posted on October 28, 2001 03:06:15 PM new
Seller Protection Policy Update
Notice Date: October 18, 2001
Effective Date: November 6, 2001
Effective 11/06/2001, to qualify for the Seller Protection Policy for items $500 or more in value, sellers must provide a proof-of-receipt in the form of a signature from the buyer. This extra security is needed for PayPal to offer chargeback protection on these large ticket items. The signature is part of the proof-of-delivery service provided by most U.S. carrier companies, including the U.S. Postal Service.
New Account Withdrawal Requirements Update
Notice Date: October 18, 2001
Effective Date: November 6, 2001
Effective 11/06/2001, the definition of "new account" for the purpose of the new account withdrawal requirements will be increased from two months to four months. Like the existing policy, new PayPal members will need to complete at least two out of three authentication steps in order to withdraw more than $500 per month. This requirement will automatically be lifted four months after the account opening date, and applies to all accounts opened after 7/07/2001.
posted on October 28, 2001 03:31:16 PM new
Also, if you opened a business account after October 11, 2001, you have given PayPal permission to remove money from your checking account without asking you for prior authorization for any particular withdrawl that they should decide to make.
When you receive a payment through the Service, unless you follow the steps necessary to qualify for our Seller Protection Policy described in Part VII of this User Agreement, you are not protected against a subsequent reversal of the transaction. 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 charge-back 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. PayPal will seek to recover the funds from you by debiting your PayPal balance and, if there are not sufficient funds in your PayPal balance, PayPal reserves the right to collect your debt to PayPal by any other legal means. If you open a Premier or Business Account after October 11, 2001, you authorize PayPal to debit your bank account linked to that PayPal account for the amount that you owe PayPal on transactions which were not covered by the Seller Protection Policy and which were not recoverable from your PayPal balance.
posted on October 29, 2001 05:50:49 AM new
Debits in case of chargeback are really all the same for all credit card processing services, be it PayPal, Billpoint, or your own merchant account.
posted on October 29, 2001 06:56:33 AM new
Yes, coonr, but representatives for those other services never promised they would not take money from your checking account for any reason without your explicit approval for each individual debit.
posted on October 29, 2001 07:24:55 AM new
And where is PayPal taking money out of your account without your approval? You now give approval when you sign up. If you don't want to give approval, dont sign up.
posted on October 29, 2001 10:55:36 AM new
No, the idea was withdrawals only with your explicit approval. As in, PayPal please transfer $100 to my PayPal account. Your checking account was never considered a slush fund for disputed transactions.
How comfortable would you be if, for example, your credit card company posted an inaccurate transaction on your statement for $300 and then took the money out of your checking account - and then said "okay, now dispute it if you think it is wrong."
Based on what I have seen of PayPal's length of time in investigating disputes, I would not want them to have my money in the interim.
paypaldamon said that all transactions require that the user request the transaction, and that they would never make a transfer from the user's account without explicit permission.
---------------------------------------------
paypaldamon posted on October 11, 2001 09:24:07 AM
---------------------------------------------
PayPal will never make electronic transfers from your bank account without your explicit permission... All transactions, be they to or from your bank account, require the user requesting the transaction.
Apparently, this promise is no longer good (when did never become three weeks, anyway?) since PayPal is no longer going to require the user to request a transfer- they will just take the money from the user when they want to.
A user may have agreed to let PayPal remove money from his account whenever they please, but he most certainly did not request such a transaction.
posted on October 29, 2001 03:07:19 PM new
Let me guess, your also still sticked about it not being "FREE" any more also. Right?
Where have you ever seen any agreement that was not subject to change. The last time I heard of one being carved in stone, Moses had to pack it off a mountain.
Notice has been given of the change, if you don't like it, don't use PayPal. The rest of us will take real good care of your former customers.
posted on October 29, 2001 03:46:09 PM new
Nope coonr, I pay my fees to all of my payment services gladly.
Just sick to death of repeatedly being told "this can't happen" when clearly it can and does.
I'm grandfathered in, so this latest change doesn't affect me... YET.
Lord knows what tomorrow's TOS change will bring.
Kind of like the assurances repeatedly given by a certain PayPal rep who posts to the boards that there's no way any PayPal employee could have access to a customer's personal information.
However, the SEC filing for the upcoming stock offering warns that there's no guarantee against PayPal employee fraud... that it's a possibility.
Gee, that fuels my trust and faith.
