Coonr
|
posted on September 19, 2002 09:48:30 PM new
Notice Date: September 19, 2002
Effective Date: October 9, 2002
Starting on October 9, to increase the ease of conducting international transactions, PayPal will begin to support transactions in multiple currencies. The initial roll-out of Multiple Currencies will give PayPal account holders the option of sending and receiving their payments in Pounds Sterling or Euros, as well as U.S. Dollars.
When the Multiple Currencies feature is launched, sellers will be able to choose the currencies in which they would like to conduct business through their Payment Receiving Preferences. Sellers may continue to transact only in U.S. Dollars unless they elect to accept Euro and/or Pound Sterling payments. Sellers who choose to receive payments in multiple currencies will have the option of maintaining separate balances for each currency in their PayPal account, or automatically converting all payments they receive into a single currency.
We will be providing additional information about Multiple Currencies as we get closer to launching this product. At present, you can learn more about Multiple Currencies in the Help Center.
http://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_help&exloc=mc
|
Coonr
|
posted on September 21, 2002 11:06:59 PM new
|
kkaaz
|
posted on September 24, 2002 12:40:17 PM new
how much commission do you get paid per post ?
|
Coonr
|
posted on September 24, 2002 03:25:34 PM new
None. You? After all Damon did brag on eBay about how much your posts benefited him.
|
kkaaz
|
posted on September 24, 2002 05:49:20 PM new
[After all Damon did brag on eBay about how much your posts benefited him.]
Are you refering to the same Damon that said "it does not matter if the buyer gets the item or not. If you are not protected under the sellers protection policy, you are liable for any reversal" ?
Or the Damon who knows a Paypal account was used to comit mail fraud and Paypal stood to make a profit from seller fees from the crime rather then stopping it.
Or is that the same Damon who clips from terms of use from current user agreement to apply to past transactions even though he knows he can't do that and then changes his story and claims he never did.
Or is it the Damon who complained to partner service auctionwatch that I insulted him and I got suspended even though there was no insulting post ever produced.
Becuse that Damon is a real asset to Paypal.. I heard he even won a award for handling problems that took so long to fix that they had to make it to public boards and complaint sites.
|
Coonr
|
posted on September 24, 2002 06:28:33 PM new
Are you refering to the same Damon that said "it does not matter if the buyer gets the item or not. If you are not protected under the sellers protection policy, you are liable for any reversal" ?
Damon did not make that up. It is in the Terms of Use.
Or the Damon who knows a Paypal account was used to comit mail fraud and Paypal stood to make a profit from seller fees from the crime rather then stopping it.
Evidence? When was the trail? Who was convicted?
Or is that the same Damon who clips from terms of use from current user agreement to apply to past transactions even though he knows he can't do that and then changes his story and claims he never did.
Never happened. They TOU always said youw were liable for a reversal.
Or is it the Damon who complained to partner service auctionwatch that I insulted him and I got suspended even though there was no insulting post ever produced.
Really? When was that? Trying for another?
|
kkaaz
|
posted on September 24, 2002 08:25:28 PM new
[Damon did not make that up. It is in the Terms of Use. ]
Really ? It's in the terms of use ? Under section 101 pulling a fraudulent scam with a Paypal account ?
I only see one complaint allowed by buyers for non-shipping. If the buyer gets the item and Paypal knows it was shipped to them, I don't see where the terms of use says Paypal will assist in fraudulent activity. I only see that you are not supposed to use a paypal account for fraudulent activity. I have yet to see that rule enforced.
[Evidence? When was the trail? Who was convicted? ]
Mail fraud investigation with signed payment confession and an hand written IOU. There is no need for a "Trial" when there is a confession. And nobody was convicted yet as the USPS said they rarely do they convict on single non grand theft fraud. But enough evidence for any small claims court that Paypal refused to accept solid evidence and then changed their user agreement and still tried to profit from the sellers fees for funds reversed after a mail fraud scam with a paypal account.
[Really? When was that? Trying for another?]
About a month ago.
claims of "posting defamatory and/or insulting messages"
Publicly showing a Paypal rep mistakes with dated e-mails and post that shows he has sent me terms of use from Dec 2001-Jan 2002 terms of use that were altered and re-written for an October 2001 reversal and then later tried to make claim he did not ?????? Truth is not against the rules.
Sorry if dates don't lie. I can not say the same for Paypal or their employees.
So does this thread mean you can now pull scams with a Paypal account with a different monetary system and not just US dollars as long as the terms of use says you can ?
|
Coonr
|
posted on September 24, 2002 08:55:39 PM new
Kev you can keep posting the same old garbage. and it wont change the facts. Unless you fall under SPP you are and have always been liable for a reversal.
You did not fall under the SPP.
You collected full payment from PayPal.
You collected partial payment again from your sucker (I mean buyer)
You obtained a rebated of fees from eBay due to the chargeback, which you have not paid. (Will be interesting to see how this is handled once eBay owns PayPal.)
You appear to have file a fradulent mail fraud complaint, as you have now been paid approximately 1.5 times.
|
kkaaz
|
posted on September 24, 2002 11:44:42 PM new
coonr.
