unlike Paypal, they can not just change their TOU on a whim. But they are planning to have someone answer general questions at some point.
As for the silly argument about "is your money insured?" the answer is simple. With C2it you DON'T have an account. Funds go directly from the buyer's bank account or credit card to the seller's bank account or credit card. When the seller gets the email that he has a payment, he must go to C2it and claim it (note to paypal, I believe you are the ONLY service that doesnt have this option and accepts funds automatically, except for the weak protection of your convoluted reject method). Upon hitting the "get cash" button, he is presented with a list of all credit cards and bank accounts attached to his C2it account and asked where the money should go. It goes there directly. There is no option to have it sit in a C2it account.
Now let's stop discussing hypotheticals. I asked C2it specifically about the three cases that I have "featured" and how they would handle them. I was told that once the seller has claimed the funds, they WILL NOT take it back unless there is clear evidence of fraud. This might include: several customers complaining about the wrong goods being received or several complaints about non-receipt. They would never take back or "freeze" funds based on the unsupported claim of one customer. So these three Paypal customers with good records would never have gone through the ordeal Paypal has put them through.
Next, C2it has a 24-hour, toll free number. If the first person answering the phone can't help the caller, he will be transferred to someone who will. Callers will not be told that the guy who makes the determination is in another building without a phone.
Now let's talk about the terms on C2it that seem to frighten folks. Can they possibly be any more frightening than the terms below?
"PayPal will seek to recover the funds from you by debiting your PayPal balance and, if there are not sufficient funds in your PayPal balance, PayPal reserves the right to collect your debt to PayPal by any other legal means."
"Not a Bank. You acknowledge that (i) the Service is not a banking service (ii) Service accounts are not insured by any government agency of any nation, (iii) the Service is not subject to banking regulations and (iv) PayPal will invest in liquid assets and that interest earned on those assets will be the property of PayPal. "
"Restrictions. PayPal, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to restrict an account for any one of the events listed below." (I only listed the ones I consider unreasonable)
"Complaints received regarding non-shipment of merchandise, merchandise not as described, or problems with merchandise shipped" (one complaint from a buyer and they can restrict your account)
"Receipt of potentially fraudulent funds" (they don't even have to prove it's fraudulent)
"Unconfirmed identity" (unverified sellers - they can restrict you at any time)
(here's the clincher - they don't even need an excuse)
"Termination. PayPal, in its sole discretion, reserves the right to terminate this Agreement, access to its website, or access to Service without notice for any reason and at any time. "
On a related issue:
I met this weekend someone who is one of the leading experts on credit card fraud investigation and prevention in the US (and does NOT work for Citibank). He told me that there are certain prevention measures that can be taken to greatly reduce fraud and false charge backs that are more easily done by banks. There were certain details he could not go into and certain details I can't reveal, but he said that C2it would have a major advantage of services that were not run directly by banks. He also told me that the fraudsters were constantly looking for new services opening because it is early on that they make good targets, before they learn from their mistakes and start plugging up the loopholes. Exchangepath was hit with most of the fraud very early on and so was Paypal. EP is gone and PP has plugged up most of the holes. C2it and Moneyzap don't appear to have been hit. So the excuse that some have made that Paypal is only a fraud target because it's more heavily used and if C2it becomes bigger, you will suddenly start seeing fraud, (I'm talking about professional fraud, not buyer-seller disputes) is not really a concern.
