Oz Round Table

The Oz Round Table boards => PayPal => Topic started by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 02:53:31 AM

Title: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 02:53:31 AM
For the record, I have been given detailed documentation supporting this story.  I have names, addresses, dates and times, emails, case numbers and copies of shipping documents.  I have the tracking information and have performed my own online inquiry on the status of the parcel in question.

I also have the seller's permission to present his story here.  

(A complete copy of the above information and the seller's permission has been forwarded to this site's Admin.)

As you will appreciate, there are some things that I cannot publish and other things that would also carry legal risks to this site - fundamentally, things that could identify the buyer.  So I while I will be presenting as much detail as I possibly can, there will be some details that will not be disclosed and there will be times when I present my own precis in lieu.

I have also looked at bothe the buyer's and seller's feedback profiles and present my own opinion, which I have endeavoured to make objective and accurate.

INTRODUCTION:

This is a story.  A true story which, at the time of writing, still has the last chapter unwritten....

It's a story about Paypal, involving a buyer in Germany, a seller in Hong Kong and an 'ex-display' laptop computer worth around $2,000 AUD.

The buyer is a young fellow - around 20 - living in a town somewhere in the middle of Germany. His membership on eBay is over 6 years old with a feedback score between 100 and 200 - about one third of which is as a seller.  He has a couple of negs, but nothing excessively worrying.

The seller is an Aussie Powerseller who operates out of Australia, but spends much of his time in and around Hong Kong, where he has an office.  He trades in a variety of products - including high value, high tech equipment, such as laptop computers and mobile phones.  He operates on eBay and through his own website and ships all over the world.  From what I have been able to glean, is doing quite well.  

(I will have to ask you to trust me on my examination of his feedback - I've been doing the same exercise on sellers whenever I'm looking to buy - and I've never been stung.  So far.)

While he's not perfect, his (4 digit) feedback indicates he only scores negs when the buyer: didn't read the listing, breaks the item, wants false customs declarations, wants untracked shipping, complains about customs charges, gets caught trying a fraudulent payment or loses a Paypal dispute.  In all the years he's been trading on eBay, his total count of red dots number in the single digit range. His neutrals are fairly mundane for the products involved and he has a couple of 'Withdrawn' ratings.

Other stories I have heard regarding this seller indicate two very, very clear points:  Firstly, he will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure a buyer is happy and, secondly, the power a buyer wields through the leverage of eBay and Paypal is astonishing - and has resulted in this seller pulling out all the stops and then some!

Bottom line: If I was asked if I would buy from this seller, I would answer: Absolutely!!

THE ADVENTURE BEGINS

With the international purchase of a laptop, you can probably expect some correspondence - which certainly happened here.  I have written it up in another thread, so as not to clog up this one too much.  It is not an atypical example of what sellers are expected to go through and still smile sweetly...
The Preliminary Bout: "Ask Seller A Question" (http://www.ozroundtable.com/index.php?topic=1755.0)

So
 - the buyer has bought and paid for his laptop
 - the seller has sent it on its way

and don't you just know, this is where the fun begins......
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 04:14:57 AM
THE FIRST HURDLE

Nine days after posting, the buyer lodges a dispute - Item Not Received.

Let's not dwell on the buyer's motives nor the seller's anxiety - we'll just cut to the chase on this one......

The seller provides the tracking information which shows the item is still in transit and Paypal find in his favour.

Here is the (anonymised) email from Paypal advising of the outcome:

From: service@paypal.com.au
Subject: PayPal: Resolution of Buyer Complaint Case no. < case number >
Date: 29 December 2009 11:48:02 PM GMT+08:00
To: < seller email >

Hello < seller name >,

PayPal has concluded our investigation of the following Buyer Complaint:
Buyer's name: < buyer name >
Buyer's email: < buyer email >
Transaction ID: < transaction id >
Transaction date: 18 Dec 2009
Transaction amount: $2,000.00 AUD
Your transaction ID: < seller transaction id >
Case number: < case number >

Thank you for providing the requested information in a timely manner.

The postal information you provided has been verified. The claim has been
closed in your favor.

Thank you again for your cooperation with our investigation.

Yours sincerely,
PayPal Protection Services Department


I believe this process took less than a day.

A quick decision and correct.  Paypal has done well.

But wait, there's more!
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 09:28:53 PM
ROUND 2

Less than 2 days later, the buyer raises a Significantly Not As Described dispute, even though the item is still in transit. (This is the case which prompted me to post the thread: Can a buyer lodge a SNAD dispute without.... (http://www.ozroundtable.com/index.php?topic=1698.0)).  Whilst seemingly an illogical ability, there are some circumstance where it does make sense - but this case is NOT one of those.

The trail followed by this SNAD is, from all accounts, pretty standard.  Here are the basics from the emails received by the seller:

From: service@paypal.com.au
Subject: First Request for Information About Buyer Complaint: Case ID no.
< case number >
Date: 31 December 2009 10:54:49 PM GMT+08:00
To: < seller email >
Hello < seller name >,
< buyer name > recently opened a dispute against this transaction indicating
that the purchased item was significantly different than what was described.
The buyer's claim is in regard to merchandise that either was never
received or did not match your original description. Please understand that
until our investigation is complete, the funds associated with this
transaction may be temporarily held. For more information, please review
our User Agreement.
Please be aware that until we complete our investigation, we may place a
hold on funds associated with this transaction.


From: service@paypal.com.au
Subject: Status Update - Case no.
< case number >
Date: 2 January 2010 6:36:08 PM GMT+08:00
To: < seller email >
Hello < seller name >,
We are writing to let you know that we requested additional information
from the buyer about this case.
We'll let you know if we require additional information from you.


From: service@paypal.com.au
Subject: Resolution of Buyer Complaint Case No.
< case number >
Date: 4 January 2010 6:08:44 PM GMT+08:00
To: < seller email >
Hello < seller name >,
After careful consideration of the evidence provided in the case detailed
below, we have completed our investigation and decided in favour of the
buyer. Under the terms of our User Agreement, we have debited the following
amount from your PayPal account as a refund to the buyer:
-----------------------------------
< Transaction Details >
-----------------------------------

-----------------------------------
What to Do Next
-----------------------------------
If you requested that the buyer return the item to you and it was not
received in its original condition, you may appeal against this decision.
To make an appeal, log in to your PayPal account, click the Resolution
Centre link, and click the Appeal button next to the case.
Please understand that although we will carefully consider your appeal, we
cannot guarantee a reversal of the decision.
-----------------------------------
Due Dates
-----------------------------------
Provide additional information within 10 calendar days from the date this
case was filed.
-----------------------------------
Other Details
-----------------------------------
To review the PayPal User Agreement, visit the PayPal site and click the
'User Agreement' link on the bottom of any page.
At PayPal, security is our top priority. We investigate fraudulent buyers
and transactions in order to protect the integrity of our payments network.
You can help protect yourself by following the steps outlined in our Seller
Protection Policy.
To learn how to protect yourself from disputes, we recommend visiting the
PayPal site and clicking the Security Centre link located at the bottom of
any page. There you will find information in the 'Seller Protection Policy'
section.
Thank you for your patience and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
PayPal Protection Services Department

From: service@paypal.com.au
Subject: Resolution of case no.
< case number >
Date: 4 January 2010 6:08:45 PM GMT+08:00
To: < seller email >
Hello < seller name >,
PayPal has concluded the investigation of the following claim:
< Transaction Details >
A refund has been initiated from your account and the case is now closed.
Unfortunately, due to insufficient funds your account balance is now
negative and may be limited. Any funds entering the account will apply
toward making a positive balance.
This claim has been solved amicably. Please consider this when leaving
feedback for this buyer.
Yours sincerely,
Protection Services Department


The buyer, I am informed, claimed that they had received "an empty box".  It would seem Paypal simply accepted this statement, despite the seller providing tracking information which showed that the item was still in transit.

