posted on July 6, 2001 05:34:56 PM new
I'm relatively satisfied with PayPal. People pay me, Paypal takes its fee, I put my money in the bank. It's relatively convienent and simple. I accept the price I pay for the service.
In the past week, I've gotten two emails from PayPal talking about a "bug" in eBay's software that is inserting Billpoint logo's without user notification, profile changing etc. I am sure these emails weren't written to me alone, so I won't go into the details of the "urgency" of the emails.
Has anyone been a victim of this eBay "bug"? I am just curious, no one I know and have talked to has experienced it.
While it's fun to watch the good ol' fashioned mud-slinging by the payment companies, it sure does something negative for the perception of a "financial institution."
posted on July 6, 2001 07:03:56 PM new
Hi orion940,
Yes, this is a real issue. The issue has gone on for about two weeks now.
This is a thread from this forum (many other forums have had similar comments, but I will not post them here because they are generally competing services).
posted on July 7, 2001 05:05:16 AM new
Yes, all my auctions had that dratted billpain logo in them without my permission. I tried to manually change my preferences and eBay would not let me. I cancelled my billpain account and it went away.
posted on July 7, 2001 05:59:20 AM new
EBay has acknowledge the problem on their anouncement board but there is still no fix. It has created some problems with buyers and sellers. Here are a couple links to eBay's message board with the typical problems this default payment method has caused.
posted on July 7, 2001 06:30:50 AM new
Let me see if I have this right.
Some people are upset that billpoint is accepting money in the sellers name? The buyer says "Hey, I paid you, were's my stuff?" All this uncertainty leads to an exchange of negatives.
Paypal has been accepting payment in the sellers name for years. Paypal has caused me to "earn" a negative feedback.
Remember, the way back years, when all this was fun?
posted on July 7, 2001 08:16:32 AM new
Here's the difference. If a buyer sends you a personal check or a PayPal payment that you don't accept the funds are never transferred, the buyer has an uncashed check or an unclaimed PayPal payment. If the buyers sends you a BillPoint payment the funds are transferred. With a personal check or PayPal there is no refund to give because you didn't accept the payment. With BillPoint you either give them a refund or BillPoint will take the refund plus $10 in the form of a chargeback from either your bank account or credit card. See the difference?
posted on July 7, 2001 08:40:23 AM new
Payola (paypal) has no problem accepting payment to an account that doesn't even exist. I'm not that involved with payola's mechanism, do they give you the option to refuse a payment? If you do refund does payola make 2% coming and going?
Do you honestly believe that Billpoint would do a charge back when the error was theirs to begin with? I'm sure payola would do anything to pass on the fees but billpoint is not payola.
dendude
posted on July 7, 2001 09:51:31 AM new
Check the eBay announcements for 07/02/2001 concerning BillPoint.
I'm sorry I can't explain to you that an unclaimed PayPal (or Payola, or PayDirect, or MoneyZap, or C2it) payment is no more a forced payment than a personal check would be that you decided not to deposit.
posted on July 7, 2001 12:56:02 PM new
I'm certainly not angry with payola, I just don't like to be lied to. Kinda like don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.
The billpoint fix is just not all that difficult. It only took me a few days and a few heated emails to billpoint to discover that the fix was just plain simple.
A buyers payment to an account that does not exist is clearly the buyers problem. The difficulty arises when the buyer doesn't understand that the seller hasn't received payment. Can and does happen with payola, can't happen with billpoint.
posted on July 7, 2001 07:10:16 PM newA buyers payment to an account that does not exist is clearly the buyers problem. The difficulty arises when the buyer doesn't understand that the seller hasn't received payment. Can and does happen with payola, can't happen with billpoint.
This is the Cat calling the Kettle black.
Who Need's a stink'n Sig. File?
[ edited by Microbes on Jul 7, 2001 07:11 PM ]
posted on July 8, 2001 09:16:15 PM new
Now I am not usually one to defend 3rd party payment systems! But there was a 'bug' on EBay that caused all relists to have a Billpoint logo inserted in them. Even for the PayPal Preferred folks. All of the PayPal users should have gotten several emails if your preferences are set to get the latest announcements.
If you take a look at some of the Trust and Safety Boards and Payment/Billpoint boards at EBay, it caused alot of confusion.
Some buyers, seeing the Billpoint logo, used it to pay. Sellers who may have been PayPal preferred or even having no 3rd party payments mentioned who in the past (or present) have an active or inactive Billpoint account had payments sent to them via Billpoint. And remember- Billpoint is a COMPLETE (meaning $ transferred right away to an account) not like PayPal. It doesn't go to your web account and sit there while you decide what to do
Stressful to a seller paid by credit card via Billpoint. ( if not accepted form of payment but has a Billpoint logo in the listing) The seller would have had fees from the sale removed, and have a heck of a time explaining it to an irrate buyer who is screaming 'you have my money' Some buyers are initiating chargebacks to the seller (who as mentioned has to pay $10.00 for it)
I hope they get it ironed out soon. It didnt affect me, (I offer both Billpoint and PayPal) but it could - when Ebay decides it is tired of dealing with the competition completely. Some think they can't /won't do it (eliminate PayPal) but it is their site and we live by their rules.
