posted on April 24, 2001 04:53:30 AM
This from AuctionBytes NewsFlash:
April 24, 2001 - PayPal Institutes New Fee
Effective May 10, 2001, PayPal members will be assessed a $1.50 fee each time they withdraw funds by check from their PayPal accounts. Members who have bank accounts attached to their PayPal accounts may continue to withdraw funds via electronic funds transfer for free.
posted on April 24, 2001 08:48:09 AM
I'm not a PP cheerleader - I use them. I keep my balance low to buy a few tchochkes on eBay and I have them wire my money into a 2nd account I have for ONLY this purpose. I believe they make a lot of mistakes, which is why they have access to an account that can't ruin my life if they screw up.
That said, an electronic transfer is a key stroke.
Generating a check requires at the very least, setting it up, printing it, putting it in the envelope, and mailing it.
I can see why they'd put in a disincentive to checks.
posted on April 24, 2001 09:23:19 AMI have never understood why anyone would request a check when an electronic transfer is much faster.
A mystery to me also. It's almost like insisting to use a slide rule because you don't know how to operate a calculator.
option 1) I click withdraw funds, I enter the amount and I send them to my bank, in 2-4 days they are in my account.
option 2) I click withdraw funds, I enter the amount and they mail me a check, I wait for the snail mail to show up, I have to physically take the check to the bank and fill out a deposit slip and deposit it.
The electronic withdrawal is so easy and effortless for me there was never a choice.
I don't make as many deposits as use to. My wife has made it her goal in life to spend my PayPal funds as fast as they come in, she might just succeed. Everytime I look in my PayPal account I see payments made to Penny's, Sears, Walmart, Toy's R Us, Nancy's Nails, Topical Tans, Bertha's Beauty Parlor, etc. The debit card with my wife's assistance has really reduced my bank deposits.
posted on April 24, 2001 09:29:28 AM
Why pay $1.50 for a paypal check mailed to me? Absolutely, I'll just have my buyers send a money order straight to me, won't cost me a thing.
posted on April 24, 2001 09:40:51 AM
Are you sure that an electronic transfer is final and cannot be adjusted? Sometimes banks let adjustments be made by the transferring institution if a mistake was discovered. I am wondering if on chargebacks, can PayPal not withdraw the funds back from your bank account.
posted on April 24, 2001 09:58:32 AM
Do you honestly know how much it really costs to print a paper check?
These are estimates, but still pretty close to real amounts.
Computer Time $.05
Security Check Paper $.04
Ink $.02
Envelope $.01
Postage $.34
Bank Fees per check $.02
Reconciliation Fees $.03
Audit Fees $.01
Total $.52
So while it costs them about $.52 to send a check out, it costs about $.03 to have an ACH transaction. What is comes down to is that it costs 17X more to send out a check so they want to recover the costs, but also provide a disincentive to request more checks than you need. If you are really busy and are making several thousand dollars a week after all paypal and ebay fees, the $1.50 fee is just .075% of $2000.00 Add to that regular paypal fees and it is about 3%, but by using the ACH option, you keep it back in the 2% range. Anybody who has experince in the banking industry should be able to back up this information, although their amounts might be slightly different.
"We're flooding people with
information. We need to feed it
through a processor. A human must turn information into
intelligence or knowledge. We've tended
to forget that no computer will ever ask a new question." - Grace Hopper
posted on April 24, 2001 10:38:15 AM
>>Are you sure that an electronic transfer is final and cannot be adjusted? Sometimes banks let adjustments be made by the transferring institution if a mistake was discovered. I am wondering if on chargebacks, can PayPal not withdraw the funds back from your bank account. <<
Anyone who makes an electronic deposit into your account can also make a reversal. There is a limited amount of time they can do this and you can file an affidavit to stop it. Paypal used to do these reversals but Damon claims they have stopped this process and I have not seen a complaint about it in a long time.
"Anyone who makes an electronic deposit into your account can also make a reversal." There is a limited amount of time they can do this and you can file an affidavit to stop it. Paypal used to do these reversals but Damon claims they have stopped this process and I have not seen a complaint about it in a long time.
_____________________________________________
This is a federally regulated item and it is explained in our terms of use. We do not do transactions against the bank account without the end user's permission. The one item you keep referencing was a clerical error (and, notably, one in which the party admitted to engaging in money laundering, by knowledge or not).
posted on April 24, 2001 08:25:54 PM
And it took you weeks to stop lying about this, by continually claiming that such a thing would never happen, before you would finally admit that it was a clerical error and did hsappen.
This is precisely the sort of dishonesty on the part of Paypal that makes me distrust the "We will never take money out of your bank account" claim, when your TOS also says you can change that at any time.
Lying is a very bad thing, especially for a company that wants to get its hands on your money.
posted on April 24, 2001 08:29:10 PM
Damon,
Can you elaborate more on this "permission"? For instance, if paypal mistakenly (through clerical error or whatever) deposits $10,000 into my account, will you have to ask "permission" to take it back?
posted on April 24, 2001 08:47:22 PM
One more word on this...
