posted on August 17, 2001 10:01:16 AM newWhen buyer tries to extort the seller by saying "lower the price or I'll charge it back" you don't consider this fraud?
If "charge it back" means "I'll return it to you and submit a chargeback request if you don't refund", then no. It's impolite, and suboptimal as a negitiation technique, but not at all fraud.
Lots of sellers sell disappointing merchandise. Hell, ALL sellers sell disappointing merchandise. Responsible sellers sort out such disappointments, sometimes by agreeing to partial rebates. Credit card rules require the buyer to work it out with seller, and making such a suggestion is patently such an attempt.
Edited to add: it's not at all extortion, either. It's very much like a buyer who might say "if you don't send me my item I paid for, I'll leave negative feedback". Gauche, but neither extortion nor fraud.
posted on August 17, 2001 12:16:31 PM new
>>Yisgood, you've hit the nail right on the head with the example of your business model.<<
Nothing wrong with MY business model. In business 20 years. Never got a bad check. Never had a charge back. 3 attempts but I won them all. It's PAYPAL'S lousy business model that's a problem.
>>I can see why it bothers you, and bothers you a lot.<<
It doesn't bother me, since I don't accept Paypal credit card payments. But it bothers me that I get several emails a week from sellers who learned the hard way that there is no seller protection, contrary to the lies Paypal is STILL emailing.
>>When buyer tries to extort the seller by saying "lower the price or I'll charge it back" you don't consider this fraud? <<
>>>If "charge it back" means "I'll return it to you and submit a chargeback request if you don't refund", then no. It's impolite, and suboptimal as a negitiation technique, but not at all fraud. <<<
Does Paypal give their cheerleaders a training course in how to twist the facts? Buyer bought the item and was happy with the item. Then buyer decided a month later that she wanted a "rebate". This is not a "negotiating technique." This is extortion and it very much is illegal and fraudulent. But it is one of those crimes that the victim has to prosecute at their time and expense, which is the first hurdle. The second hurdle is that Paypal protects the scammers and won't even assist unless the victim gets a subpoena.
>>Lots of sellers sell disappointing merchandise.<<
Buyer was NOT disappointed in the merchandise. Buyer just tried to extort money from seller long after the transaction was over.
>>it's not at all extortion, either. It's very much like a buyer who might say "if you don't send me my item I paid for, I'll leave negative feedback". Gauche, but neither extortion nor fraud. <<
Buyer GOT the item she paid for. There is no way to spin this. It IS extortion and we have heard from several different REPUTABLE sources that seller would have won the case if not for Paypal's involvement on behalf of the buyer and lack of involvement on behalf of the seller.
Incidentally, you "forgot" to address how Paypal will prevent buyers from returning something very different from what was actually purchased.
posted on August 17, 2001 12:55:46 PM newBuyer was NOT disappointed in the merchandise
Regarding the purse?
Yisgood, if we're gonna communicate here, you can't be tossing out hypothetical sounding things and then reconnect them as you see fit at some later time to some real case.
The purse buyer was clearly disappointed, and wanted to return the purse. That part seems beyond dispute.
posted on August 17, 2001 01:04:37 PM new
Disapointed? The buyer wasn't disapointed. She set the bid and then wanted it for less many days later (after reciept of item). Trying to force the buyer to take the item back. When this didn't work. The buyer then lied to her CC company and stated that the item was not as described.
From what I see Yisgood is accurate.
A credit card company can grant a charge back for what ever reason. However, there is nothing which prevents the seller to use the legal system to collect from this buyer. Where it would be harder on the buyer than the seller.
If anyone can simply claim "not as described" and paypal will not gather information what's the point of using paypal?
posted on August 17, 2001 02:47:21 PM newIf anyone can simply claim "not as described" and paypal will not gather information what's the point of using paypal?
Higher sales prices?
More sales?
Profit?
Trying to force the [seller] to take the item back. When this didn't work.
It worked.
Edited to add "I think the buyer was tring to force the seller to take the item back, and succeeded in that attempt".
[ edited by roofguy on Aug 17, 2001 02:48 PM ]
posted on August 17, 2001 02:51:07 PM newThe buyer wasn't disapointed.
Surely this can't be a literal claim.
Buyer was willing to fill out all kinds of forms and return the purse at buyer's expense.
That's a pretty clear expression of disappointment.
The buyer then lied to her CC company and stated that the item was not as described.
You don't know that. Seller didn't claim that, and there's no reason to believe that buyer lied at all. Buyer had to claim that buyer was dissatisfied with the quality of the merchandise. That's all. Given the facts as we understand them regarding this story, I sure would belive that buyer was disappointed in the quality of the purse.
