posted on September 27, 2002 09:05:19 AM new
ON Sept. 22 I received a payment notification from Paypal for an auction item. That was the only response I received from the buyer, no other email.
On Sept.23, I mailed the package priority mail with delivery confirmation to the CONFIRMED ADDRESS paypal gave me.
Delivery confirmation shows the item was delivered on Sept. 26 to the confirmed address.
I received an email from Paypal today stating that this buyers account was under investigation for possible fraud usage.
I responded to all the requested information with the facts and received a thank you email for the information.
My questions are; Is my entire account restricted or just the $25.00 plus change showing as a pending refund to the buyer?, how long does this investigation take and am I protected since the only information and address used were Paypals confirmed information?
posted on September 27, 2002 12:41:03 PM new
I have already recieved an email from Paypal that the funds were returned to my account. I had followed the rules to the letter and was covered by sellers protection services.
posted on September 27, 2002 03:54:47 PM new
rarriffle
good to hear it was taken care of.
I just have to ask you as for the information you sent to Paypal. You said you shipped priority mail.
Did you have online tracking for that also ?
Did Paypal request the tracking number from you and what did you need to keep that said the "confirmed address" on it ?
Was it a paper reciept you faxed as most online tracking does not show a physical address and the terms of the sellers protection says it must be tracked online and this documentation must show the confirmed address ?
Please let us know what you were required to submit in case in happens to other sellers so they will know what they need to save.
posted on September 27, 2002 05:52:18 PM new
rarriffle
Also could you please clearify these
[I received an email from Paypal today stating that this buyers account was under investigation for possible fraud usage]
[I received an email from Paypal today stating that a buyer had possible fraudulent credit card use and was disputing a charge. ]
I take it you recived "credit card funds" thru Paypal from a buyer and shipped them the item with delivery confirmation (but not sure with online tracking). The buyer recived the item at the confirmed address.
Then for no fault of your own and no complaint made by the buyer of the item paypal contacted you for an investigation ?
Who was disputing the charge ?
By submitting that information to Paypal, Who were you seeking protection from ?
posted on September 28, 2002 12:41:36 AM new
The email I received from paypal said;
We regret to inform you that you received funds from an account with reports of
fraudulent bank account use. The following transaction is under review
To help in our investigation, we request that you reply with the following
information within 7 calendar days:
1. The item that was purchased and the value of the item.
2. The name and address given to you by the buyer.
3. Whether or not you have shipped the purchase (If you have not yet sent
the purchase, please do not proceed with the exchange).
4. If shipped, the company used for shipping, date of shipment, and tracking
number so that PayPal can verify online for shipment and delivery. (For
transactions $250 or more, sellers must provide a proof-of-receipt in the form
of a signature from the buyer.)
5. Details of any other payments you sent or received that were related to the
above transaction.
6. A phone number where you can be reached during the day and evening.
We would like to obtain as much information as possible about the above transaction,
including any email correspondence between you and the buyer, in order to expedite
this investigation. Solving fraudulent cases helps us continue to offer PayPal as
a secure and cost-effective payment service. Thank you for your cooperation and
assistance.
I emailed them with the information requested, including the fact that I had received no correspondence from the buyer other than the payment notification from paypal. The only address I ever had for the buyer was Paypal's confirmed address.
I printed the address label and delivery confirmation from the USPS website.
I followed the rules for the Seller's Protection Plan to the T.
posted on September 29, 2002 06:11:40 PM new
[Delivery Confrimation does provide on-line tracking.]
Coonr. Dude... Delivery confirmation shows ifthe item was delivered or not. It does not track where the item is nor does it say that before the item is there.
If the item is never delivered, you must show proof of shipping that can be tracked online.
I have yet to see anything from the poster that says they gave Paypal a "tracking number"
Online Tracking is one of the steps of the sellers protection policy.
According to Paypal, you must have online tracking of the shippment. Not just of the "delivery"
According to Paypal, you must meet the sellers protection policy 100% and not just 99% or you are at buyers mercy.