Here is a screen shot of the tracking status as it was on the 5th January, showing that German Customs had only just received the item - THE DAY AFTER the case had been closed.

This is going to sound corny - but you ain't seen nuthin' yet!

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 10:01:46 PM
ROUND 3

Now, this seller is not the sort of guy to take this lying down and just accept it - especially when he's done everything he's supposed to do.  It's also not in his best interests to become known as an easy target for the high value items he sells.  It goes against his principles as well.

So it is no surprise for him to have appealed the decision.  Twice.

From what I have been able to see, the first appeal was just another formality and was, not surprisingly, denied.

The second appeal was only allowed to be made after our seller pursued the matter - in no uncertain terms.

Here are two emails I received from the seller when I was preparing this story.  They talk about a number of points, but include some details about what he had recently gone through and the conditions imposed to get that second appeal.  They are presented in their entirety, with some bolding I have made of some particularly relevent statements....  (please take into consideration that dates and times of the various entries here are affected by differing time zones)

From: < seller >
To: < Me (Brum6y) >
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 11:23 PM
Subject: PayPal Issue

Hi < Me (Brum6y) >,

thanks for the email.    i have attached a folder with all the relevant details in which prove beyond a shadow of a double that i shipped the item, the buyer requested the shipping method and agreed to the shipping time.    that PayPal closed the INR in my favor and then allowed the buyer to open an SNAD and find in his favor.    after denying my first appeal the case was granted to me on the second appeal with the condition that i was not given a refund of the payment just the satisfaction of winning the dispute.   the buyer already had the funds and PayPal were not crediting them back to me.     they will also not give me a copy of the police report they claim lists me as shipping an empty box to the buyer.    given the package is still not delivered and he filed a police report on the 2/1 its not rocket science to see it was a scam.

at this stage i have recontacted the buyer and warned him i will be taking legal action and flying to germany to have him charged with fraud.    he claims he never really lied... never really lied?    i told him i wanted a copy of the police report and he said he was not allowed to give it to me.    or he has been told by PayPal not to give it too me.   he also said his account is still open with PayPal and he does not believe he did anything wrong.    only what he was told to do...   told to do????

i have given him an hour to provide the police report or have me on his door step with the police on Monday.

let me know if you need any other detail at all.

best regards

< seller name >

p.s.   this is what sent to the BSFO today
< file attachments included >

 
From: < seller >
To: < Me (Brum6y) >
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 1:37 AM
Subject: Re: PayPal Issue

Hi < Me (Brum6y) >,

thanks for the response.    not a problem at all.    of course the details sent contain all the contact details etc for the buyer but only because this was given to BFSO so needed that.    feel free to use what you think suitable but as you can see wading through it is what can only be considered as gross misconduct on PayPal's part for failing to investigate the claims made by the buyer and allowing this SNAD dispute to be awarded in his favor even though he had never received the item and it was clear to see this fact looking at the tracking that was provided at the outset and easily seen online.

the fact that at 2am this morning i finally forced a PayPal manager to actually log onto the DHL site whilst i recorded a conversation to see for themselves that the item the buyer claimed he had already received 5 days earlier as an empty box.    she then agreed to reopen the dispute which i had lost and then had my initial appeal declined.     the absolute slap in the face was the granting of my appeal after the 3 attempt only to have PayPal tell me to contact the buyer for my money.    as if he will be going to give it back when he ran the whole thing as a scam.

seller protection .... sure, i won the INR ... but then the buyer was permitted to open an SNAD which has no seller protection ... so the claytons win to allow the buyer to get his money back in the end.

let me know if you need any other details at all.

best regards

< seller name >

Below is a screen shot of the log of the SNAD dispute, with identifying information removed (by me).

Now, if you think we've really got a meaty case where Paypal has something to answer for - in the next instalment you will see that this has just been the entrée!

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 10:32:26 PM
So - where is the laptop now?

At the time of writing, it has been cleared by customs for collection - but has, as yet, not been picked up.

This screen shot was taken a couple of days ago and the status has not changed. (I just checked)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 11:05:39 PM
MORE BITS & PIECES

Along the way in the unfolding of this story, there have been a number of other bits of information that have come to light - which add some head-shaking details.  If I were to attempt to write about them, I'd be quickly wearing out my thesaurus in the pages around the ideas of 'incredible', 'unbelievable' and 'slack'.

Fortunately, this seller has done the work for me.

As a Powerseller, he has shared his story on the Powerseller Board and my seller friend, also being a Powerseller, has been able to assist me in capturing some of those posts.

As you will appreciate, out of respect for the privilege of discussion by Powersellers on the Powerseller Board, I am not going to publish any posts from any Powerseller without their permission, nor am I going to discuss any particular points raised by them.  I will, however, make a couple of general observations to put a context around the posts I will be quoting - and I don't think ANY of that will be a surprise at all.

The posts which follow are from the seller involved in this case.  I have obtained his explicit permission to do so and to 'format' some of the content to make it easier to read (essentially, just putting a bullet against each point).

The Context....
From the Powerseller Board, I need only outline these things for you to understand some references in the quoted posts:
1. Posting members are very interested and concerned in this case
2. Holidays to eBali are given
3. Our seller in this case has just come back from one. An excerpt from our seller on his return: "... vacations have never really been a strong preference of mine ... this one was not really a vacation ... up all night working 20 hours a day to prove i am innocent is not my idea of a vacation ..."
4. In his 'absence', other Powersellers had received information from him and posted it on the Powerseller Board ... carefully.


Now is the time to make that cuppa, get comfortable and buckle up....!
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 17, 2010, 11:44:07 PM
ADMISSIONS & REVELATIONS

From the Powerseller Board (with permission):

Just read.........

14/01/2010 14:47

that was a quick 7 days ...

thank you all for your support in this situation ... post 79 ... all correct ...

at this time the item in question weighing 2.79kg as per the consignment note supplied in the dispute is still in customs and has been awaiting collection now for 6 days. i am told that if its not collected it will be destroyed as unclaimed as it has passed through german customs system and cannot now go back.

