KateArtist
|
posted on October 7, 2000 02:00:57 PM
Well as things have developed, it appears that PayPal is freezing the entire accounts of sellers and still accepting transfers from buyers into these frozen accounts from buyers without telling them there is any problem. The sellers then have no access to their own accounts, even to look to see if credits have been made to them.
If the seller is a crook, and you made your transaction out of your checking account, then your money is now tied up until PayPal decides what to do, which apparently can take over a month. If you had charged this item to your credit card, the credit company, merely suspends the charge and you make no payments on it, til the problem is cleared up.
Not so with PayPal. They take your money and hold it in limbo, keeping you from using it for anything else until they decide you or the seller can have it.
If you use your credit card to make your transaction to PayPal, this may cause you a problem if your CC company will not allow you to chargeback the item because the charge was to PayPal rather than the seller.
If the seller is not a crook and either made a mistake, or had a bad complaint against him or her, then he or she can't even tell you made the payment and would be justified in keeping the item until they are sure they will get paid by PayPal for it.
Not much of a problem if you are just buying a 2 dollar bangle, but if this is the money you had saved up for a new computer or birthday or christmas gift
well I guess you will just have to wait.
By the way, this problem is far more likely to happen if the seller is verified. The guarentee that PayPal is offering buyers that if the item is not as listed or never arrives is apparently being enforced by said freezing of the seller's entire account. This will happen even if the seller has proof that the item was delivered. PayPal freezes first and asks questions later. One person's item gets lost in the mail and every paypal buyer that is patronizing the seller suffers until PayPal settles the claim.
Have you ever known an insurance provider to settle a claim quickly?
|
radh
|
posted on October 7, 2000 02:20:23 PM
LOL!
I just luv those Billpoint ELECTRONIC CHECKS, which means NO chargebacks, whatsoever -- but ANY seller can issue a REFUND. Better yet, they are FREE.
Kate, the scenario you depict could really make life miserable for innocent folks who do NOT happen to be Net.Billionaires.
|
mballai
|
posted on October 7, 2000 03:21:28 PM
If PayPal pulls this with my bidders, I will cancel my account. As it is, I check and move my money regularly and haven't yet had a problem.
Actually this sounds like someone who whines to PayPal rather than one who works it out with his seller. The same is true for those who snivel and sob to eBay rather than deal with the seller.
|
uaru
|
posted on October 7, 2000 05:50:00 PM
KateAritist The sellers then have no access to their own accounts, even to look to see if credits have been made to them.
Source of information requested.
I saddly realize that 'hysteric inducing posts' don't have to have any validation, but I'm curious where you found your information for the above statement. I've never had my account withdrawals put on freeze. Just tell me what your source is so I can give your post and you the proper amount of credibility.
|
KateArtist
|
posted on October 7, 2000 06:48:14 PM
This has been reported by several people who had their accounts frozen in posts on these boards.
I have not experienced myself and am relying on hearsay, but I have also not heard anyone contradict them on that point including Damon, who certainly had the opportunity.
Have you heard anyone say otherwise?
[ edited by KateArtist on Oct 7, 2000 06:50 PM ]
|
uaru
|
posted on October 7, 2000 07:00:24 PM
I've had no personal experience as I stated, I was curious if you had some information other than anonymous posts on a message board. I've seen posts where the accounts were frozen, but I've also seen posts those the same account holders mentioning receiving payments and looking at their history file.
I'm seeing more and more of this 'relying on hearsay' as evidence.
|
HJW
|
posted on October 7, 2000 07:18:49 PM
uaru
This is not hearsay. These are people whose
accounts have been frozen.
The link to the lawsuit thread is,
http://www.auctionwatch.com/mesg/read.html?num=41&thread=3197
|
uaru
|
posted on October 7, 2000 07:30:25 PM
HJW, that is hearsay to me. In fact its on the very questionable list. The post is claiming that they are required to show proof of shipment for an item sold on May 5th. When did PayPal buyer protection plan go into effect? August? I don't believe we know the whole story on that.
That posts states a buyer was unable to send funds to that seller's account because it was locked, which would make Katie's opening post on this thread null and void.
I can't validate that post, it's not a fact by my standards.
|
HJW
|
posted on October 7, 2000 07:43:08 PM
uaru,
Isn't it a mess. Have you ever dealt with an
organization so untrustworthy?
I recommend that anybody with an interest in
paypal should read this thread and come to
their own conclusions.
You have been a cheerleader in the past so
your opinion may be a little biased.
Helen
|
DoctorBeetle
|
posted on October 7, 2000 07:49:00 PM
When we only see one persons slant on the story is it safe to assume that all the facts are in evidence and that all the statements are valid? Personally I don't want to draw my conclusions based on half of a story.
