posted on September 26, 2002 07:22:09 PM new
coonr: So I have to correct your misinformation again ?
[You incorrectly interpurted their terms. You agreed to them, you just are not allowed to interpert them as you like.]
Are you going to deny the change ? If I was wrong, why did Paypal make EVERY SINGLE CHANGE I TOLD THEM TO MAKE ?
[You are either a liar or misinformed. They do ivestigate. However, the seller is not protected unless they play by the rules. ]
No. They told me they only check to see if the seller is protected. That is not an investigation into the claim made by the buyer. I was told this by phone and by Damon.
If they did any “investigation” they would see the buyer removed the confirmed address on the payment and put in address in the notes field that matched the e-mail sent the day before. That is the address where the item was signed for.
And the terms of use said on that date:
“If a buyer does not provide a Confirmed Address, the seller must either refuse the payment and ask that the buyer provide a Confirmed Address, or accept the chargeback risk in shipping the item outside of this Seller Protection Policy. “
After I told Paypal it only says “chargeback risk”, they changed it to what it now says which is “reversal risk”. They saw they made a mistake. They just won’t admit to it publicly.
And in my case. It’s a prove fact Paypal changed the “rules” after the event and tried to make me follow the new rules. I have dated post and e-mail from Damon showing him post the terms of use from Jan 2002 with the word “reversal” and then claiming those are the terms from 2001. Fact is terms said “chargeback” when the reversal took place and Paypal changed them.
[The truth is a seller is liable unless they are protected by the SPP. There is no other way to know the Payer got the item. ]
No other way ? Are you crazy man? Then why do they make this claim ?
"PayPal will investigate your claim, contact the seller and, if the seller does not present appropriate proof of shipment, a full refund or other evidence of a satisfactory resolution, PayPal will seek to collect the amount you paid from the seller."
that is a total false claim made by Paypal. They do not investigate the claim made by the buyer and they do not take any other proof then what is listed in their seller protection policy. And then they may even change the policy like they did to me.
What proof the payer got the item that was promised to them ?
Feedback Praise : great item, everything included as listed nice doin business with u
That says they got it. Very clearly. And also by e-mail saying the got it. Signed delivery confirmation and online tracking that says they got it. And even a mail fraud complaint they made payment to said they got it.
I showed beyond any reasonable doubt that the promised goods were shipped and received at the correct location and to the buyer.
Paypal dismissed all unless I could get a court order forcing them to match my information to the information Paypal was harboring within 2 days because Paypal refused to reply by e-mail within the first 5 days.
[You are making a blatant false claim. You have no idea what Paypal did or did not do to the person you accused. ]
Paypal processed a reversal and returned funds to the account used for a fraudulent act. That is a reward. Not a penalty. And the person told me they got their funds back. I trust them more then I trust Paypal. At least they were honest about what they did.
[This is NOT relevant. The buyer may or may not be the rightful owner of the funds paid to you. The only way to prevent this fraud is to comply with the SPP, which you have repeatedly claimed did not apply to you. ]
It's 100% relevant. Paypal knows the account was used for fraud. That is against their rules. And a buyers complaint is only for non-shipping of promised goods. It does not cover someone using someone else account.
If someone used someone else account without permission, Paypal offered insurance against that. A buyers complaint was filed against me. Only a "buyer" can file one. That is why it’s called a “buyers complaint”. If you did not buy anything or pay for anything, you are not a “buyer”. And it is only for when the seller does not ship the promised goods. Does not say at what address confirmed or not.
I love how you throw out anything you can. Not rightful owner ? Then that's an insurance claim thru Travelers which was offered at that time and cover that thing for the account holder and to be filed by the owner of the account. Not to collect fees from the seller and then allow Paypal to double dip from the insurance company. Maybe that’s why Damon got so defensive when I told him I wanted to find out if an insurance claim was also filed. He claimed I CAN NOT do that. And got all flustered. What are they hiding ???
[Confessed to whom? You? Sorry, You are not judge and jury. In fact, as you claimed and retained payment from Paypal and deny and responsibility for the debt, it could be alledged you filed a false mail fraud complaint. ]
Confessed to the USPS postal service with a partial payment for the reversal and an unpaid IOU which will be forwarded soon to Paypal because they own Paypal any fees.
[Again, you are wrong. They still do not say what you claim they do. They have made several changes, but none affect your case as it was than or is now. ]
The terms of use in Jan 2002 where changed from the words "chargeback" to "reversal" and that is a FACT !!!!!! You know this is true and you have see it. You are one sorry person if you are going to deny 100% factual evidence.
And I love it how Damon first tried to deny the changes until I showed him the link to prove him wrong. And they he had no explanation for why the changes took place or why they matched 100% to fight my claims against Paypal.