[We would like to obtain as much information as possible about the above transaction,
including any email correspondence between you and the buyer, in order to expedite
this investigation. ]
WHAT ??? Paypal did not even want to see my e-mails. I had e-mails from my buyer thanking me for the item. I was told by Paypal e-mails don't matter because they calimed they can be faked. Paypal refused to look at my e-mails from my buyer. They also refused to even take the tracking number without a court order forcing them to match the delivery address with the "hidden" confirmed address.
I just want to point out that I am happy this person was covered but it does not sound like all the other reversals and chargebacks people get when using Paypal. I was never even given a chance to offer aditions information nor would paypal take it.
Is Paypal getting soft or are they bending the rules now ?
Or maybe finally Paypal is doing the right thing and taking reasonable proof of order and delivery. That would be grand !!!
posted on September 29, 2002 08:10:20 PM new
kkaaz,
As you well know USPS Delivery Confrimation satisfies the requirements of the SPP for items less than $250.00. It ahs been posted on numerous forums by PayPal reps, and customers who testify that it was indeed accepted.
posted on September 30, 2002 11:59:51 AM new
coonr.
[As you well know USPS Delivery Confrimation satisfies the requirements of the SPP for items less than $250.00. It ahs been posted on numerous forums by PayPal reps, and customers who testify that it was indeed accepted.]
Not as I well know becuase I read the terms of use as they are do not say that. It says online tracking of shipping.
Please show where the TERMS OF USE says that delivery confirmation counts as online tracking to meet the requirment of shipping with online tracking to the confirmed address
posted on September 30, 2002 12:21:33 PM new
kkaaz,
I will trust the info from the OP, as their problem has been resolved. At last report your account was still restricted, indicating you did/do NOT undersand and follow the rules.
posted on September 30, 2002 02:28:19 PM new
[Coonr is right, Delivery confirmation does have on-line tracking and it is easy to see that item has been delivered.]
Coonr is vague and only partially correct. Not all "delivery confirmation" tracks "shipping". Once delivered it may show something but rarely shows a physical address online for Paypal to see with a confirmation #. AND not all "delivery confirmation" can be "tracked online".
We are assuming the OP chose the confirmation type that has online tracking of when the item is delivered. If not, Paypal bent the rules. If so, that's great for the OP.
Because delivery confirmation does not track a package. It shows if delivered. Not always where it is located last scan like normal online tracking.
The problem is coonr is not telling the whole story. He likes to give false hoped to make Paypal sound safer then it really is.
If the item does not make it to the buyer, the deliver confirmation WILL NOT TRACK the item... So it would not cover as online tracking if the package gets lost.
A seller is not responsible for the package once shipped unless over a certain value. The OP did not name a value. Unless they get a "quality dispute chargeback" under which Paypal offers NO PROTECTION!!
I have sent and received several packages this year with delivery confirmation on them not ONE had a complete address listed online. I had to order a hard copy to see the address.
Sellers need to follow all 7 steps. Not 6.5
[At last report your account was still restricted, indicating you did/do NOT undersand and follow the rules.]
Coonr
At last report, Paypal duped me and knowling allowed one of their accounts to be used as a mail fraud tool.
If I did not understand the terms, Paypal should not have followed my suggestion 100%. I also had more then one attorney view the terms and they said Paypal was wrong in their vague terminology. Paypal then corrected it exactly like I told them. You can deny it all you want but facts are facts.
In Nov-December 2001, I told Damon and Paypal by e-mail and on an Ebay board that the seller’s protection under theses phrases in the user agreement:
-------------
PayPal's consumer protection programs, consisting of a Buyer Complaint Policy and a Seller Protection Policy as defined below, are designed to try to help buyers recover funds from sellers who do not ship the promised goods, and to reduce the risk of chargebacks for sellers who follow specified risk-reduction procedures.
-----------------
General. PayPal agrees to indemnify sellers of physical goods from chargeback liability resulting from a buyer's unauthorized use of a credit card and/or false claims of non-shipment of goods
------------------
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.