DHL have also said they are unable to retrieve the item for me as i am no longer the owner. in respect to if the buyer collects would it be fraud? simple answer no ... because he was awarded the item as a result of his SNAD win and legally entitled to the item paid or not under german common law.

what i have learned in the last 7 days after spending around $5000+ AUD on phone calls to Germany, US, AU and UK:

* buyer had done this more than once (manager in the US said 'has a history')
* buyer is well known to Police who were more than willing to assist with information but require me in person for a formal complaint (on the cards)
* buyer did the same thing to another HK seller in July 2009 for a $4000 item which he claimed was delivered as ''an empty box"
* buyer has in the last 6 months bought via the venue multiple accessories for the item never received from the other seller
* other seller lost their dispute and the payment.
* buyer has admitted he used the same method in this case 'because it worked last time'
* buyer used the same police report and altered the details to reflect this case
* buyer has stated he did what he was told ... opening an SNAD and immediately escalating it to a claim
* buyer still claims he did nothing wrong, has said he is entitled to both the money and the item (after several about faces)
* buyer still has an eBay account
* buyer still has a PayPal account
* buyer has still yet to receive any punishment
* buyer has claimed he has done this before and continues to do it
* …because it works every time
* buyer has had an account for more than 7 years but is only < buyer’s age (around 20)>
* buyer had assistance

* company never investigated the SNAD dispute
* company never investigated the first appeal
* company only opened the second appeal (3rd time lucky) which was granted after the company's representative was forced to look up online the tracking details that had been supplied from the beginning to see the item was in fact in customs and no where near the buyer who claimed the box was empty ... i am sure he really meant his post box was empty and waiting for the package to arrive ... translation issue no doubt.
* company has stated they made a mistake
* company has agreed all documentation supplied by the buyer was fake or forged
* company has agreed the buyer has a history of this type of dispute
* company refuses to give any detail of the documentation or copies of to the seller as the buyer is entitled to privacy

* seller has spent over $5,000 doing the job the company should have, has provided copious amounts of factual documentation, information and investigative assistance to the company and still no action ...
* seller has not received requested copies of the forged documentation which the company led the seller to believe were genuine and carried significant problems for the seller and penalties.
* seller has been told by the buyer he was told by the company not to give me a copy of the documentation
* seller has received a new police report from the buyer which appears to be for harassment and threatening behavior leveled at the seller but this is still being investigated as there are only 2 pages of the report which was 4 pages.

* INR opened was only closed to allow an SNAD dispute which the buyer could win

how many of the other $150,000+ cases of fraud on my account have been handled in the same manner and if i had spent the same amount of time and money doing the companies work in the past would i have found this out sooner?

how many other sellers have suffered the same fate as a result of lack of care on the part of the company like the seller mentioned above who lost $4000?

MODERATOR < this is addressing the eBay moderators >

the information above is true and correct as was all the other information supplied to assist other sellers before i was given my holiday. if you do not believe this to be true contact PP for advice on this before removing my post. sellers are being cheated by scams of this nature all the time and they should be aware of the methods used by some buyers. if you believe its better they just suffer the same for themselves to learn that is unfortunate and perhaps a result of the fact you earn a salary and do not have the same level of exposure to the risks of accepting fraudulent payments. as i have just spent more than most employees monthly salary and a week of my time getting the information i believe i have a right to share it with the other sellers who could be placed at risk.
 

14/01/2010 15:25

i have spoken at length to the other known seller who was a victim of this scam. he was not as fortunate as i with being able to get evidence against the buyer as english is a second language for him.

he does however have one of the largest HK eBay accounts and gets a lot of disputes but this one left a particular bitter taste in his mouth. he was very happy when i contacted him with all my information and the knowledge of his problem. he has now commenced follow up against the buyer and will be discussing with the company what can be done for him. i am in reality a small fish compared to this seller and i hope that he gets some satisfaction.

given the buyer is using the venue to purchase accessories for the item that arrived as an empty box, has admitted in writing that he has used the scam more than once and specifically names the other seller in his email one would hope that it will if nothing else exonerate the other seller of any wrong doing.

in the end no matter the outcome of all of this ... we both still have black marks on our accounts as a result of this scam and like the many others before cause considerable problems when they mount up and effect a lock down on the funds in our accounts.

the company needs to really address this type of situation and i hope my efforts this time around to prove that the buyer was pulling a scam even though they were aware of his history will help to make a change happen.

14/01/2010 20:57

thanks guys great to be back ... all has been forwarded to the BFSO in detail.

i totally agree ... unless others have had the experience they cannot imagine that its possible things like this can happen.

what it has proven and made 110% crystal clear is no seller can ever believe that a dispute has been investigated and or that the buyer has not used false statements, fake police reports or dishonest means to win their money back and when the buyer loses on default via the seller protection they are then encouraged and in this case assisted to get the money back by a fraudulent SNAD claim.

it took me over 7 hours of phone calls to the US with the proof i had from the german police to even get an admission the matter had not been investigated and that the company was aware the documentation was forged. even at that stage the buyer still had the win. only when i forced the point the item was showing as in customs on the DHL site was my appeal granted with the requirement i chase the buyer for the funds.

i was offered $100US for my phone expenses by one of the managers after i told him that i had spend over $5,000 to date chasing the buyer with legal fees, phone calls and other costs. i told him there was a place for the $100US and it was not my account ... (all recorded to boot).

as interesting and enticing as the story is the sad fact of the matter is sellers are paying the price for this type of scam and the company sits back and lets it happen. for me to take action i need a copy of the fake police report ... the company has told me i am not getting it from them and the buyer has said he has been told not to give it to me. at least i have a recorded admission from the company that they are fully aware the documents submitted by the buyer are forgeries and its not the first time he has done it.

the buyer still has his accounts intact ... how many times have i and other sellers been made to pay for the errors of others with suspended accounts, frozen or limited accounts and yet a blatantly open scam which has awarded this buyer over $7000 in goods we know of still does not cause his accounts to fall. how desperate are we for buyers that we are letting this go on?

i would post some of the most damning proof i have uncovered of this here but i am not ready for another trip to eBaili just yet ... and thats where i would go ...


Don't know about you, but I'm speechless.

However I am REALLY, REALLY keen to find out what happens next...!  Overseas travel perhaps...?
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *smee* on January 18, 2010, 12:02:20 AM
I refer you to athread I started on this forum on 16th July 2009 ..... Pay pal sellers protection .... its a figment of their imagination ..... I rest my case your honour !!!!!!
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 18, 2010, 12:22:02 AM
BUT, didn't I read somewhere.....?

At PayPal, security is our top priority. We investigate fraudulent buyers and transactions in order to protect the integrity of our payments network. You can help protect yourself by following the steps outlined in our Seller Protection Policy.

To learn how to protect yourself from disputes, we recommend visiting the PayPal site and clicking the Security Centre link located at the bottom of any page. There you will find information in the 'Seller Protection Policy' section.


... and something else just as puzzling...?

This claim has been solved amicably. Please consider this when leaving feedback for this buyer.


Yep - you sure did.  These are excerpts from the SNAD dispute closure emails sent by Paypal.

Irony?  Hypocrisy? Hmmm... Think I'll grab my thesaurus again.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 18, 2010, 01:30:36 AM
I refer you to athread I started on this forum on 16th July 2009 ..... Pay pal sellers protection .... its a figment of their imagination ..... I rest my case your honour !!!!!!

Just re-read that thread to reacquaint myself with it.

Certainly, the promotional material on 'Seller Protection' indicates a useful service and the requirements clearly (?) defined.  From what is published, you should not expect the sort of dismissive treatment that Paypal actually dish out - but they do.  It is an unfortunate reality that when these situations are presented on low cost items, the business decision to 'pursue the matter' or to 'write it off' supercedes principles.