Dr. Beetle
|
uaru
|
posted on October 7, 2000 07:50:00 PM
Yes, that post is a mess, the dates don't work for me, there is more to that story. We'll never see PayPal's version. One statement I loved in particular was this "After looking for several days my attorney found a phone number for them". I can only assume he was using the law firm of Larry, Moe, & Curly.
I don't particularly like the term 'cheerleader' I like to think I'm a very calm individual and not prone to hysterics and I'm very picky about my news sources.
[ edited by uaru on Oct 7, 2000 07:58 PM ]
|
KateArtist
|
posted on October 7, 2000 08:03:10 PM
Indeed Uaru, all posts are heresay. That is the nature of boards such as this and why I prefaced my post with 'It appears'.
I'm far more interested in finding out what really is happening then pushing PayPal as the good guy or beyond redemption.
I haven't seen the same posts as you about looking at the history file - so lets ask those that have their accounts frozen - are you able to see the history?
But at any rate - as a seller, I still would not send out an expensive item until I was reasonably sure that PayPal is going to allow me to transfer out the money of my account that the buyer sent and as a buyer I'm still concerned that I'm not being told if the seller's account is frozen.
One of the problems here with PayPal is that they are not being clear or even the least bit revealing about what their actions will be about what will happen in different circumstances, so we must all rely on other customers to give us warning when they found out the hard way.
But at any rate, I agree with you - there's not enough information to make conclusions and I don't recommend anyone do so.
By the way - the name is Kate, not Katie.
Only my Mom calls me Katie.
|
uaru
|
posted on October 7, 2000 08:25:14 PM
HJW " Have you ever dealt with an organization so untrustworthy?"
Is that sort of like asking "Have you stopped beating your spouse?" Sorry, but I don't do loaded questions. Please give me enough credit that I am able to evaluate a company's performance on my personal experience. PayPal has handled a lot of my money (by my standards) and I can account for every penny.
If you are able to draw conclusions as to guilt from an anonymous post like the one you've referenced that saddens me. I have to confess I drew some minor conclusions... the dates don't work, and he's got a stupid attorney working for him if it takes several days to look up a phone number.
|
uaru
|
posted on October 7, 2000 08:36:25 PM
Kate "I'm far more interested in finding out what really is happening then pushing PayPal as the good guy or beyond redemption."
I have no problem with seeking the truth in matters, I have a problem with the jumping to conclusions that is occuring with alarming frequency.
There are 2 recent PayPal titles that I think reflect an unresponsible posting method.
"PayPal Withdraws $1000 From User's Account"
"PayPal use unsafe for buyers"
I think posters should hold themselves a bit more accountable.
|
yankee98champs
|
posted on October 7, 2000 08:46:57 PM
I agree uaru, these threads are misleading at best, libel at worst.
"Paypal use unsafe for buyers". Seems to me it only became "unsafe" when Paypal stopped subsidizing the Power Sellers on this board with free credit card processing. But of course, that's a coincedence, right?
Want to use Paypal fine, don't want to, that's fine too. But don't tell half the story and present it as truth.
|
yankee98champs
|
posted on October 7, 2000 08:49:40 PM
I hear, btw, that KateArtist is actually employed by Billpoint.
I am relying on heresay, but noone from Billpoint has contradicted it, so it must be true, right?
|
yisgood
|
posted on October 7, 2000 08:56:51 PM
Here are two items that are not heresay because I know this for a fact:
1) I had a personal account tied to my personal bank account. My wife has a business account tied to her business checking account. Someone in paypal decided that this violated their TOS and shut down my account without notice. I couldnt access it but buyers could still put money in it. I called them repeatedly and got nowhere. Then someone on Yahoo pointed me here. When I complained here, Jennifer (Damon's predecessor) got it fixed. I still thought it was heavy handed to do it in the first place.
2) A customer of mine paid someone with paypal and received nothing. The seller gave a fake address and phone number on the auction site, indicating that this is a premedidated fraud. Paypal says there is nothing they can do, so he has made a charge back on his credit card. But the seller's PP account is still accepting payments two months later! If PP did not freeze his account, they are allowing him to continue defrauding people. If they did freeze his account, why is it still accepting money?
The one common theme that every PP post has is that 1) PP makes no effort to contact the person before their account is frozen 2) it takes weeks to get an answer and only after dozens of calls and emails and a public post here. This is very scary!
http://www.ygoodman.com
[email protected]
|
HJW
|
posted on October 7, 2000 09:03:05 PM
uaru
One question...why is it that these people
who are "apparently" having problems with
their accounts are unable to get in touch
with anyone by phone. They have to rely on
an auction watch message board. In this case,
the phone number obtained by the lawyer was
not to the department equipped to answer the
question.
|
KateArtist
|
posted on October 7, 2000 09:08:30 PM
Sorry Uaru,
Since it's pretty hard to jam disclaimers into subject headers I don't expect to find them there. The post had them, so I don't agree that they are misleading.
|
uaru
|
posted on October 7, 2000 09:27:54 PM
Kate Since it's pretty hard to jam disclaimers into subject headers I don't expect to find them there.