------------------
Only say the word "chargeback" and do not warn of a possible "reversal". Although Paypal damon claimed other. He was proven wrong by facts. So they later fixed their mistake
I said a "chargeback" thru Paypal could only be received when paid with credit card funds. Damon supported that statement.
I was correct. I received a "reversal" and not a chargeback and the terms did not warn of steps to keep "reversal" protection or warn of shipping to a confirmed address for "reversal" protection
Again, Paypal fixed this after I pointed it out.
I told Damon thepaypal who proved to me he did not understand the user agreement or the fact that dates in a contract are important, that they all say the word "chargeback" and none say "reversal".
Damon claimed otherwise but then later backtracked when I posted a link to the full terms to prove him incorrect.
Then in Jan 2002, Paypal made the three changed that I pointed out publicly in 2001 they needed to make. They removed "chargeback" and put in "reversal"
Which is exactly what I told them need to be there in 2001 but was not.
They saw their mistake and fixed it.
This can be proven by facts. Anyone can see on http://www.archive.org that these three changes took place and coonr can attest if he does not lie that I made those claims publicly.
In Jan 2002, Paypal changed in each of those three phrases the word "chargeback" to the word "reversal"
Either I was a psychic profit or I understood the terms better then Damon and Paypal as they made EVERY SINGLE SUGGESTION I made.
Sorry coonr but the changes are a proven fact. And I made those claims before the change and then after my claims Paypal made the changes.
Maybe I am not the sole reason for the changes but I know for a fact they made EVERY single change I told them and then tried to make me follow the changed terms and even claimed they were not changed.
Anyone reading this should understand kkaaz's account is currently restricted as he did not understand and follow the requirements of the SPP. Take his advice accordingly.
posted on October 1, 2002 07:34:47 AM new
I understand that not all On-line confirmations can be tracked, however, to be covered under the SPP, it clearly states in the TOS, you have to have a Delivery Confirmation that is tracked on-line.
Delivery confirmations do track to the City, State, and Zip to where it was delivered. So if you have one, you can see that is was delivered to the correct city. However, it the confirmed address is CA, and you shipped to NY, then there is no way to make the connection.
This is the same regardless of PayPal or a merchant account
posted on October 1, 2002 10:56:08 AM new
[I understand that not all On-line confirmations can be tracked, however, to be covered under the SPP, it clearly states in the TOS, you have to have a Delivery Confirmation that is tracked on-line. ]
The problem is coonr does not understand that and statements are misleading.
He claims "delivery confirmation" covers under SPP and that is not totally true. Not all "delivery confirmation" can be tracked online.
He is making a general statement which leads to false information. That false information could cause a seller to be "unprotected"
Paypal sellers need to follow the terms as written word for word. Not what coonr thinks they say.
posted on October 1, 2002 12:30:52 PM new
[Point is, despite your rant, the Del Conf. worked for the OP. Nothing misleading about that]
Coonr, you made a general statment.
You said "Delivery Confrimation does provide on-line tracking."
You did not say just in this case, you said all unless you specify.
That is not 100% true. Not all types of delivery confirmation tracks or shows this tracking online.
So your statement is misleading as most are.
If a seller did just "delivery confirmation" and not the type that can be tracked online and shows the address, your misleading information would cause them to be "unprotected" from any reversal or chargeback.
It's a good thing you "claim" to not work for Paypal as you would be liable for your post when someone gets scammed.
posted on October 1, 2002 03:18:53 PM new
My account with PayPal is not now and never has been restricted. I understand and follow the rules.
Anyone who choose to accept and follow your advise, considering your current account restrictions and problems is welcome to do so.