In any case, NO ONE, not a credit card company, not a bank, is going to investigate a series of "he said she said" "which shows that this is true". They are not going to investigate. Once buyer claims to be disappointed in quality, they look for documentation that the rest of the steps were carried out, and they might require buyer to reassert the claim in the face of a response from seller.
posted on August 18, 2001 07:55:58 PM new
If anyone can simply claim "not as described" and paypal will not gather information what's the point of using paypal?
Higher sales prices?
More sales?
Profit?
Not to change the subject, but I would like to see proof that paypal increases sales. eBay reports that 80% of transactions are paid by check and money order, and 20% are paid by online payments. So out of 20% how many are actually paypal, and how many are other companies? I can say doing research on my competition that I do more business NOT taking paypal than those who do. The reason is simple they charge outrageous handling fees, and higher starting prices. Being a seller for 4+ years I never took paypal and my business keeps growing. So in my case not taking paypal hasnt hurt my business, and my sales keep improving. I dont hold checks and that helps too. I think this has to do with my great feedbacks, and no handling fees.
posted on August 19, 2001 08:21:19 PM new
There is a part of the seller’s statement that some of us are missing.
"She was outraged that the second bag which was similar went for less. She Demanded that I accept the same price for the first bag that the second handbag went out for and that I refund her money promptly. She did not complain about the bag, it was new, Authentic as stated! Her complaint was that she paid too much!"
The buyer’s only disappointment is that she paid too much for the bag. She might have gotten into a bidding war and later realize that a similar bag was sold for a lot less, so she wanted a partial refund. The buyer did not complain about the quality of the bag, just that a similar one was sold for less.
If the seller had a chance to present her side of the story and show that the buyer was happy with the purchase until she realize that a similar one was sold for less, the bank would realize that the quality claim was a false claim.
Now I can understand why a lot of sellers pull their money out of PayPal daily, so PayPal does not get a chance to hold their money.
posted on August 19, 2001 09:21:24 PM newIf the seller had a chance to present her side of the story and show that the buyer was happy with the purchase until she realize that a similar one was sold for less, the bank would realize that the quality claim was a false claim.
It does seem unfair, but banks DO NOT INVESTIGATE such things.
They do not get into "he said she said".
They have procedures. They check to see that the procedures are followed. The procedure for a quality of merchandise chargeback is:
Buyer must claim to have tried to work it out with the merchant.
Buyer must document the return of the merchandise.
Sometimes a response by the merchant will cause the bank to put the claim back into buyer's court. Buyer must then reassert the claim, by answering the response. The bank however will not decide who has the best case. They only care for the procedure to be followed.
Yes, if buyer were to have written the dispute as "I was happy with everything except the price I paid", the chargeback might have been rejected.
However, the fact that buyer said that to the merchant at some time is not investigated by the bank. Banks do not want to pass judgement, and will not pass judgement in such cases. Imagine if the credit card bank was fooled by a clever, lying merchant. The bank would be legally in deep water, having refused a legitimate chargeback. The act of enforcing a desired return has very little downside.
Finally, we have no idea as to what the purse buyer might have said if we had asked, the buyer was never part of the discussion.
posted on August 20, 2001 07:15:05 AM new
Of course, there are some who choose to ignore the fact that several posters have already said that, in the case of a situation similar to that of the seller of the purse, their merchant account provider would have disallowed the chargeback.
I guess it makes arguing your point easier if you don't have to address facts that do do not support your point of view.
posted on August 20, 2001 08:38:03 AM new
mrpotatoheadd, what we have is in fact a claim by some posters that they have won or would expect to win a case involving a chargeback.
What we do not have is the details of any case to examine.
We may never have such, so it seems you'll have to make your decision regarding which to believe in the absence of such hard evidence. Such is life.
posted on August 20, 2001 09:25:44 AM new
Mr Potatohead: What we have are a number of sellers claiming that they won similar cases. But of course they are lying. What we have is an article from Newsday showing that sellers often win those cases and a quote from a consumer attorney stating the same thing. Obviously Newsday and the attorney are both lying. We have the relevant law from the FTC showing that sellers have rights too, but the FTC must be lying. We have Paypal's lousy ratings from the Better Business Bureau, the Wall St Journal, Bankrate, Salon Magazine, Cnet and Epinions, but obviously they are all lying. I spoke to the CC department at three different banks who all told me the seller would have won this case, but of course, they are lying. The only ones telling the truth are Paypal and its cheerleaders. After all, they have a proven track record of honesty with "always free," "we will never force you to upgrade," "buyer/seller protection" and most recently their emails stating "just follow our rules and you will be charge back free" even AFTER admitting that sellers will always lose "quality of goods" charge back disputes.