I have no doubt that Paypal rely on this for a great deal of their resolution outcomes, however, the seller in the case presented here has the resources and energy to push through that barrier of superciliousness.

But you shouldn't need to.

In the case you presented, Smee, it would seem that Paypal themselves created the problem and then 'withheld' your money. That really worries me - but I would ask: "Why did you let them get away with it?".

Why didn't you pursue them for information, an explanation, return of your funds - and persist until you had satisfaction?

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not singling you out to have a go at you - the same questions apply to any seller who has encountered problems not of their own making.

And I am more than aware of the reason.  As I said above, it's just not worth the time, cost and effort for most sellers.  (By their actions, Paypal are certainly aware of this and taking full advantage of it).


But I hear you say "That's all bollocks! I shouldn't have to go through all that."

... and I could not agree more - but it's this elitist, bullying attitude that needs to be broken, even though it has no right to even exist in the first place.


The problem exists. It is undeniable, but a million plaintive posts on the forums of the world decrying this sad state are so easily ignored.  Why? Because they can be.  And thus, by being ignored, lose their power.

However, this is a story about Paypal being shown they can be held accountable, the efforts that have been made in order to make this happen and the discovery of some dirty little secrets along the way.


This is a story of challenge and, perhaps, one step further towards change.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *smee* on January 18, 2010, 05:28:36 AM
Sir Brumbles . I did pursue it .... it cost me hundreds of $$$$$$ .... but I pursued it and in the end received an 'ex gracia' payment from paypal for purchase price only , not my costs pursuing them ....

fact remains though .... there is no seller protection actually provided by PAYPAL ...

as the  seller in your story has found out the hard way

All I am trying to do is get the message through to other sellers that you can not feel secure by Paypals useless policy ... in reality there is NO SELLER    protection !... the only protection the seller has is what Aust Post offers
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Ubbie Max* on January 18, 2010, 07:17:16 AM
Brum6y. Your story is frightening. I feel for Ebay sellers as there are obviously many crooked buyers out there & Ebay sides with them all the time.

My memory may not be completely accurate but, didn't Ebay/Paypal make a statement to the ACCC regarding buyer/seller protection that contradicts this incident. If Ebay/Paypal did make such a statement to the ACC re protection they lied to the ACCC.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: cueperkins on January 18, 2010, 10:04:34 AM
No Ubb....I think you may be referring to the Payment Systems Board or RBA.....possibly even ASIC, as the BFSO, reports back to ASIC on systemic issues with any payment system....enough complaints and ASIC then investigate them.....BTW...it's also ASIC who administer the EFT Code of Conduct......and thus the reason why they recommended that Paypal sign the Code back in the ACCC debacle.

So...no....this is more related to the Payment Systems Board and rules governing payment systems under APRA licensing...

And........can't help it........TOLD YA SO.....LOL....

Any wonder why I still refuse to join that pirate payment system?   I believe the worse is yet to come actually.....sooner or later we're going to hear about a mass hacking of paypal accounts....like that's not possible?  Crikey China has been hacking into private email accounts of Google owners...so just how hard does anyone think it might be hacking an email account?...lol.....

Funny thing is, that it will be only then, when there are thousands of victims, that anyone will bother doing anything.....and just like the ACCC issue, Media will gag the issue and it will be the 'RETURN OF THE REBELS' that brings it to the fore once again....thank gord we have this site when that does happen.....not if it happens..

Remember the famous words of Wobbit the Bwuce......Paypal protection was and is illusory....non existent, dead, demised, nailed to the bleeding perch....it's snuffed it...lol
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 18, 2010, 12:41:52 PM
Sir Brumbles . I did pursue it .... it cost me hundreds of $$$$$$ .... but I pursued it and in the end received an 'ex gracia' payment from paypal for purchase price only , not my costs pursuing them ....

My apologies - I wasn't aware of the extent of your efforts, Smee.

Quote
fact remains though .... there is no seller protection actually provided by PAYPAL ...

as the  seller in your story has found out the hard way

All I am trying to do is get the message through to other sellers that you can not feel secure by Paypals useless policy ... in reality there is NO SELLER    protection !... the only protection the seller has is what Aust Post offers

I can only agree with you .... unfortunately.

But it HAS to change ... which is why I have gone to the effort of posting this story.

... and I will be posting more as the matter progresses.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 26, 2010, 12:34:31 AM
IT'S BEEN A WEEK - WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING?

I contacted the seller for an update and he advised me he is still persuing matters in Germany.  He didn't give me any details at this time, but I'm sure he will when the time is right.

He also stated the laptop still had not been picked up from German customs.  I checked the tracking status and sure enough, it is still showing as having cleared customs, but delivery has not been taken.  One wonders if the buyer is game to even try...

But our buyer - the one who was caught out supplying false police reports (amongst other things) - is still happily buying.  EBay and Paypal accounts still operational.

I checked his feedback to find in the last month, he has bought, amongst other things, a leather case specifically designed for the laptop still waiting to be collected, a DVI adapter and a 22" LCD monitor.  Curiously interconnectable.

Looking at the items against his other feedback, this boy likes getting his high-tech gear from eBay ... and he's still doing it.

Buying, that is.  I can't tell if he's doing anything else..... but he is getting positive feedback.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 13, 2010, 05:09:49 PM
HAVE I HEARD FROM THE SELLER?  WHERE IS THIS MATTER UP TO?

Yes, it has been a while since the last update, but this story is now being told in real time and since it is now involving legal processes, that time line moves slowly.

When you are not privy to their daily schedule, it is a risk to overburden a business person with a matter incidental to their survival (such as the reporting on this thread) - and so my emails to the seller have been few and brief.  One concern was the probability of the seller's time being grossly dominated by topical legal matters.

I have finally received a response from the seller that indicates my concern was well founded - and truer than I would have imagined.

Here is his opening paragraph:

thanks for the emails and apologies for not getting back to you sooner.  unfortunately, i have been tied up in dealing with the last two PayPal issues with the police and my lawyers.  i have had a total of about 7 hours sleep in the last 7 days and spent over $20,000 in legal fees and other costs since this began.

Since he is operating in the high value consumer electronics market, it is not surprising that he has more than one issue to deal with.  He also disclosed the value of the last 5 years worth of Paypal's indiscretions and while I won't divulge that figure, it puts his current legal bill into a justifiable perspective.

He goes on to provide details of some of the nature of the investigations being conducted by police, lawyers and others.  At this time, however, it would be unwise to publish those details on this publicly accessible thread since it might compromise the effectiveness of his legal efforts.  When the time is right, I will present some of that information, as appropriate.

It is very clear that matters are still being actively pursued - and that distinct progress is being made.  When the matter will be resolved is not known, but there is little doubt that it WILL be.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 13, 2010, 05:38:27 PM
OH - YES ... JUST ONE MORE THING

It is always a fact that just because of one or two difficulties we face, the world doesn't stop to allow us to catch up ... it just keeps turning.  (Can you spot the odd one out?...)

Sellers do what sellers do.
Buyers do what buyers do.
EBay does what eBay does.
Monkeys do what monkeys do.
Paypal does what Paypal does...........

Now I'm just being flippant.

Or am I?