It's this kind of stuff that makes me a former PayPal cheerleader. I think it's a great idea that's very poorly run and could use a good deal of shaping up.
posted on October 29, 2001 04:02:53 PM new
paypal is a tool for small sellers to facilitate payment of goods ,alternative to having a merchant account and pay fixed monthly fee for cc processing.
if we all use it prudently ,enabling paypal to make a profit,who do you think is going to benefit in the long run?
we can all do a better job helping paypal combat fraud by using our good judgment when buying and selling-such as asking for a cashier check or money order for large transaction,insuring the goods,getting delivery confirmation and packing the goods well and shipping to verified adr,taking some time to research into the other party and ask a few questions .
in our eagerness to take on sales,we sometimes take on more risk than we can handle or stomach,just like in real life,the middleman who suffered the loss will always look to recoup it from the ultimate parties involved,either the buyer or seller.
there is less protection with merchant account cc processor and their customer service is not that great either.
posted on October 29, 2001 04:08:35 PM new
if you read the threads on individual gripes on paypal,it started like this-
i lost my paypal debit card,---------------
or i moved and then i left the country--------------------,or i checked out the service on my website and then i tried to sell it to my clients-----------------,or i sold to a guy in arizona but i ship to RUSSIA-------------
,i bot a used laptop from a romanian dealer-------,or i bot a laptop from a used car salesman-----------,or i won a camera for 20 dollars but----------------,
never do these paypal users blame themselves for losing their card,confusing the system by moving and leaving the country or not doing a diligent check on what they are buying and whom they are buying from?????
posted on October 29, 2001 04:15:59 PM newLet me guess, your also still sticked about it not being "FREE" any more also. Right?
Nope. I'm bothered by the fact that PayPal's customer service representative's October 11 post (referenced above) was either
1) a false statement
or
2) the change to the TOU was made retroactively.
As noted above, on Oct. 11, paypaldamon stated that PayPal will never make electronic transfers from your bank account without the user requesting the transaction.
If the terms that are currently in the TOU were there on Oct. 11, that would mean paypaldamon's claim is false. If those terms weren't there, that would mean PayPal instituted a policy change that took effect before posting the updated TOU.
Either way, I'd be concerned about a company that handles my money showing such disregard for its users that it doesn't feel it necessary to post timely and accurate information regarding changes to its terms and conditions.
Existing users are grandfathered. No, I did not lie (as mrpotatohead seems to imply all the time), as I have to make my statements based on what policy is.
My messaging to users about this was placed in the Partner Services Forum on the 19th.
Mrpotatohead would like me to state:
a) Users that registered before Oct.11 will not have their bank account accessed for chargeback liability.
b) Users that registered after that date can have their bank account accessed for chargeback liability. The only time the bank account will be accessed is to recover money for a chargeback, as many payment services/merchant service providers currently do.
posted on October 29, 2001 05:21:28 PM newMrpotatohead would like me to state:
a) Users that registered before Oct.11 will not have their bank account accessed for chargeback liability. b) Users that registered after that date can have their bank account accessed for chargeback liability. The only time the bank account will be accessed is to recover money for a chargeback, as many payment services/merchant service providers currently do.
Well, yes Damon, that IS what you should have said. By only saying
PayPal will never make electronic transfers from your bank account without your explicit permission... All transactions, be they to or from your bank account, require the user requesting the transaction.
You have misled people. Your act of omission would lead a person who was considering opening a business or premier after Oct 11 to believe paypal would NEVER make electronic debits from their bank accpint without the customers EXPLICIT permission...which, of course would be a bald face lie as far as the NEW customer was concerned.
So tell me...in 3 months when that customer comes on this board and complains that paypal just took $300 out of his (the customer's) bank account and he says "on Oct 11 Paypaldamon said paypal would never do this without my EXPLICIT permission, so how come they just took $300 from my bank account" ...how are you going to explain that you knew the information you were giving out was not the complete truth?
posted on October 29, 2001 07:43:39 PM newNo, I did not lie (as mrpotatohead seems to imply all the time}
I didn't imply you lied- I also offered an alternative explanation. It appears, since you said you did in fact, not lie, that the alternative explanation is accurate:
PayPal instituted a policy change that took effect before posting the updated TOU.
Gee, amy- I could have posted to damon a dozen times, and he would still tap dance around what you understood from one post. What a surprise.
See, damon- I'm not the only one. When your company is holding other people's money, you have an obligation to be honest and accurate with the information you present regarding your company's policies.
By the way, damon- are you up for a question from one of your customers?
I have the "Check this box to receive ALL Policy Change Notices" box checked in my email notification preferences at PayPal, and I never received notification of this particular policy change. Why?
Note that PayPal emphasises the word "ALL" regarding policy changes by the use of capital letters. If you don't really mean all, why do you say so?