I hope no one is fooled by this giant worldwide conspiracy against Paypal. And while I'm at it, let me reiterate that I'm really Elvis Presley the King and anyone who says different is lying.
By the way, I will never say anything about Paypal that isn't true. It says so right in my TOU.
posted on August 20, 2001 10:00:45 AM new
Yisgood, I suggest that you continue your analysis. You've gone quite far, but you've not as yet got to the bottom of the story.
For example, at the bottom of the story you will find that the FTC offers no protection to credit card merchants under the Fair Credit Billing Act. None. None. That act protects buyers, not merchants.
You'll find that the story is often confusing, because not telling it has been the strategy of the past to combat abuse. Reporters don't lie, but they sure don't get it right either in many cases.
On the face, the FCBA seems to preclude internet credit card commerce all together, so reporters struggle to make sense of the fact that such commerce continues to flourish.
It will continue to flourish, but part of that flourishing is the longstanding mail order business model. A core of that model is the no-questions asked return policy. That policy is what keeps businesses out of quality of merchandise chargebacks.
Here's a challenge for you, Yisgood. Find a single well known mail order company which does not offer such a return policy, but does take credit cards.
posted on August 20, 2001 10:35:24 AM new
I guess Buy.com and Egghead.com must be stupid because they don't seem to believe that any customer can return anything at any time. On some items, Buy.com restricts returns to only 14 days after purchase and only if it is defective. Why don't they realize that a customer has the right to return something a month later if they don't like the price?
Egghead is even stupider. They actually believe that they are allowed to refuse returns and charge a restocking fee of 15%.
Neither site allows you to return something due to "disappointment."
I guess in all the time they were in business and all the thousands of items they shipped out, no one ever tried to return one. Some day they're gonna learn that if you accept credit cards, you have to let anyone return anything at any time for any reason. Or is that just if you accept Paypal?
buy.com Return Policy at a Glance
• Most Non-Clearance Store products may be returned or exchanged within 30 days of your product's shipping date.
• Clearance Store and Buy of the Day products may be returned only when defective and within 14 days of your product's shipping date.
• The shipping date is available in your My Account history. After 30 days (14 days for Clearance Store/Buy of the Day products), please contact the manufacturer directly.
• Opened laser printers, inkjet printers and fax machines may be exchanged within 30 days (14 days for Clearance Store and Buy of the Day products) of your product's shipping date, for the same item only. No refunds are available for these items, if opened.
• Opened Software, Music, Video, DVDs, Wireless Accessories, Wireless PDAs, Games, Books, Office Products, Office Supplies, Furniture and Janitorial Supplies items may be exchanged within 30 days (14 days for Clearance Store and Buy of the Day products) of your product's shipping date for the same item only. No refunds are available for these items, if opened.
• All returns must include a Return Merchandise Authorization Number (RMA#).
• Items must be in original packaging, in as-new condition with the packing slip, all warranty cards, manuals and accessories. Furniture must be disassembled in original packaging.
• Please allow approximately 10 business days for your return to be processed once it has arrived at the warehouse.
• If you request a replacement, we will ship your replacement after we receive and process your returned product. If you need a replacement right away, we suggest you request a credit (rather than a replacement), when you obtain your RMA number. Then place a new order. The new order will be shipped as soon as we have product available and your credit will be applied approximately 10-15 days after we receive the product you are returning.
http://www.egghead.com/ShowPage.dll?page=hd_policy_return_p
Return Policy
Egghead.com is committed to working with you to ensure that every product under warranty performs to the manufacturer's specifications. Please check the product description for warranty details and contact information.
Warranty Support
If your item requires warranty services or is missing parts, please first contact the warranty service provider listed in the Warranty section of the product description. To view the item's description, go to the Order Status page.
If your item has not been repaired to your satisfaction, Egghead.com will work with you to obtain an appropriate resolution. In this event, submit a Defective Product Service Request or a Missing Part Service Request. Please include the name, phone number and case/reference number of the warranty provider. An Egghead.com representative will respond to you within 2 business days.
Return Merchandise Authorization
Items may be returned for refund, replacement or repair, subject to manufacturer and/or Egghead.com restrictions. All product returns must have a Returned Merchandise Authorization issued by Egghead.com or the product manufacturer.
