posted on March 27, 2001 06:35:33 AM
Yup, I'm positive now. EBay would be only a theory if buyers were as panic stricken over merchandise not being shipped as some sellers are over chargebacks.
How did mail order merchants accept credit cards all these years?
Lions and Tigers and Bears and Chargebacks... oh my!!!
posted on March 27, 2001 06:40:06 AM
Boy, I had *no* idea by little question would create such a long thread!
I was just upset w/ that fact that PAYPAL can take money back *out* of my account if a buyer claims he never receives the product!
I am small time seller & it does not pay to get DC on these $5-20 items IMHO. This is the second time this has happened to me where buyer claims he/she never rec'd item.
Last time I sent the buyer back his bid + shipping & ate it. Maybe he/she did get the product, who knows! But at that time, it was *my* choice as to return the money or not.
This time, there was *no* choice, PAYPAL zapped it out of my account because I had no proof I shipped it! That's what got to me. I have high feedback & I guess that doesn't mean a thing!
The other part to this story is that this buyer had won an auction from me a couple of weeks before this one & left GLOWING fb & was happy! Now he/she thinks I ripped them off the 2nd time!?!? Go figure!
posted on March 27, 2001 07:01:26 AM
Well it is not all about CC regs for me like had been stated earlier by someone. I did a quick look at my transactions for the last 2 days on PayPal. Actually I looked at the last page of them and of 13 transctions (lucky 13) 4 were Credit Card, 7 were non credit card (I take that to mean funds already in the system) and 2 echecks. So that is only 30% of my transactions come from the credit card. That means I am goverend 70% of the time by PayPay rules only and I want to make damn sure I understand them.
That is exactly where I am coming from. unlike some of you I too have been taken by Paypal over these rules once already and I don't want that to ahppen again.
This is an simple open fourm, The questions asked are quite simple. Either the answers from Damon come with conditions which might be the answer or he does not answer them at all.
Since his first answer come with conditions and he would not say yes period I followed up with another simple question he desided not to answer last night while responding to the rest of you and sending out tee-shits to the others.
Here it is again maybe he will find time tonight to answer it.
Damon, I have a related question. If I was to accept the fact that DC was proof of shipment etc, etc, then what do I have to do to prove the second part of the sellers protection rules as stated by you.
All shipping providers that provide a trackable number on-line will suffice as evidence for our the purposes of the Seller Protection Program (with the understanding that there are several components to the Seller Protection Program, including shipping the item to the confirmed address on file, not shipping internationally, and not accepting payments from multiple accounts for a single purchase).
What do I use to prove I shipped to the verified shipping address, thats all I want to know.
Jim
Removed extra lines is all
[ edited by lanefamily on Mar 27, 2001 08:56 AM ]
posted on March 27, 2001 07:22:01 AM
>>How did mail order merchants accept credit cards all these years? <<
Here are a few reasons:
In the past, you "earned" your CC with a good credit rating. Today the CC companies are giving away their cards to anyone, kids, pets, etc. They don't care. They have gotten the sellers to eat the cost of fraud. There are even companies that specifically target folks with bad credit histories.
There were fewer credit cards and folks had to go through a stricter verification process. Today the average person walks around with several cards and the scammers go online and get hundreds.
The charge back rules were tighter. In order to plug the small problem of crooked vendors, they opened the doors wide to the bigger problem of crooked buyers.
When I was in college, some students discovered that a certain payphone returned the money after a call was made. Within days, there was a long line at that payphone of folks calling all over the world.
Now that even plain folks have learned how easy it is to do a charge back, they are doing it. There are hundreds of articles on the net about it. A woman learned that she could let her boyfriend use her card to charge items and then just charge it all back and say he didn't have permission. A father learned that he could let his teenage son charge whatever he wanted and then refuse to pay for it. (He tried this on me. I told the CC company that I also had one of their credit cards and I also had a son. If they felt this was right, my son would be treating himself to lots of free stuff. They backed down.) Though these folks would never think of shoplifting, they think nothing of charging back. It's just too darned easy and there's almost no risk of prosecution. Why rob when you can not only steal, you can have it delivered right from the comfort of your home? Credit card fraud is increasing at an exponential rate and smart vendors have good reason to be worried.