The last paragraph of this seller's email just shows how ridiculous buyers' attitudes have become...

today i had another INR from france this time $2000 computer ... the buyer rejected the delivery because they had to pay tax and believe this is our issue even though our terms and conditions state they are responsible.    prior to contacting us they opened the dispute and demanded full refund immediately.   never ends.


I am simply amazed at the lack of responsibility taken by buyers in regard to customs and quarantine regulations - let alone an appreciation of why they exist.... and with Paypal bailing them out, they aren't ever going to learn.

So, for this seller (and others) it, indeed, never ends.


Wonder what's next?
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 13, 2010, 05:57:13 PM
...AND SOMETIMES YOU JUST GET A SURPRISE GIFT!

The following is not as blatant an example of internet ignorance as has been known to occur, but you would think that by now ...

Obviously not.

Here is another very recent morsel from the keyboard of our intrepid seller.  (I've just copied it here ... I don't think anything more needs saying!)

my god some people are so infinitely stupid ... it amazes me ... but to all good things they bring into our presence for publishing themselves for the world to see is heart warming ...

most know of my plight with the german boy who stole a computer from me using a forged police assisted by lack of interest by the company ...

i have been diligently working with lawyers, law enforcement and countless hours on the phone and computer in an effort to find this boy and or a way to get justice for his crime ...

tonight bless his soul he up dated his gmail buzz on one of the email addresses i sent him an email from ... giving me full details of his school ... low and behold the IP address used in emails is located on the school premises ... implicating the school in the fraud for providing the venue for the boy to defraud us and file his forged police report ...

happy chinese new year Mr Smith ...

as a consequence i have been able to send an email direct to the school principle detailing the case, the forged police report and his behavior ... perhaps they will be good enough to expel him ... or at least compensate my losses caused because they did not monitor his use of school property ...

i love technology ...  


This just keeps getting better...
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Ubbie Max* on February 13, 2010, 09:07:08 PM
Keep us posted Brum6y.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *CountessA* on February 13, 2010, 11:56:52 PM
This is more gripping than CSI.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: gr8-expectations on February 14, 2010, 12:45:35 PM
the plot thuckens ...
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Ubbie Max* on February 14, 2010, 06:03:19 PM
Yep Countess & Gr8. I wonder if any bodies will turn up! Maybe there will be a terrorism twist. I hope so, I love a good juicy thriller.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 14, 2010, 06:21:17 PM
Please - let's not get carried away.


An administrative win would be far more poetic than a row of heads on pikes (however appealing that might seem).

You never know, there might be some heads rolling as a result of all this - and there won't be a drop of blood on any of our hands!


Couldn't ask for better... but let's just see what unfolds......
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: gr8-expectations on February 14, 2010, 07:20:23 PM
Yep Countess & Gr8. I wonder if any bodies will turn up! Maybe there will be a terrorism twist. I hope so, I love a good juicy thriller.

"loaded" undies and planes perhaps ubie? lol
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: gr8-expectations on February 14, 2010, 07:28:00 PM
on a serious note though, thank god they got that guy and others like him before they take out their twisted plots on innocents
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 03:37:17 PM
THE WHEELS GRIND SLOWLY IN GERMANY – BUT JUST WEST OF THE BORDER……

As we wait for news of further developments with our intrepid seller’s German lad, let us pass the time by having a closer look at one of the more recent examples of the perils of international selling.

Our longsuffering seller has forwarded me further details on the other laptop mentioned earlier – the one that went to France. I present it here, with some comments of mine interspersed…

He begins:

not sure if you have seen my new post but again i have been hit by an EU buyer ... this one not so dishonest as stupid and using the system to get his payment back.    

Well, that is different to the German case – but does it make life any easier?  I know – silly question. You can stop laughing… (I can guarantee you won’t be laughing by the time you finish reading this instalment.)

he purchased a computer $2000 and then paid for EMS shipping with full insurance ... even pointed out to ensure the item is insured for the full amount.    item shipped with full insurance (in this case 11500HKD).     item took 36 hours HK to EU and when it arrived the buyer refused to accept it because there was tax payable.    instead he opened an INR and stated he had refused the package because he could not afford the tax and wanted his payment back asap.

At least he was honest.

PayPal after carefully investigating the case found in his favor ... based on the fact that its the sellers responsibility to ensure that the buyer does not have to pay tax or if tax is payable the seller pays it.

?? Including import duties ??  This is a new twist to some pretty longstanding practices in international shipment of goods – or am I mistaken?

i appealed the dispute on the basis that i provided PayPal with the full details of the shipment, and that it should be covered under the AU seller protection policy.       the response was appeal denied because the item was not delivered.

i then drew their attention to the buyers dispute in which they stated that when the item was delivered they rejected it because they did not want to pay the tax.     i asked PayPal for a copy of the policy that states that a buyer is entitled to reject an item if they do not want to pay the tax and or where the seller is responsible for it.     i also asked for clarification on the AU seller protection policy that states the seller only need to ship the item as require to be covered ... not deliver.

Isn’t it just amazing how much work a seller has to go through just to get Paypal to understand their own policies and then to get them to actually follow them?

PayPal then agreed i was right and that they had not investigated the case or noticed that the buyer had stated he did not want to pay the tax or when they spoke with the buyer on the phone remember him mentioning the item arriving and he not being able to pay the tax.

Another example of Paypal’s absolute consistency in NOT investigating a case, nor even paying attention to evidence put right in front of them.  It would seem that whenever more than one piece of evidence, policy citation or procedural challenge is presented to Paypal, they just take the easy way out and find in favour of the buyer and it is then up to the seller to be relentless in their efforts for the facts of the case to be properly considered. 

Even then, there is (wait for it……) a ‘but’………

The only thing is again ... they have found in my favor with the clause ... you go to the buyer to get back the funds ... this is a matter between you and them now as they have been given a refund in error.

Ahhhhh, the moral victory!  At least Paypal are being consistent about the funds side of it – ‘Go chase them yourself’.  I am underwhelmed … such dismissiveness makes me see red – and I’m not just talking about the ledger!

Just so I don’t lose what little objectivity I have left, let’s move on… So, what does the ledger look like?…

the $2000 computer is in French customs waiting for someone to pay $487AUD tax for it to either be delivered or returned ... the return shipping is $150AUD and i paid $107AUD to ship it.    so total cost to get it back after the buyers little error is $744AUD ... i also registered the computer in the buyers name after setting up it for them as requested so its second hand.     so now 2 x $2000 computers in EU that belong to me because PayPal made an error ...

So – in a nutshell – an experienced and successful seller, who has done everything by the book will end up having to pay $744AUD to get back his (now) second hand laptop. No responsibility is being taken by, nor being required of, the buyer who, through their ignorance, caused the problem, since PayPal is more than ready to keep them happy via the complete abdication of any and all responsibility, morals and ethics.  (There are some readers that would class this as borderline criminal activity – and a greater number that would vehemently challenge the use of the word ‘borderline’ … and whilst I do not advocate such, I find myself unable to disagree.)

The equation is so simple, isn’t it?  Offer the “improved buying experience” at the sole risk of the seller.  Seems to be working well for the “Venue” ** and the “Company” **.


Such an inspiration …. for me to get back into working on the website setup for my seller.