To request an RMA and shipping instructions, please contact the warranty holder. RMAs are valid for 15 days from the date of issuance.
All returns will be processed and fully inspected after they arrive in our warehouse. All products must be returned in original condition including packaging, documentation, warranty cards, manuals, and accessories.
Returns that do not include all peripherals may be returned to the customer or charged on a per item basis.
Return Shipping
All returns must be shipped freight pre-paid.
Unauthorized or Refused Returns
Egghead.com cannot accept unauthorized returns or exchanges. Packages without a Return Authorization Number will be refused. Egghead.com will charge a 15% restocking fee plus any applicable shipping charges for refused shipments. Additional charges may apply if all peripherals and accessories are not returned in the original, unopened packaging.
Non-Defective Returns
Any returns found to be non-defective are subject to a restocking fee of 15% and all non-product-related fees (shipping, transaction and insurance) are not refundable. Refused or undeliverable shipments will be subject to a restocking fee of 15%, in addition to applicable shipping, transaction and insurance fees.
posted on August 20, 2001 10:41:44 AM new
Is CompUSA well known enough?
Online Return Policy
For items purchased from CompUSA.com
Purchases can be returned for refund within 14 days from date of purchase. Most items purchased online can be returned to CompUSA retail locations. Some items must be returned by mail, using the Mail-In (RMA) Return Policy listed below. Please review your packing slip to determine return procedures for your purchase. All items must be accompanied by a copy of the original receipt and must be in the original, undamaged packaging. No refunds or exchanges are allowed after 14 days.
An open box fee equal to 15% of the purchase price will be charged on any opened item, unless the item is defective and exchanged for the exact same item (fee not applicable in Hawaii). The 15% open box fee will be assessed at the time of refund or exchange.
Opened software, DVD movies, pre-recorded videos and game cartridges may ONLY be exchanged for the exact same item and may NOT be returned for refund.
CompUSA will not accept the return of any item if the UPC code has been removed from the packaging.
Refunds on purchases made with a credit card will be posted to the original credit card used at the time of sale.
posted on August 20, 2001 10:53:12 AM new
Ok - read the entire thread - very interesting, although Paypal seems to have lost all interest.
Just a thought -
Is it not possible that in order to initiate a chargeback, the CC company required buyer to provide documented return of the purse to the merchant? If so, the merchant of record would be Paypal. The issuing bank would have no interest in third party tranactions.
posted on August 20, 2001 11:01:45 AM newIs it not possible that in order to initiate a chargeback, the CC company required buyer to provide documented return of the purse to the merchant? If so, the merchant of record would be Paypal.
I think it's likely that's exactly how this played out. PayPal's requesting of this particular buyer that they return the merchandise to PayPal as a part of the chargeback process would hardly do much to support any perceived "seller protection program", however.
Although one might think that Paypal seems to have lost all interest, I would guess that it is more accurate to say that PayPal would like the issue to just go away.
posted on August 20, 2001 11:18:51 AM newOpened software, DVD movies, pre-recorded videos and game cartridges may ONLY be exchanged for the exact same item and may NOT be returned for refund.
Ok. So some of them have such statements in their terms. In the context of a credit card transaction they are unenforceable, but some of them have them there.
However, when threatened with a chargeback, they do take them back. They have no choice. They don't set the rules, the credit card company does.
One of the steps a buyer must follow in the procedure is "attempt to work it out with the merchant". A customer who reports "contacted merchant, merchant refuses to cooperate" has fulfilled that requirement in spades.
posted on August 20, 2001 11:51:03 AM new
Add compusa, buy.com and egghead to the group of conspirators against paypal. There are hundreds of sites that all have conditions for returning items but the "fact" is that anyone can return anything at any time for any reason. All of these sites wasted their time and effort to post useless return policies only to make paypal look bad. Every one of them is wrong. Only paypal knows the truth.
posted on August 20, 2001 01:43:04 PM new
Add Wal-Mart.com to the conspiracy. It has exceptions to its "return anything anytime for any reason" policy:
From walmart.com:
Please note: Gift cards are not returnable or refundable.
From Walmart.com:
Returns Policy Exceptions
CDs, DVDs, audiotapes, videotapes, video games and computer software/Return UNOPENED within 45 days of time of receipt
Computer hardware and components*(*Please note: computer hardware and components cannot be returned to a Wal-Mart store. Please return these items using the enclosed return label.) Return with any included software within 15 days of time of receipt
Electronics Return within 90 days of time of receipt
But wait! There's more! Target.com lists non-returnable items:
Some items cannot be returned if opened. These items include Music, Movies, Computer Software, Video Games, Sports and Toy Collectibles.
posted on August 20, 2001 01:52:13 PM newHowever, when threatened with a chargeback, they do take them back. They have no choice. They don't set the rules, the credit card company does.