Any one who would sign up for a payment service based on a message posted 3 months previous, without reading the current terms of use deserves whatever they get. You agree to the TOU when you sign up, not messages posted 3 monts ago.....
posted on October 30, 2001 07:45:30 AM newI think it's a great idea that's very poorly run and could use a good deal of shaping up.
Yeah, and that'll happen sometime after pigs fly.
Let me say this straight out (for those who haven't learned it yet):
For PayPal, "always" (as in "always free" means "at least for today."
And "never" means "at least not for today."
Either way, I'd be concerned about a company that handles my money showing such disregard for its users that it doesn't feel it necessary to post timely and accurate information regarding changes to its terms and conditions.
Exactly, except their problem really much more basic than that. PayPal has demonstrated over and over again, in ways too numerous to count, its lack of trustworthiness. Surely it's been at least a year now that the combination of backtracking on "always free" and their attempt to FORCE you to upgrade (or lie -- by saying "I don't sell on ebay", not to mention all those frozen accounts with no where for users to turn for information or help, made me realize they weren't deserving of my respect and certainly not my money.
I absolutely loved PayPal before that. It was FABULOUS. But if they can't behave in even a remotely trustworthy way, if they can't treat their customers with some semblance of honesty and respect, they *I* certainly won't be doing business with them, no matter how convenient the service is.
And yes, I feel about the same way about ebay, for about the same reasons. The only difference is that PayPal's sins, faults and arrogance have been so much more blatant, egregious, and outrageous.
posted on October 30, 2001 08:35:37 AM new
RE: paypaldamon statement, "My messaging to users about this was placed in the Partner Services Forum on the 19th."
RE:
"When you receive a payment through the Service, unless you follow the steps necessary to qualify for our Seller Protection Policy described in Part VII of this User Agreement, you are not protected against a subsequent reversal of the transaction. 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 charge-back 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. PayPal will seek to recover the funds from you by debiting your PayPal balance and, if there are not sufficient funds in your PayPal balance, PayPal reserves the right to collect your debt to PayPal by any other legal means. If you open a Premier or Business Account after October 11, 2001, you authorize PayPal to debit your bank account linked to that PayPal account for the amount that you owe PayPal on transactions which were not covered by the Seller Protection Policy and which were not recoverable from your PayPal balance."
I have checked the Partner Services Forum under PayPal on the 19th, I can find no reference from the PayPal representive concerning the above policy change. I wonder if my computer has a problem and is not showing me all of the posts or something. (Maybe it was another date?) Time to call in computer guy.
posted on October 30, 2001 09:04:26 AM new
Damon, since you are in an IPO quiet period and you have stated "existing users will grandfathered" can you explain what this means? I don't see it in your registration statement or on your site.
Does this mean current personal users who upgrade their accounts won't "have their bank account accessed for chargeback liability"? Your statement about existing users is very vague and confusing.
This is a very important issue for 8 million of your users. Please clarify, since you posted that your lawyers have said it is okay to talk about such issues during your IPO quiet period.
posted on October 30, 2001 12:00:32 PM new
Coonr...you misunderstood what I said.
First...we don't know exactly when paypal posted the new TOS that gives them the right to debit a bank account without explicit instructions from the customer. From what Damon is saying, it sounds like the change wasn't posted until around the 19th of Oct. and is retroactive to the 11th.
A prospective customer of paypal may have read them many threads here about paypal and may have been concerned that if they signed up that paypal could debit their bank acount whenever paypal felt they had the right to.
But they read a post by Damon on Oct 11 that says quite emphatically that paypal would NEVER debit a user's bank account without explicit permission. So the potential customer goes to the paypal site on Oct12th and signs up. If, in fact, this part of the TOS was not posted on the site on the 12th (as seems possible from Damon's post), then that customer DID NOT agree to such a TOS.
My reference to 3 months later was about the person who signed up 3 months earlier (Oct 11 time frame) and then later having paypal debit their bank account.
posted on October 31, 2001 09:14:57 AM new
just be more careful whom you do business with,whether buying or selling.
if you dont feel comfortable with paypal or billpoint,then do it the old fashion way,MONEY ORDER
posted on October 31, 2001 08:08:30 PM new
I always assumed that if Paypal could put money in your account,they could take it back for a chargeback. It is just a gamble.
That is why I use an account other than my regular checking out. I never leave enough money in that account that I could loose it and if a fraudulent charge is made on my credit card, the card people handle it. At least they have in the past.
What I do not like about Paypal and have written them is their 'customer did not give a verified address'. Why if the address is not verified, doesn't it generate a response to the customer to either explain or update their information. They could request the customer either update information or explain to seller regarding the difference. Why not take the opportunity to get the info straight. Now there are many reason for giving a different address - mailing to third party, etc. But if it is just due to change of address why wouldn't Paypal want that in their files.