** “Venue” and “Company” are, respectively, code words for eBay and PayPal. On the eBay forums, such code words must be used if any negative sentiments are expressed towards those two entities – otherwise moderation, slaps and holidays to eBali are freely on offer
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 05:51:30 PM
Yeah, ebay isn't for everybody. That seller Brum6y suffers more 'bad luck' than any other seller I've heard of. His bad luck has been going on for at least 5 years that I know of. Not good at taking offered advice that one. With all that 'bad luck', it's amazing that he's still in business......truly......amazing ;)
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 07:13:14 PM
I remember once reading something in the Ebay Help pages that actually said that Buyers were responsible for any extra taxes or charges imposed on them by their local Customs.  That it was their responsibility to find out what those charges were.

I tried to find the link....but surprise!  Ebay's Help pages were having a problem...something about pages being moved...unable to connect to them...lol
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 07:18:20 PM
“International Buyers – Please Note:

Import duties, taxes and charges are not included in the item price or postage charges. These charges are the buyer’s responsibility.

Please check with your country’s customs office to determine what these additional costs will be prior to bidding/buying.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 07:34:59 PM
Thanks Bazza!

I guess my memory hasn't gone yet...lol

Can you put a link in here please?   You can do that here....you don't get slapped for links like that here.... ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 07:42:27 PM
http://pages.ebay.com.au/help/policies/feedback-removal.html

Found by doing a search for Import Duties in the help page search bar.


What's a slap? :)
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *FluffyDuckee* on February 23, 2010, 07:45:11 PM
It's kind of like a spank Bazza, but not as enjoyable. 
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 07:51:48 PM
Thanks again Bazza!   When I tried to get into Help earlier this arvo I couldn't get in....usual Ebay glitch I think...or maybe they just don't want to let some people know their rights...**shrugs

I remember the days when you used to be able to whiz in and out with a handy link...in the old days.

I guess some things don't improve with age...lol


What's a slap?

Awwww...C'mon....don't be so modest...I'm sure you have had your fair share...lol

None done by me I must add.....but I hear there is a Feral poster over there that does it for fun... ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 07:54:18 PM
Nah....ya lost me  ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 08:00:15 PM
Nup...I didn't lose you.......you get lost by yourself.

Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 08:07:42 PM
I think Brum6ys thread is in danger of being thrown off course  ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 08:10:05 PM
Yeah...thanks to you..lol

Buzz off then...don't slam the door ......nice seeing ya! ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 08:13:31 PM
Please feel free to ignore my posts in future won't you Roo  ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 08:17:30 PM
You can't ignore a loaded gun...when it's in your face Bazza....so get your hands off the pistol.

And I'm too much of a lady to say what I would really like to say.....so my Buzz Off statement was tame.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 08:19:31 PM
See, now that's not ignoring  ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 08:39:22 PM
Flock Off.... ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 08:40:19 PM
That's what sheep do...anyway..lol
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Poddy on February 23, 2010, 08:41:30 PM
And now you are basking in the limelight huh Bazza?

My guess is that you had an urge to deflect the subject of this thread, which you almost achieved, but not quite  ;D

Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 08:46:58 PM
Now that's not very friendly Roo......and you were so polite earlier.

I believe that inter-personal disputes are moderated here?



Not at all Poddy.

Just adding what I know to be true  ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 08:51:39 PM
This ain't Ebay Bazza.....you play by this sites rules here.  The mods here also know what is what...and you don't get some guy in India trying to decipher the meaning of Aussie slang...or inuendo.

If I get a warning...no sweat off my nose....but at least I had my say.

It's a shame you don't have the wit to at least make some funny remarks that may diffuse the situation though.

Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 08:56:38 PM
Sorry, I must have missed 'the situation' Roo.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 08:58:41 PM
You seem to 'miss' a lot Bazza. ;D

Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 09:01:27 PM
This thread was originally intended to present the details of an actual case - so that they may be examined and assessed by those who find it of interest.

There are facts presented, with supporting evidence - that I have not published since the fundamental issues of privacy demand they not be publicly disclosed.

There are opinions of the seller involved have been presented, as have some opinions of my own and these should be fairly self-evident.


As for this post:
Yeah, ebay isn't for everybody. That seller Brum6y suffers more 'bad luck' than any other seller I've heard of. His bad luck has been going on for at least 5 years that I know of. Not good at taking offered advice that one. With all that 'bad luck', it's amazing that he's still in business......truly......amazing ;)
... I find it a brilliant example of assumption, misrepresentation and absolute ignorance of the seller involved, their principles, their business and its turnover.

Please, Bazza, post more of this inane baiting.  I could not do anything better in destroying your credibility if I tried.

.... and those that are seriously following this thread will see it for what it is.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Poddy on February 23, 2010, 09:09:04 PM
Oh yes Bazza, you value truth don't you? Or so it was said in a previous existence by another poster who is no longer with us, I wonder if we should put that to the test?

Yeah why not, simple yes/no answer please, and can we take avoiding the answer as an answer in the affirmative?

Challenging huh?

Bazza are you the person who was Riff Raff?

That should put paid to any future conjecture :)
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 09:13:57 PM
Silence is golden...Game..Set...Match! ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 09:16:13 PM
No assumption Brum6y. I know that seller somewhat better than your good self. I've heard the story before and many just like it.

I'm sorry my comments don't fit with the 'story' you think this guy deserves.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: cueperkins on February 23, 2010, 09:18:01 PM
Lol...take that ri...I mean Bazza..aren't you a friendly kind a chappy eh?...BOHICA..mate....now flock off or I will taunt you a second time....you son of a silly person....I fart in your direction....lol...
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 09:20:44 PM
Bazza are you the person who was Riff Raff?

No


But it suits me that you think I'm someone I'm not  ;D

Not very nice there Cupie.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Poddy on February 23, 2010, 09:27:55 PM
OK Bazza.
The fact is that I was not sure, so I asked straight out without beatin around the bush :)
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 09:27:59 PM
Crikey Cupie...you sounded just like a Paypal rep there..lol
 :lol:

But really...this whole saga is a snapshot of what many sellers...and some buyers... face each day on Ebay.

They stuff up...and leave the injured party holding the empty bag.

For some strange reason..they can't even tell the difference between an Aussie seller and a seller from a different Continent! Different rules apply to different sites.

Do they even give the staff any training?
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 09:41:33 PM
Bazza,

If I have presented anything here with errors in fact - I would ask you to contact me via PM and give details.

I would then seek to determine the accuracy with the resources I have available - including the evidence file I have accumulated.

Where it is shown that an error in fact has been presented, I will publish a correction.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: cueperkins on February 23, 2010, 09:47:33 PM
Thanks for the support there roo...I've learned to expect that...

Not very nice there Cupie

What goes around comes around bazza.....if you want to give shite, you can expect to get shite....know what I mean?

Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 09:52:54 PM
That's ok Poddy. Don't blame you for thinking that. Fact is I remember Riff Raff from threads ages ago and I have some similar views. Not popular views. I was a member here long before he left.