Add to this the payment services. Now the vendor hasn't even dealt with the customer directly. He has not been given a CC number to charge. He has to rely on a third party. How many times has this third party screwed up? But when the charge back comes, they refuse to give the seller the customer's info. So the customer is free to cheat, secure in the knowledge that the payment service will protect him. And like that college payphone, this info is spreading across the world. "Use a payment service. It's fast, secure and FREE."
posted on March 27, 2001 07:57:45 AMsg52, does the above response from Damon help?
Well, let's check it out.
The key item is that it is more than likely going to be scanned at one of these facilities and this is what allows tracking---if office a didn't scan it, office b probably would---the margin for error is probably not that large.It would provide proof that it was shipped, which is what we are asking for
In other words, "maybe,if".
"USPS DC may satisfy PayPal's requirement if it can be tracked online. If and when it cannot be tracked online, then it does not meet PayPal's requirement."
paypaldamon, I'm not as unfriendly as I seem, and I'm sincerely pleased you're here. But I think you misunderstand what people want.
Users seem to worry about---
Bring item to the post office. Item is mailed from post office to another post office where it is not scanned.
I suggest that very few people imagined this scenario. Here's what they DO imagine. They buy USPS DC. They ship the stuff. The chargeback comes in.
Seller to PayPal: "I bought DC, here's the number".
PayPal: "sorry, not good enough".
Seller:"but you said DC was good enough"
PayPal:"No, we said no such thing. We said that the item must be trackable online."
posted on March 27, 2001 08:24:12 AM
I insure all my packages no matter what the vaule..I find this protects the seller and the buyer and also seller can prove item was mailed and also if lost ..damaged..or just did not get there..a claim can be filed and either replace product to buyer or a refund..also puts the breaks on a buyer claiming i did not get my package when they have to sign the postal forms..i fig. the cost into the shipping charges and just leave it at that..
I am still having a very hard time understanding why it is not being understood that the confirmation/tracking method has to be tracked on-line for our purposes.
The hypothetical scenario of the post office not scanning the item has a very low probability of it happening. If it came to that, you would probably have to provide documentation from the USPS to validate your claim to the Seller Protection group (such as a letter).
I fear that this is being made more complex than it truly is.
The verified shipping address is the one that is released when payment is made. If you go to the SEND MONEY screen, you will see what I am stating when the buyer is making their transaction choice (confirmed address and contact seller about shipping to another address).
I have also posted several times that delivery confirmation is not the only part of the equation (sent to confirmed address on file, not shipped overseas,no multiple payments from multiple accounts for one transaction). I have also offered to post it and do a complete breakdown if it helps (for SG52).
posted on March 27, 2001 10:37:44 AM
hi paypaldamon,
i don't think most of us are having any trouble understanding either why or that paypal needs confirmation/shipping to be trackable online.
most of us simply want to be assured that if we use usps dc [which is simplest and cheapest method of confirmation/shipping], that will do the trick as far as confirmation/shipping for paypal. if it will 99% of the time, only not be by some fluke of the item not being scanned along the way, ok, that's the answer we wanted.
i too am interested in your answer to the question jim/lanesfamily has asked: if usps does not include info other than zip code and date, *how* do we fulfill the other part of the protection plan that requires us to prove we've sent the item to the verified address?
all we're trying to do is have all the bases covered - all t's crossed and i's dotted - in advance, should such a problem arise, not trying to make things more complex than they are. we just want to make *sure* we're fulfilling all of paypal's requirements for the protection plan.
posted on March 27, 2001 11:23:53 AM
Paypaldamon, your system of not accepting printed documents is inadequate.
A seller could send someone an empty box, get delivery confirmation and claim they sent them a $1000 computer.
Or a buyer could claim they received an empty box, when they in fact they did not.
In such a case, printed documents at the time of delivery might be the only way a seller could prove they actually sent the item. USPS Delivery confirmation will not tell you the weight or cost of the mailing - prime factors in determining whether fraud has taken place.