I love how you forget to say Paypal claims I owe them over $350 even though they know my item was shipped to the correct person at the correct address by the terms of the payment, so that means Paypal ripped me off and I never even received close to half payment and have lost over $200 profit or even break even point. They charged me for services NEVER received and they knowingly allowed my buyer to get my sold item at the address requested by the terms of the payment for nothing and then changed their terms of use to reflect each and every single point I showed them that they made a mistake on. They should pay me the seller fees they are trying to collect from me. I did half of what I paid them to do and I turned in a mail fraud scammed and recovered some funds.
They did nothing for me except show their true colors. They are a poor service and can not accept a public mistake. Went as far as changing the sellers policy from October 2001 to Jan 2002 and you know this.
My issue does not change this thread. Just an example of their weak policy's.
All this all means is people can pull scams thru Paypal even easier in 2002 because with more requirements for sellers protection means less and less protection for sellers and more ways for buyer to fraud the sellers and now not just in US dollars ?????
Until Paypal does something to change their "investigation" into fraud process and their philosophy of "Seller is guilty until proven innocent by the ever changing terms of use", and their poor customer service, it really does not matter what types of "Multiple Currencies features" they offer.
|
thchaser200
|
posted on September 25, 2002 06:09:01 AM new
PayPal offer protection? That is a good one, the only other thing to say on this is if you did not ship to the billing address of the credit card, regardless of PayPal or a merchant account, you would have lost the chargeback. Merchant accounts require that the owner of the card sign for whatever was shipped. If that did not happen, then you would have lost the chargeback.
|
stopwhining
|
posted on September 25, 2002 06:47:01 AM new
there are many cases when the item was shipped to confirmed addr and signed for and the cardholder still file chargeback claiming he did not receive the item and won the chargeback.
unless the delivery person asked to see the id of the person who signed for the item and documented it someway,the cardholder can always say it is not me who signed the package.
another piece of evidence which is sorely lacking with online purchase is the signed receipt of the charge transaction.
|
thchaser200
|
posted on September 25, 2002 06:50:41 AM new
Very good point and could be something that needs to be solved regardless of what payment service is used. There are sellers that do not ship, and then are buyers that get the article, leave positive feedback and then claim they never got the item.
|
Coonr
|
posted on September 25, 2002 09:45:40 AM new
You have claimed in prior posts, the paymnets was sent as "No Shipping required."
Now you claim, "...they knowingly allowed my buyer to get my sold item at the address requested by the terms of the payment..."
[ edited by Coonr on Sep 25, 2002 09:46 AM ]
|
kkaaz
|
posted on September 25, 2002 10:03:50 AM new
"requested by the terms of the payment"
I forgot, you are the contract law king.
If no other address is listed in a payment sent for a phyiscal item being sold, it can be considered transfer of ownership is the terms of the payment.
Once transfer of ownship is complete and agreed by both parties, Paypal job is done unless they are an escrow company and they are NOT an escrow company.
If a Payment does not contain a "shipping address", a total for shipping paid or a request for shipping to accept the payment, unless Paypal is an escrow company, they can not make you ship something to accept and keep the payment.
|
Coonr
|
posted on September 25, 2002 10:12:58 AM new
It would appear they can and did.
When are you going to start paying your bill to PayPal?
Would you please pick one story and stick with it? Did they request shipping, or was the payment sent as no shipping required?
[ edited by Coonr on Sep 25, 2002 10:21 AM ]
|
kkaaz
|
posted on September 25, 2002 04:55:44 PM new
[Would you please pick one story and stick with it? Did they request shipping, or was the payment sent as no shipping required? ]
I have never changed stories. There is no story. Just an factual sale went sour thanks to Paypal mistakes in the user agreement which they saw and later fixed.
The buyer selected "no shipping address required". So Paypal removed the “confirmed address” off the payment and changed the “terms of the payment”
The payment terms did not say for an item to be shipped. So by accepting the payment, I did not have to ship anything. I accepted a payment for the transfer of ownership of said item only. As soon as that was done, Paypal job was complete. They had no right to escrow the sale. Anything that happens after the transfer is NONE OF PAYPAL'S BUISNESS.
The buyer also did not include any shipping totals in the terms of the payment.
So with out an address or funds for shipping, where are you to ship the item to and who is going to pay for it?
But they did say they got the item and said so verbally, by feedback, by e-mail and to a mail fraud complaint.
[When are you going to start paying your bill to PayPal? ]
I own Paypal nothing. They broke the agreement between them and myself as soon as they tried to apply the terms of use in Jan 2002 to my transaction in 2001.
My buyer owes Paypal. They used a Paypal account for a fraudulent act, which is against the user agreement. Paypal needs to enforce that upon them.
You cannot use the terms of use from future dates on past events unless all parties agreed or it's breach of contact. I never agreed to the user agreement in 2002 so they cannot use it for past events. So Paypal broke our agreement.
And it is a proven fact that Paypal changed the user agreement from the word "chargeback" in 2001 to the word "reversal" 2002 and in 2001 did not say anywhere that you are liable for a "reversal" of Paypal funds if you cannot prove you shipped to a "confirmed address". It only said the word “chargeback” and you can only get a chargeback if paid with a credit card.
I am sorry Paypal was wrong. I am sorry I had to show them their mistake, which they later fixed. I am sorry I had to make their change after the fact public. All they had to do was follow their terms of use as written and my buyer would have paid for the item as planned.
|
Coonr
|
posted on September 25, 2002 09:36:03 PM new
And according to the terms of use your liable for the reversal.
|