Do not argue with me about Delivery Confrimation. Take it up with your firends at the USPS. They are the ones who provide the on-line tracking of Delivery Confrimation.
posted on October 2, 2002 12:15:21 PM new
Kkaaz, are you saying that USPS delivery confirmation is not valid? Or are you saying that not all "delivery confirmation" (from other shippers too) is valid?
posted on October 2, 2002 12:45:15 PM new
[Take it up with your firends at the USPS. They are the ones who provide the on-line tracking of Delivery Confrimation.]
Coonr. USPS is not the only way to send items but if you want to live in a simple world, here is from them
And don't compare your risk of someone taking your $3 item to that of someone selling a $300 item. Just becuase you sell low cost items does not mean you have the same risk as those selling much higher valued items.....
From USPS-"Verify delivery with Delivery Confirmation. Our low cost Delivery Confirmation service gives you the date, ZIP Code and the time your article was delivered. If delivery was attempted you will get the date and time of attempted delivery."
Oh but Coonr is right and they are wrong. Coonr has said before that delivery confirmation shows the "confirmed address" but USPS said date, zip and time. Does not says address.
and a requirement of Paypal is {The seller can provide reasonable proof-of-shipment which can be tracked online. This documentation must show that you shipped to the Confirmed Address.}
So if it does not show the confirmed address like for this user http://www.paypalwarning.com/horror/seller_protection_policy_is_bogu.htm
"They say I have to prove this via on-line tracking. Well, here's the problem. The U.S. Postal Service do not have ANY SERVICE WHICH ALLOWS A PERSON TO TRACK ON-LINE A PHYSICAL ADDRESS TO WHICH AN ITEM WAS SHIPPED. PayPal's Seller Protection Policy says they do, but I called USPS today and they said that's absolutely wrong. So, in effect, the PayPal "Seller Protection Policy" is completely bogus because there is no way for a seller to be able to prove on-line that they shipped to a specified physical address.
PayPal's marketing information and "Seller Protection Policy" is misleading and deceitful. BEWARE!!!"
Paypal can dismiss coverage as they have before.
more from USPS.....
Q. What is the difference between tracking a package and confirming the delivery of a package?
A. With tracking service, packages are scanned at acceptance, in transit and at delivery. Our confirming delivery services are designed to be a low cost alternative to full tracking and primarily provide delivery information.
(Oh so there is a difference like I said between tracking of shipment and delivery of the item which can means if the item is not delivered, there is no tracking. The item must make it to it's location. Where on tracking a package, you can prove it was shipped which is the requirement by Paypal)
Q. Which services provide tracking?
A. Express Mail, Global Express Guaranteed and Global Express Mail (depending on destination country) provide tracking service at no additional cost.
Q. Which services provide delivery information online?
A. Delivery Confirmation service, Signature Confirmation service, Certified Mail and Registered mail provide delivery information online. These are add-on services that are purchased at the time of mailing.
Oh but coonr must be right and all those who have dealt with Paypal in real life for real transactions are wrong. Because Coonr has yet to have to fight Paypal, he thinks it does not happen...
Just for the heck lets check UPS.
Lets enter in a tracking number:
Oh, just as I thought. It does not contain a Physical address. It shows an item was delivered to a zip code. So I guess that does not prove "confirmed address" which is more then just a zip code.
Lets check proof of delivery :Upon request, UPS will provide proof of delivery via facsimile transmission (fax) or mail. A fax number with area code must be provided.
Oh well, not "online" so that does not count for online tracking. No Protection.
Now this is different if you have an account with them and then you can use UPS Signature Tracking
So what does this all mean ?
Paypal can refuse to cover sellers based on if the online tracking or the delivery confirmation actually shows the confirmed address or not like they did for this user.
Even if the seller did ship to the confirmed address and can prove it, or if the seller shipped to the buyer and the buyer signed the delivery notice just does not show the "confirmed address" on the signed form.
Paypal needs to learn that in order to stop fraud and really protect sellers, sometimes then need to work with a seller, and except reasonable proof of shipment. They need to follow their user agreement where it says they will investigate the claims made by the buyer. If the buyer’s payment did not ask for shipping, don’t allow the buyer to file a non-shipping complaint. If the buyer gave the seller a different address, ask the buyer why they did that and why they don’t think they have to pay because they gave the seller the address where the item was shipped and received at..