This is simply Paypal's latest scheme to force users to provide their bank account information & give blanket authorizization to Paypal to withdraw money from that account. They only way to make an electronic withdrawal & avoid the fee is to give them carte blanche to take money from your bank account.
As I have noted before, the whole verification scheme is not aimed at increasing security (if it were, why would they let so many accounts be opened by overseas criminals using U.S. addresses, when this type of obvious fraud is easy to prevent?). Instead, the whole purpose of verification is to get access to users' bank account info.
I recently received a notice that I would be losing "Verified" status because my bank account information is no longer current. The only reason my bank account info is not current is because X.com was not competent/trustworthy enough to operate an Internet bank (which would, unlike Paypal, been regulated), and they shut it down. How does their inability to get a banking license or operate a bank reflect on MY validity as a Paypal user or my impact on the security of the system? Why should it affect my status as a "Verified" user, when the only thing that has changed is on Paypal/X.com's end?
It seems to me that they are the ones who should be verified, not me. Damon, please fax me the most recent audited financial statements for Paypal/X.com, plus copies of driver's licenses & utility bills & criinal records for all Paypal employees, so that I can "verify" your company for security reasons.
I stopped listing Paypal in my auctions a while back, when Paypal started lying repeatedly, but kept the account open to keep an eye on the situation. I still received occasional payments from people who didn't read my auction terms (or occasionally from international buyers who I made an exception for), and retrieved the funds by check.
With the new $1.50 fee, I have removed my seller e-mail address from my account, so I won't receive any more payments. Anyone who sends me payments anyhow will be turned down, and will receive a link to the Better Business Bureau finding that Paypal has an "unsatisfactory" rating -- a status usually reserved only for the obvious con artists and scammers.
posted on April 25, 2001 09:39:04 AM
I have $2.00 in my account that somebody send me without asking if I take PayPal or not, and I refuse to give them my bank info. Without that, they won't even send me a check.
Anybody know if I can beam this money to a PayDirect account? Just an idea!!!
posted on April 25, 2001 10:24:41 AM
booksbooksbooks,
Your comments to paypaldamon are very close to the line. Damon is entitled to the same consideration and courtesy as are our other members. Please keep the principles of basic etiquette in mind as you post.
The withdrawal policy is in place to protect our user base from fraud.
The information that you provide us with is the same that is on a check you send someone. Accounts are protected against unauthorized access through Traveler's Insurance and your bank account will not be accessed without your permission.
posted on April 25, 2001 11:51:11 AM
Hi booksbooksbooks and vargas,
The customer case that is being referenced---please bear in mind that I have access to the account records and financials.
Customer admitted to being involved in a money-laundering schem.
We placed a reversal, before the funds left out system, to prevent the money from leaving the system.
However, the reversals at the time, required notifying another department to process the reversal. This was not done.
The system showed the reversal as being processed before it left out system, but the money left the account to a bank account. This left a reversal notice pending, which finally got processed a month later. The bank honored the request and returned the funds.
This process is not in place anymore and it is automatic. Once a reversal is placed, there is no need to contact another department to stop it.
Our terms of use are quite clear on bank account withdrawals and I have gone more in-depth on this than I truly should on the boards. Users will not have money withdrawn from their bank account without their permission and reversals will not allow the money to leave the system in the event of fraud.
posted on April 25, 2001 12:10:41 PM
Hi booksbooksbooks,
This will be the last post I respond to posted by you (unless you change your tone and stop calling me names or a liar).
1. All employees go through an FBI background check.
2."This is simply Paypal's latest scheme to force users to provide their bank account information & give blanket authorizization to Paypal to withdraw money from that account."
Please review the terms of use on this matter. This statement is incorrect on your part and could be considered libel or slander.
I also have access to the BBB reports and I know how much of it could be attributed to user error and how many of the issues are the result of a transaction through another venue.
Your feedback is much appreciated, but I am going to ask you for civility in your posts.
posted on April 25, 2001 12:15:42 PM
"Why would anybody want a check sent rather than an electronic transfer?"
Well, I'm one of those who prefer a check. I do not have a separate account for my e-bay, so if it were transferred directly it would go directly into the household account. From there, there's a good chance it would get spent on groceries, bills, etc, just because it's there and it's handy. (as in--"I'll just borrow a little from it for today...I'll pay it back out of my paycheck next week...yeah right.) If it is sent to me by check, I have it cashed and from there stuff it into my hot little envelope where I can use it as needed for "good deals." Yes, I know the logistics to have it deposited and then take the cash out of the account are there, and are simple, but--in my experience once it's in the household account, there's a good chance it will be eaten up for household expenses.
posted on April 25, 2001 12:52:23 PMI recently received a notice that I would be losing "Verified" status because my bank account information is no longer current. The only reason my bank account info is not current is because X.com was not competent/trustworthy enough to operate an Internet bank (which would, unlike Paypal, been regulated), and they shut it down. How does their inability to get a banking license or operate a bank reflect on MY validity as a Paypal user or my impact on the security of the system? Why should it affect my status as a "Verified" user, when the only thing that has changed is on Paypal/X.com's end?