Oh goody! I'm going on a shopping spree! And after I've watched all those dvd's, copied those cd's and installed all that software on my 'puter, I'll tell Buy.com that I'm charging it all back and they'd just better accept it, 'cause roofguy says I can!
You don't think the credit card companies have run across this scam before?
posted on August 20, 2001 01:52:46 PM newAdd Wal-Mart.com to the conspiracy. It has exceptions to its "return anything anytime for any reason" policy:
Well, now- don't let that stop you from "renting" that Hannibal DVD and returning it for a refund. If they balk, just tell them "roofguy" says your cc company says it's okay. I'm sure you'll have no problem.
edited to add...
Sorry, vargas- you must type faster than I do.
[ edited by mrpotatoheadd on Aug 20, 2001 02:00 PM ]
posted on August 20, 2001 01:59:54 PM new
I've got a better idea. I'm going to use my credit card to rent movies. Then I'll charge it back and say I already returned the items because I was disappointed.
posted on August 20, 2001 02:29:27 PM new
microbes-
MrP... RENT? Sounds like an intrest free loan to me...
Poor choice of words on my part. "Rent" would, after all, indicate making some sort of a payment. "Free" sounds much better (unless you're a seller, of course).
posted on August 20, 2001 04:05:51 PM new
So I asked myself, "roofguy, how did you come to post such a bad argument?"
And basically, it's because of two things.
My actual experience with mail order outfits has not been with software kinds of places. The places I do buy from are very good at accepting returns, that's why I buy from them.
But my gaffe (which doesn't change the truth, of course) goes a bit deeper than that. I think what really happens is that I routinely discount those "no returns if blah blah" as being non-authoritative with respect to credit card transactions. I see them, but I don't process them, because I've seen how credit card companies handle such disputes.
The Fair Credit Billing Act specifies minimum protections which a credit card company must offer to consumers. Among those protections are protections regarding quality of merchandise. There is no provision for those protections to be waived if the merchant has a posted policy to not take returns.
posted on August 20, 2001 04:34:57 PM newexperience with mail order outfits has not been with software kinds of places.
I think what we are pointing out is there are whole classes of merchandise that only a foolish company would allow no questions asked returns on. Any thing that is easily duplicated (software, movies, music, etc) would be fair game to scammers if returns where wide open. Banks aren't going to buy into this, and let people "borrow" $100 software long enough to install it on their computers. Returning software for anything but replacemant of bad media is, at face value, a scam. Ditto with wedding dresses two days after a wedding. Fraud is fraud, even if it is a "buyer" doing it.
There is no provision for those protections to be waived if the merchant has a posted policy to not take returns.
Does the law say a bank has to help commit fraud? I hardly think so. So, how do banks stop it...? How about, "if you don't drop this charge back, we are going to report you to the authorities for fraud"
posted on August 20, 2001 05:56:32 PM new
The FCBA DOES NOT COVER "quality of merchandise" disputes
"An important caveat
Disputes about the quality of goods and services are not "billing errors," so the dispute procedure does not apply. However, if you buy unsatisfactory goods or services with a credit or charge card, you can take the same legal actions against the **card issuer** as you can take under state law against the seller."
This is from the link I orginally posted here, the FTCs page explaining the FCBA to consumers.
MANY larger card issuers do not do "quality of merchandise" chargebacks; they self insure for those limited situations where the cardholder has a legal right against the issuer. (The buyer gets credited for the amount, but no attempt is made to collect from the merchant.)Again, this is only for transactions over $50, where the purchase was made within 100 miles of the buyers' billing address or in the same state, and the buyer has made a good faith effort to resolve the issue with the seller. MOST smaller issuers, who do such chargebacks, limit the dispute right to the same conditions. A very small minority of issuers allow chargeback disputes for ANY quality of merchandise issue regardless of amount, geography, etc.
Many states have laws specifying that there is no requirement for any seller to issue refunds. And there is no federal law on refunds in the retail setting.<p>
Finally, "right to dispute" means just that - it does not mean "right to win the dispute". If the consumers' complaint was the end of the matter, it wouldn't be a dispute. Consumers under the conditions covered by the FCBA are guaranteed a right to dispute. And merchants, under the contract terms of their merchant accounts, are guaranteed the same right.