The more requirements they make for "sellers protection" it only helps Paypal. It does not improve buyers complaint ability and it does not improve sellers safety. If just gives fraudulent buyers more ways to scam and Paypal more ways to help that buyer pull the scam.
If you had simply denied the payment without a confirmed shipping address you'd have been okay. You received a payment from a zero feedback buyer for an expensive item, and you were too busy leaping instead of looking.
Two weeks ago I received a payment for a few hundred dollars from a zero feedback buyer requesting I ship to somewhere other than the confirmed billing address. I told the buyer I needed to send the item to a confirmed billing address for both our protections and denied the payment. The buyer resent the payment with a confirmed billing address. If you had been operating like that you would have saved yourself a year of whining and moaning.
You can type out the aero dynamic coefficent formulas, the US Constitution, and theories on relativity, but that isn't going to matter, and I won't read it. It's a real simple concept. Ship to the confirmed billing address or accept the risks.
one more time not that it will do any good.
It's a real simple concept. Ship to the confirmed billing address or accept the risks.
posted on October 3, 2002 05:14:42 AM newOh but Coonr is right and they are wrong. Coonr has said before that delivery confirmation shows the "confirmed address" but USPS said date, zip and time. Does not says address.
There you go again. I never said that. I said PayPal will accept the USPS for the SPP.
In your case, you did not even ship to the same zip code.
posted on October 3, 2002 01:33:05 PM new
[If you had simply denied the payment without a confirmed shipping address you'd have been okay. You received a payment from a zero feedback buyer for an expensive item, and you were too busy leaping instead of looking. ]
uaru-
Why should I deny the payment? I had no reason to deny that payment.
No reason what so ever according to the terms of use. Even the payment itself had no warnings listed. Paypal even removed the normal warnings as soon as the buyer chose” no shipping address required”
Had I not used Paypal, I would be ok.
There was NO WARNINGS of a possible reversal.
Only warnings of a possible "chargeback"
I got Paypal funds. Not a credit card fund. You can not file a "chargeback" on Paypal funds.
The terms of use said word for word"
"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. "
I was safe to not ship to a credit card billing location on a non-credit card payment.
There is no warning of a reversal in that statement or any other part of the terms of use based on address confirmation and that is a fact Paypal fixed..
I did not care if the buyer even had "credit" or a credit card so I don't care where the bills go.
All I cared was that I followed the terms of use as WRITTEN and I did.
I followed the terms 100% and Paypal duped me. They even then changed the term to cover their mistake.
I did not receive a payment that could be "chargedback"
I understand what you are trying to say but it does not matter. Paypal made a mistake in the wording of their user agreement. It did not warn of a "reversal" based on the confirmation of the shipping address anywhere in 2001.
You should not have to ship to someone’s credit card billing address on a non-credit card payment.
Paypal saw the mistake after I showed them and they fixed it.
They fixed it after the event and then tried to hold me accountable for the changed terms.
They have no legal right to do that.
That is breach of contract.
Paypal's change of the terms proves they saw a problem. They should not hold me responsible for their problem.
And if they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone.
I read and COMPLETELY understood the terms of use when I received a bogus reversal. Paypal made a mistake. I prove them wrong. They changed their entire user agreement over the wording of "chargeback" to "reversal" so they could cover their rears.
I have no damages so I can not sue for breach of contract. However I do have the right to make it public that paypal made a mistake and fixed it after I told them.
And even though Paypal realized their mistake, they want to profit from it ?
They want to assist a fraudulent user because they made a mistake ?
Rather then admitting they were wrong, they knowingly assisted someone in a fraudulent act and then breached their user agreement with me by changing the terms and trying to pass them off on me.
Wrong.......They should not and can not do that...
posted on October 3, 2002 06:31:07 PM newThere was NO WARNINGS of a possible reversal.
WRONG! It has always been a risk!