I'd be very interested to see this point addressed.
When you become Verified, you provide PayPal with further proof of your identity.
Since this seems to indicate that the reason to become Verified has to do with proving one's identity, could you please explain why, once a user has provided that "further proof" and become Verified, they suddenly become Unverified when the company who provided the further proof goes out of business?
There has been absolutely no change in the user's personal situation, and unless PayPal requires current bank account information for some reason other than identification (I don't suppose we'll be hearing about that reason any time soon), there should be no need for a change in status from Verified to Unverified.
posted on April 25, 2001 01:49:11 PM
Damon's refusal to respond has nothing to do with my tone. It has everything to do with his inability to contradict what I say.
Damon has never been willing to respond to my points (made repeatedly over several months) regarding the verification scam. Every time I point out exactly why Paypal's verification program is a cover for obtaining access to bank account info, and that their stated justification doesn't make sense, Damon goes mysteriously silent.
Anyhow, I'll give him a couple more questions to ignore:
(1) Do you deny that you repeatedly, over the course of several weeks, issued blanket denials that Paypal ever made unauthorized withdrawals from users accounts, before finally admitting that it did so by "clerical error"? Since, as you note, you have access to all of the internal information, were your denials not intentionally deceptive?
(2) Do you really expect us to believe that the FBI performs background checks for private unregulated pseudo-banks, when they barely have the resources to investigate high-level government appointees?
(3) Please post the language from the withdrawal authorization that a user is required to accept in order to vbecome verified, and tell us how that does not constitute a blanket authorization.
(4) Please cite the language from the TOS which states that Paypal's right to unilaterally modify the TOS does not extend to the prohibition on unauthorized withdrawals.
It appears that, in your inability to provide rebuttals to these criticisms, you prefer to turn to threats of litigation, against club1man, against me, against everyone else who points out the holes in Paypal's spin. If you had facts to rebut me, you would present them here. Looks like all you have is empty threats.
posted on April 25, 2001 02:41:39 PM
Hi booksbooksbooks,
I have no issue responding to fact, which all message board postings are not. You are taking comments from relatively anoymous posters and taking them as wrote, without asking if there are issues that you are not aware of.
Anyhow, I'll give him a couple more questions to ignore:
(1) Do you deny that you repeatedly, over the course of several weeks, issued blanket denials that Paypal ever made unauthorized withdrawals from users accounts, before finally admitting that it did so by "clerical error"? Since, as you note, you have access to all of the internal information, were your denials not intentionally deceptive?
(No, they were not deceptive. There is account information that I can't discuss freely on the boards. And no, PayPal does not make unauthorized withdrawals from a user's account).
(2) Do you really expect us to believe that the FBI performs background checks for private unregulated pseudo-banks, when they barely have the resources to investigate high-level government appointees?
(Yes, we do perform background checks. I supplied my fingerprints and all so that this could be performed.)
(3) Please post the language from the withdrawal authorization that a user is required to accept in order to vbecome verified, and tell us how that does not constitute a blanket authorization.
(Verification is for identification.Here are the terms of use regarding bank account withdrawals and you can check it on the web site on your own---Item 10)
PayPal will never make electronic transfers from your checking account without your explicit permission. Furthermore, PayPal provides you protection against unauthorized withdrawals from your checking account under the terms of Article III below.
(4) Please cite the language from the TOS which states that Paypal's right to unilaterally modify the TOS does not extend to the prohibition on unauthorized withdrawals.
(Same as item#3-PayPal will never make electronic transfers from your checking account without your explicit permission. Furthermore, PayPal provides you protection against unauthorized withdrawals from your checking account under the terms of Article III below. )
If you would like, I can also cover charge backs and charge back liabilitly/recovery (the butt of club1man's issue---since they made it public). This can also be found in the terms of use.
It appears that, in your inability to provide rebuttals to these criticisms, you prefer to turn to threats of litigation, against club1man, against me, against everyone else who points out the holes in Paypal's spin. If you had facts to rebut me, you would present them here. Looks like all you have is empty threats.
posted on April 25, 2001 03:46:26 PM
Well, I suppose they probably do have the answers, but since they obviously have nothing to do with a user being able to prove his identity, I don't think we'll see them posted here.
It's pretty sad when a company feels that dodging issues like this is a better way to instill confidence than being honest and up front with their users.
posted on April 25, 2001 03:51:49 PM
Hi mrpotatohead and vargas,
I am the only person answering these threads and I am getting the answer to your question (s). Patience is needed and I don't know the exact reasons as to why the decision was made.
Verification is for identification purposes and we do require customers to have a current, active bank account that can be verified.
posted on April 25, 2001 04:22:26 PM
If verification is for identification purposes, could someone please explain how the collapse of X.com/Paypal's bank altered my identity?
Everytime I look in my PayPal account I see payments made to Penny's, Sears, Walmart, Toy's R Us, Nancy's Nails, Topical Tans, Bertha's Beauty Parlor, etc. The debit card with my wife's assistance has really reduced my bank deposits.