I feel at some point Auction Watch will have to step in on posts relating to companies doing business on the internet. There's a big difference between.
PayPal use unsafe for buyers
and
Is PayPal unsafe for buyers?
There are some companies I've got problems with and I know I could put a post with a spin on it, but I don't think the fact I can makes it right to do so.
HJW I have no answers to your question, I don't know all the facts. Increasingly I'm asked to form an opinion and be outraged based on 1/2 the story. I can't do that. I'm having to rely on news sources and personal experiences.
|
mrpotatoheadd
|
posted on October 7, 2000 09:43:22 PM
Increasingly I'm asked to form an opinion and be outraged based on 1/2 the story.
And all in the comfort of your own home. How could one ask for more?
|
sg52
|
posted on October 7, 2000 10:11:51 PM
I feel at some point Auction Watch will have to step in on posts relating to companies doing business on the internet.
Lord save us from the would be censors.
You're here, uaru. I'm here. And so is paypaldamon. There's toyranch. There's radh. There's magazine_guy. And yisgood. And HCQ. Cynics all (except PPD). And more I'm regrettably forgetting. With all of us, precious little BS passes unchallenged. Any reader can sort out a reasonable belief based on the discussion.
It works better than any censored system ever imagined.
sg52
|
stantman
|
posted on October 7, 2000 10:43:11 PM
KateArtist:
Don't waste your time telling this stuff to PayPal decipals. They will come up with every reason why you SHOULD use Paypal, ignoring the potential THEY have to run in to the same problems.
Don't ask me why, but some people have to have it happen to THEM before they heed any warnings.
A lot of people from Missouri, I guess.
[ edited by stantman on Oct 7, 2000 10:44 PM ]
|
hopefulli
|
posted on October 7, 2000 11:00:38 PM
I think it is good that buyers may also now be questioning some of Paypal's tactics-both real and alleged. So far, they have all been perceived as the seller's problem. Maybe if Paypal starts to lose some of its leverage
(buyers pressuring Paypal acceptance), they will solve some of these issues.
|
KateArtist
|
posted on October 8, 2000 12:45:06 AM
Uaru, let me put it this way. Unsafe is a subjective word. At this point I consider PayPal based on what I have observed people post to be too unsafe for me to use as a buyer.
I don't know that everything they said is true and I would not make the conclusion that all those posts were facts, and I may at some time consider PayPal safe enough to use again, but not at this time.
If that's not OK with you - that's your problem.
Kate
|
longfellow
|
posted on October 8, 2000 12:53:22 AM
uaru
I was going to commend you regarding your quest for "all the facts" and both sides of the story; until you publicly made a judgement from a post that you question as being one sided, by typing two words "STUPID ATTORNEY".
How can you accept this persons' fleeting comment about his attorney without question; and not his in depth post?
Don
|
macandjan
|
posted on October 8, 2000 02:37:01 AM
I would like to point out that the people telling us about how much trouble they are having getting problems resolve are not telling us if they have a business account.
If you have an over worked struggling help department and trouble getting decisions from upper management are you going to concentrate your resources on the paying customer or the folks taking the free service ????
Damon - about interest on accounts -
They can set the interest as high as they want but until this freezing the whole account thing is resolved I won't let thousands of dollars build up in the account.
You see all the raving nut cases you have to deal with? Our customers are just like that also. We never know when some nut case will freeze our account for no real reason. I had one customer make all kinds of threats etc and the next day write all apologetic saying he was "off his meds." If I do get frozen how it is handled will decide if I close out after.
|
abingdoncomputers
|
posted on October 8, 2000 06:20:22 AM
uaru:
ANY title for a thread is fair game, IMO. If the poster who orginates the thread can back up the title with facts, then so be it. If s/he can't, that will become readily apparent after a few posts have been made. And if s/he is stating an opinion, as Kate obviously is here, there is nothing wrong with that either. You and everyone else is more than welcome to state yours in repsonse and I see you do it quite often (and rightly so).
As far as calling for Auctionwatch to do something about these types of threads, I feel completely capable of forming my own opinions based on what I read. I really don't feel that I need (or PayPal needs) the protection of Auctionwatch. There are plenty enough posters with differing viewpoints on these boards to present a fair and balanced thread. If a thread title or a post won't hold water, we will all see the leaks. In the case of this thread, I don't see any. All I see is a poster with an opinion asking for the opinions of others in return.
|
HJW
|
posted on October 8, 2000 06:49:32 AM
I listed the link to the Lawsuit thread above. The link to the other thread is
http://www.auctionwatch.com/mesg/read.html?num=41&thread=3232
There will be straggling cheerleaders who will call every report of a negative experience with
PayPal "hearsay". Make your own conclusions.
[ edited by HJW on Oct 8, 2000 06:50 AM ]
|