In the event that the sender's transaction is reversed for any reason and you do not qualify for the Seller Protection Policy for that transaction, you will owe PayPal for the amount of the reversed transaction plus any fees imposed on PayPal as a result of the reversal. Examples of such a reversal include, but are not limited to, a credit card reversal by the sender of the payment, and a reversal of the transaction because the sender of the payment was using a stolen credit card or unauthorized bank account.
Sorry to say but that section is not relevant. See how it says if you are NOT covered under "sellers protection" ?
So you must then go to the section called "sellers protection" and see what steps are required for "reversal protection"
That is the way you read a user agreement. You can not just stop on the part you like, you have to follow what it says and what sections it applies to.
And that section did not list steps or requirements to keep protection from a funds "reversal" in 2001.
It only contained the word "chargeback" and you can only get a "chargeback" if paid with a credit card.
And because a "chargeback" and a "reversal" are two separate things (one done thru a credit card company and one done thru Paypal) you can not apply one to the other in a legal contract unless is says so. And it did not. And there is no retro agreement clause. Paypal has no legal right to change the contract and use those changes on past events under a past contract.
That is basic contract law.
You do not have to follow steps for a "chargeback" for a "reversal" unless is says you must. And it did not say reversal until after I pointed that out to Paypal.
So Paypal, to correct their mistake, changed the words and removed "chargeback" and replaced it with "reversal" in Jan 2002 which was right after I showed them their mistakes.
I showed Paypal their mistake. They fixed the mistakes. In at least three places.
In October 2001, there was NOTHING in the entire user agreement that said Paypal can reverse a payment of Paypal funds or an e-check against you if you do not ship an item to a confirmed address.
Paypal saw this and fixed it. So as of Jan 2002, you must ship to the confirmed address with online tracking or risk a "reversal".
And for Paypal to use the terms of use to excuse their actions in 2001, is called breach of contract. Paypal and Damon on more then one occasion sent me and posted terms from 2002 and claimed they were from 2001. They can not do that.
I owe Paypal nothing. They broke the agreement.
And if they did it to me on a $350 transaction, they can do it to anyone....
posted on October 3, 2002 07:46:29 PM newIn the event that the sender's transaction is reversed for any reason and you do not qualify for the Seller Protection Policy for that transaction, you will owe PayPal for the amount of the reversed transaction plus any fees imposed on PayPal as a result of the reversal.
Kev you insisting the SPP does not apply to your transaction. So be it. If you have no SPP, your liable. Perhaps your wife can explain it to you. Just have her log into her account and check the terms of use. (That part has not changed.)
I am claiming Paypal has no right to take it away unless they listed steps required to keep it. And nobody has ever show requirements to keep reversal protection in the 2001 terms of use.
Nobody !!!!
Paypal told me they offered "reversal" protection in 2001.
Just like billpoint does on e-check.
The problem is Paypal messed up. They forgot to include steps required to keep sellers protection on reversal. They forgot to put "reversal" as a risk for not shipping to "confirmed address".
Again, this is a problem that Paypal fixed in 2002 and is a DOCUMENTED FACT.
Coonr, As much as you flap your gums, the fact still remains that Paypal admitted their terms were incorrect or too vague.
Paypal changed the terms. The changed it to say reversal. They did it for a reason. To clarify something that was not clear.
So it's not my fault they did a piss poor job writing the terms of 2001.
I am not to be held at fault for their mistake and Paypal breached our user agreement the minute they used the 2002 terms and claimed they were from 2001.
So I owe Paypal nothing and you can thank me for clarifying the terms of use....
And I used to think Damon was a stand up guy. Not after he claimed the 2002 terms were 2001 and claimed they were not changed.
Here is what I just did, I went to www.archive.org and placed www.paypal.com and then clicked on the button that was for the wayback machine. I selected Oct. 11, 2001 and then looked at the Terms of Use. I then just did a search for the terms reversal. I found it several times. Do it yourself and tell me what you have found.