Cupie, I don't think I have given you shite?? I don't get that.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: cueperkins on February 23, 2010, 09:59:31 PM
No bazza...I'm not surprised you don't get that...it's all on me remember?.....just remember if you give it, you can expect to get it mate..it's the circle of life....lol..
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 10:09:26 PM
Brum6y, I'm not saying that what you've presented isn't true. I'm saying I've read it before many times over for at least the last 5 years. Not word for word but close. I'm also not saying he is not telling the truth. What I'm saying is, he continues to get caught out by similar scammers. He was offered advice and wouldn't take it. As I said before, eBay is not for everybody. He is a scammers dream and should not be using PayPal. I do know how he runs his business and can afford to take these temporary losses but as you know who he is, I won't discuss that.

E....?
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Roo on February 23, 2010, 10:35:58 PM
No assumption Brum6y. I know that seller somewhat better than your good self. I've heard the story before and many just like it.

I'm sorry my comments don't fit with the 'story' you think this guy deserves.

Sorry Bazza...but your assumption seemed to be that the seller was a shonk!  How on earth can you know the seller better than Brumby?  How can you make such an assumption?

The main problem seems to be that Paypal have totally neglected their duty of care in determining if the seller had posted the item and followed all their rules to be covered in a dispute.

They refunded the buyer without even checking if the seller had fulfilled everything that they required him to do, for a sale like this.

They even acknowledged their blunder....but still think they can just sweep it all under the carpet and say 'too bad...so sad'.

Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 10:43:04 PM
It is quite apparent, Bazza, that you do not appreciate the principles others are committed to as a part of who they are.

You are advocating that where an injustice is being perpetrated, the victim should just pack up and leave.

While I might not disagree on leaving eBay behind as a business decision, I hold this seller in high regard for standing his ground and having the persistence and resources to make eBay and Paypal accountable for the policies they publish as well as the fundamental expectations of a 'reasonable person' under the law.

Paypal clearly lie about investigating claims.  If they are not held accountable for their improper procedures, then they shall continue to abuse sellers unhindered.

In truth, I would simply like eBay and PayPal to follow the buyer and seller expectations they portray from their own marketing - but they clearly enjoy a distinct advantage ... the ability to ignore.

... and when someone isn't willing to be ignored, they still have a raft of alternatives they use to silence the problem.


The only way I can see any real progress being made is for a legal precedent to be set - however, Paypal would go out of their way to avoid that.

I believe it is the public interest to have a case taken to court, heard and a judgement handed down for the public record.

No settlements.
No 'gag' orders.
No hiding the truth.

I will concede one thing, though - it would devastate Paypal's bottom line.

Aside from the potential cost of litigation, there is the huge overhead involved in staffing the support areas properly, adequate staff training, a properly equipped and effective investigations unit and, amongst a whole lot of other things, a reserve fund to honour claims under both buyer and seller protection.

In short, to have them act as ethically as their marketing implies.  (Ouch!)


But, yeah, the easy answer is to walk away and let the other punters deal with that carp...

Let me guess .... that's the advice this seller hasn't taken ...?
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 10:48:22 PM
But such is not this seller's choice...

I'm really interested in how this story progresses ... it is so different to the average rubbish.



But that's principles for you.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 10:54:02 PM
Roo, I never said or indicated the seller was a shonk. I know only too well he isn't. What he is, is a fool to himself. A sucker for punishment.

But, yeah, the easy answer is to walk away and let the other punters deal with that carp...

Let me guess .... that's the advice this seller hasn't taken ...?


5 years Brum6y (that I know of) and nothing has changed. The same thing continues to happen to this guy.
Sure PayPal should be more accountable, I won't argue that. Yes, of course they should act ethically.  But please don't try and use the 'walk-away' guilt trip. It's called voting with your feet and there are a few here who have done just that.

Sometimes it just makes sense.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Poddy on February 23, 2010, 11:06:03 PM
What is needed is more sellers with the amount of integrity that this seller has and the intestinal fortitude NOT to walk away but to stand up and be counted as a defender of justice.

It happens all too often these days that people just walk away and put things in the 'too hard basket'.



Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 11:10:35 PM
Agreed Poddy but it won't happen. Sometimes integrity and bravado can be confused with an inability to make necessary change.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Poddy on February 23, 2010, 11:18:40 PM
Integrity in my opinion is an UNWILLINGNESS to compromise ones principals for the sake of detrimental change.

Do you see the difference Bazza?

I see the slant that you are trying to put on this issue and your viewpoint just does not hold water, much like a string bag  ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 11:23:05 PM

5 years Brum6y (that I know of) and nothing has changed

Oh, but there are things that have changed because of this seller.  Since you know him better than I, it would seem an easy matter for you to find out some of these.

As for things 'making sense' - it is fortunate that we are different, since those differences which include differing values, knowledge, resources, experience, etc. allow alternative perspectives on a subject.

The common perspective on abuse from Paypal is 'voting with your feet' - a simple business decision that most people are forced to endure, no matter how much against the grain it goes.

But here is someone who is different.


Is understanding someone who is acting on their principles so difficult?

It would seem so....
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 23, 2010, 11:36:42 PM
Our ability to adapt to change is all important in business. Stubborn people don't adapt well and suffer for it, generally repeatedly.

Goodnight  ;D
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 11:40:51 PM
So if you catch a burglar stealing from your neighbour's house - don't call the police, just tell them to 'adapt to it'.

Interesting point on which to depart.



Is understanding someone who is acting on their principles so difficult?

It would seem so....

Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 23, 2010, 11:57:08 PM
I was just thinking....

If I were Paypal, I'd be doing everything possible to make sure this guy's issues were properly investigated and arbitrated correctly.

It's obvious he is acting on principles and yet they continue to keep feeding him with case after case of improper handling.  They are just giving him more and more ammunition.


It will be an interesting day when the fan gets up to speed.......
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 24, 2010, 08:33:57 AM
Brum6y, your analogy has no bearing on my previous post. Apples/Oranges.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 24, 2010, 04:44:23 PM
Quite the contrary, Bazza - it is entirely relevant.

It is you who seem to be completely unable to appreciate that a person running a business could possibly operate on anything but the cold "business decision" approach.  

You seem determined to limit this seller's abilities and contain him within bounds that are obviously comfortable to you.  You have not given any credence to the possibility that this seller could step above this and be willing to endure the challenges involved in seeing 'the right thing being done'.

It might be construed as jealousy to be critical of such a person.  Someone who has the resources to enable the pursuit of such an arduous task.  Someone who has the strength of character to be undeterred.  Someone who has the principles to drive their efforts....

... but perhaps the most difficult for you to comprehend - is that someone would actually find it fulfilling to do so.

In my opinion, conducting business with no other focus than the bottom line is a hollow existence and PayPal would seem to be a textbook example.

So, if you want to limit this seller's capabilities - it will only happen within your thinking.  I am pretty confident he won't be obliging in adopting your outlook.


It is, therefore, no surprise that you only see apples and oranges but when I'm discussing fruit salad - you are going to miss out on a lot.

And so it is with my analogy...  It is far, far more relevant than I expected when I wrote it - and I have you to thank for the opportunity to explore it.


It is comforting to know the world is bigger than any one person's vision.  It allows this seller to champion a cause he believes in.  It allows me the privilege of enjoying fruit salad and (don't expect to limit the rest of the world on this) ...