To deny the option of supplying printed documentation because it "might be modified" is beyond ludicrious when such documentation is acceptable in a U.S. court of law. The real reason PayPal wants to only accept online confirmation is it is quick and cheap to do so.
posted on March 27, 2001 11:30:16 AM
>>A seller could send someone an empty box, get delivery confirmation and claim they sent them a $1000 computer.
Or a buyer could claim they received an empty box, when they in fact they did not. <<
Once again, these are NOT paypal problems. This could happen if you accepted a CC directly or used any of the other services. If you want 100% guarantee, do your shopping at the local store and your selling at flea markets and use cash only.
Why do folks seem to think that Paypal should be protecting them against anything that could go wrong? If you are in business, you have to accept some risk. If you are buying off the net, you have to accept some risk. You can cut down this risk by acting responsibly. For buyers this means checking out the seller's history. For sellers this means having a good proof of shipment and good transaction records.
posted on March 27, 2001 12:08:51 PM
Hi kittykittykitty,
most of us simply want to be assured that if we use usps dc [which is simplest and cheapest method of confirmation/shipping], that will do the trick as far as confirmation/shipping for paypal. if it will 99% of the time, only not be by some fluke of the item not being scanned along the way, ok, that's the answer we wanted.
(Yes. Delivery Confirmation is acceptable, despite all the concerns addressed over what the post office does with it).
The address shipped to will also be asked for in the event of a charge back. The sender of the payment also clicks on a button that will release the confirmed address (credit card on file) or there is an option to contact the seller for other arrangements---this is on the send money screen. If option a is chosen, then this is the confirmed address you must ship to in order to be protected. This is what appears in the payment notices you receive.
If a charge back is issued, the following information is asked for:
1. Address shipped to (we can compare it against the records on file).
2. Tracking information.
If it makes more sense---I can get a copy of the email that is sent in the event of charge back.
Hi loggia,
Yes, it is quick and fast for dispute resolution and a requirement that is not going to change. We are asking for ADEQUATE proof of delivery/shipment through a mechanism that allows us to view it. This is not likely to change.
posted on March 27, 2001 01:20:20 PM(Yes. Delivery Confirmation is acceptable, despite all the concerns addressed over what the post office does with it).
posted on March 27, 2001 03:02:58 PMDamon, See that was an answer, I don't need proof where I sent it. If I do have a claim, all I have to do is state I sent it there.
Kittykittykitty must be better looking than I am cause Damon will no longer address me for the same question.
Jim
sg52, You must of stressed Damon a little bit, he is replying to you in other threads where I did not see a post from you.
[i]Hi SG52,
This question has been answered more than once.
Yes.Delivery confirmation is acceptable proof, as is any other method of shipping that provides a tracking number that can be viewed on-line. [\i]
posted on March 27, 2001 03:16:51 PMYou must of stressed Damon a little bit, he is replying to you in other threads where I did not see a post from you
posted on March 27, 2001 04:08:01 PMbut I do not understand what you are looking for.
Ok, paypaldamon, I belive you. I'll try again.
I'm looking for a statement that USPS Delivery Confirmation is always sufficient to address the proof of shipment step to protect a PayPal seller from chargeback.
So far, as close as you've gotten is, trying to understand, a statement which is something like "USPS is sufficient when it is trackable online. We think it's usually trackable online, but if and when it is not, seller is not covered".
Note that a statement of the form "Yes, USPS DC is covered, as are all forms which allow online tracking" says "maybe if"; it clearly allows PayPal do say "insufficient" in any situation which was not trackable online to PayPal standards.
If there are some situations, however unlikely, that USPS DC would not be satisfactory, then please discuss them. If no such situations exist, then say that USPS DC is always sufficient.
sg52
posted on March 27, 2001 04:48:52 PM
Hello Everyone,
It seems quite clear to me that paypaldamon has answered your question and quite succintly, I might add.
Stop with the energizer bunny, asking the same questions over and over, hoping for new wording and generally being disrespectful to someone that is assisting you.
Please afford Company Reps the same consideration that you would give each other.
***edited to add that this thread is very long and if you wish to continue a discussion in the Partner Services forum, feel free. I will lock this one up.
Joice
[email protected]
[ edited by joice on Mar 27, 2001 04:50 PM ]