[If this is true, as you claim, at the time of your transaction, reversals were not covered under the SPP. Therefore according to the balance of the terms, you would still be liable for the reversal. ]
That's your claim not mine. You are double talking. You toss out every single defense you can. Damon said Paypal offered protection from reversals in the year 2001. He just has NEVER EVER EVER showed me terms of use from 2001 that shows what steps you need to take to keep it. But they fixed that in 2002 and even tried to use those terms against me. That is called breach of user agreement by Paypal. You can not change the terms of use after a transaction takes place and try to apply those changes to the past events unless all parities agree.
And that is what paypal did when they changed the user agreement from “chargeback” to “reversal” and then claimed the user agreement said I have to follow those points for reversal protection. However the reversal took place about 3 months before those terms were placed on their website.
Only one thing happened. A Paypal account was used to assist in a mail fraud scam. Paypal has been offered solid evidence of this and they refused to help me. And paypal tried to still make a profit by charging me sellers fees. And then paypal changed their user agreement in at least three places.
So in my opinon, from personal experince, Paypal's anti-fraud efforts suck.
posted on September 26, 2002 08:15:00 PM new
kkaaz,
You did not comply with the terms of use. Your responsible for the reversal. You are indebted to PayPal. You have claimed the SPP covered you, because your a great American. You have yet to substaintiate that claim.
I would imagine they soon will take action to collect your account. However they may find it more expedient to wait till they are aquired by eBay and just suspend you there also. After all, we all know eBay does not tolerate dead beats.
Your guilt is further demonstrated, by your continued efforts to cloud the issue with unrelated facts.
Furhter, anyone who follows the advice and counsel of one who cannot maintain their own account deserves the consequences. You may not like PayPal's investigative efforts. That is also immaterial. The USPS does!
posted on September 27, 2002 08:09:44 AM new
btw Coonr 18007251243
As for the USPS thank you....
PAYPAL helped them capture 1 person.
There is no list of others they helped capture. They probably only got him because someone footed the bill to supoena the records.
posted on September 27, 2002 11:58:48 PM new
OK Now lets get real here..... Jay Nelson has been around for 4 years scamming people. He was on EBay, Yahoo , Excite, UBid and many other sites under many different names. Do a search on his name- there even used to be a website dedicated to his antics. Dont know if it's still up or not.
I will tell you something else- PayPal KNEW about Nelson at least 2 and 1/2 years ago. They had to refund a ton of money when they still had the policy of refunding no matter what back in Oct of 1999 (I believe thats when that ended) I first saw Damon's name responding to some posters that had been taken by him and they all got refunded. Shortly after that fiasco, the program of refunding if you didnt get the merchandise ended....
They knew about him for a long long time, as many many people made them aware of him and his accomplices and other IDs as things happened.
Nelson's favorite, was to have a 3 day auction- start Friday, end Sunday with a BIN , but his best known was to have a 3 day auction and have it end on a holiday, so then he had a ouple more days to collect and move around.
The Illinois Attorney General, and I believe the Attorney General in New Jersey (?) where the ones who took him down along with the postal inspectors. PayPal HAD to cooperate - Nelson mainly used them for his auction payments.
But you know, many people will never be refunded....... they were 'denied' if using their PayPal funds, or debit cards, and thats the end to their story.
How do I know? I was taken by Mr Nelson for a computer on Excite right after coverage for any loss ended. I paid using a PayPal balance believing I was protected, but the 'program' ended with NO notification about a week before I made my purchase.
To defend Damon, in my case, he did what he could, altough I didnt get all my money back. I appreciate his efforts.
And GU1, your statement about Coonr EVER being able to take Damons place is wild! Damon may work for PayPal, but he doesnt cut and paste, throw accusations , nor is rude. He does the best he can while working withing his Company's parameters. If they lost Damon and replaced him with Coonr, there would be a mass exodus out of PayPal's doors
And the EBay 'research' that keeps being mentioned? It was NOT done by EBay- it was done by another EBay user, whom I do respect, but they cant ever know both sides. So, dont take that research as gospel.... because it wasnt done by EBay at all.
And thats the truth folks.
You may now attack me too Connr. But I KNOW about Nelson, so dont go there, and I know about the research, and I certainly know your no comparision to Damon in helping people .
posted on September 28, 2002 02:28:18 AM new
Just for the record, I never said eBay did the analysis I mentioned. I did point out the person who did, said a number of the cases, (I forget the actual number) did not have enought info to classify the problem or determine the cause.
I am not aware of any "refunds" in 1999. As far back as I go, there were NO REFUNDS or CHARGEBACKS. Credit card rules and abuse led to a change in that.