... it allows you to pick the seeds out of your passionfruit.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 24, 2010, 06:19:39 PM
Brum6y, this seller has been telling the same story (albeit with different buyers) for a very long time. Nothing has changed in the story you have relayed here. How do you think I recognised the seller? Sticking to your guns does not make even the slightest bit of difference to the way that PayPal handle disputes of this nature.

You seem determined to limit this seller's abilities and contain him within bounds that are obviously comfortable to you.

Just how comfortable do you think this seller is with all the dramas he suffers through his ebay transactions? ...and there are a lot of dramas. .....and he doesn't mind letting people know.

I remember the same seller complaining about his postage DSR when he was offering free postage. His buyers didn't want to pay for postal insurance because they were covered by PayPal. It was explained to him at the time that free postage and an 'after purchase slug' for insurance wasn't a good idea. Did he listen? No, wasn't interested in the opinions of others, just wanted to tell everyone how he was being victimised.

Being pro-active and making prudent business decisions can be a far cry from sticking to principles.

So, if you want to limit this seller's capabilities - it will only happen within your thinking.

This seller is only limited by his inability to think outside the box.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 24, 2010, 07:24:55 PM
Sticking to your guns does not make even the slightest bit of difference to the way that PayPal handle disputes of this nature.

Really?

From what little I have access to, there are some differences, if you care to look.  They aren't global front page headline material, but if that's your measure, then it's easy to write his efforts off.

Quote

Just how comfortable do you think this seller is with all the dramas he suffers through his ebay transactions?


I never said he was comfortable in what he was undertaking - I said you were comfortable by boxing him up.

Quote

I remember the same seller complaining ... ... ... ...


Well, hello Nick.**  Let's keep to the subject of the thread ... if we can, OK?

I've never claimed this seller was a saint, but I am focussing on the specific issues that he is pursuing in regard to PayPal's improper handling of the matter at hand.

Nothing you have said has done anything but question the wisdom of these efforts - I have seen no compromise of the matter itself.  Indeed you, yourself, have conceded in this thread that I have not presented any material with errors in fact.

I get it - as I am sure do many others reading this - you aren't a fan of this seller.

However, that is no basis to call into question what he is doing - yet you fail to do this by any other means.  Next thing we know, you'll be citing a report made to the "fashion police" that would question his suitability to appear in court.

Let's keep some relevance. (Oops... sorry Nick**)


Quote

This seller is only limited by his inability to think outside the box.


Normally, I would consider that statement to be a fine example of self-awareness - but in this case that would be somewhat of a paradox...



** Why I refer to Bazza as "Nick" (http://www.ozroundtable.com/index.php?topic=1883.msg85643#msg85643) (latter part of the post)
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Bazza on February 24, 2010, 07:51:27 PM
I get it - as I am sure do many others reading this - you aren't a fan of this seller.

I'm not a 'fan' and I'm not an enemy, I do however have an opinion which was offered to this guy a long time ago. Now he is still telling the same story 4 or 5 years later.

How's that working for him?

I'm unsure what the purpose of this thread was Brum6y, if not to create discussion regarding the seller in question.

Or is it just to point out how stupid PayPal have been in their dealings with the guy? If so, I agree.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 28, 2010, 01:40:18 AM

Or is it just to point out how stupid PayPal have been in their dealings with the guy? If so, I agree.


Not just to point this out, but to give specifics.  The detail! ... which will clarify exactly what PayPal are doing wrong; offer further directions for aggrieved sellers to persue in having matters resolved - properly; specifying the actual procedures executed thus exposing underlying operating principles; demonstrating behaviour which is the absolute opposite of their marketing.....

.... with the view to change all that.

I make no pretence that this thread will be anything more than another voice added to the chorus - but as that group swells, more issues are revealed and the disenchantment is unified, there will come a time when PayPal will need to act.

And, for the record, I do not seek PayPal's demise in any way, shape or form - just that they act professionally, ethically and with an appreciation of real-life business practices and innovation.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 28, 2010, 02:02:06 AM
Since there was some additional input into this thread, I had contacted the seller several days ago and asked if he would read it and comment.

He replied some six hours or more before the post above
- but I was at a different computer to the one running my email, so I didn't pick it up until some time later.  I will admit to being slow in bringing his response to this thread, but real life has a way of determining one's priorities.

I hope to do this in the next day or so...
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 02, 2010, 03:13:19 AM
LET'S CLEAR THE SMOKE AND MIRRORS OUT OF THE WAY

It is interesting to note that there have been some efforts to detract from the story presented in this thread by directing attention upon the seller himself.

I would like to point out that discussions of this seller, his business or whether he chooses to follow advice handed out by others (or not) has little, if anything, to do with the topic of this thread.

In case some readers need reminding - It is an examination of the dispute process as handled by Paypal.

All that we need to know is that the seller involved in this story is one who has made every effort to abide by the requirements stipulated for operating within eBay and PayPal's scope.  Something which, I believe, has been made eminently clear here and remains unchallenged.

There is a simple way for each of us to understand what is relevant in this thread ... put yourself in the same position as this seller.  If any comment or criticism is directed your way and doesn't seem relevant, then, in all likelihood, it doesn't belong here.


Directions in discussions wander from innocent exploration of ideas to deliberately destructive efforts - with a range of motives I won't even begin to go into.  I have cited this before, but it is particularly relevant at this point ... start about half-way down this post (http://www.ozroundtable.com/index.php?topic=1883.msg85643#msg85643) at the point 'An illustration from the movie "Thank you for Smoking"'

So don't expect to score any points on the issues with PayPal by trying to convince anyone it's because of his choice of business models ... or ice-cream.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 02, 2010, 04:10:20 AM
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION - THE SELLER'S RESPONSE:

Nevertheless, some points were raised and I did invite our intrepid seller to comment ... so here is the email I received from him.

It is presented in its entirety, interspersed with some comment of my own...

 thanks for the email.    thread is great ... interesting fellow Bazza and from reading the thread and his comments i can see he seems to think he knows me well.     

We noticed.

 a few points on his comments, which he seems to make repeatedly.     

 business model:

 i have changed my business model 7 times in the last 5 years.    i have evolved my business significantly to ensure survival and would say that my business is successful and effectively what is enabling me to endure the content issues faced with PayPal. a look at my product range and store today would show him a completely different business to what i had 2 years ago, 1 year ago and 6 months ago.  

Sounds like a person in business looking for the best return on his time and effort in line with his market's demands.  Seems an appropriate and responsive approach, evidenced by his business achievements - but this comment doesn't seem to fit...
Our ability to adapt to change is all important in business. Stubborn people don't adapt well and suffer for it, generally repeatedly.
It would seem the only suffering being experienced here is because Paypal weren't doing the right thing.


 PayPal Payments:

 sell on eBay have no choice in payment method ... so comment regarding accepting PayPal is a mute point ... there is no choice.

 reversals, chargebacks and disputes - reasons:

2006 - Credit Card Fraud
2007 - Credit Card Fraud
2008 - INR / SNAD no seller protection and most from US and Italy.     
2009 - INR / SNAD seller protection but even with full online tracking found in favor of the buyer (highly probable without investigation at all)
2010 - INR / SNAD buyers using the system to win disputes based on PayPal's on lack of investigation  

Not only a growing trend, it would seem to be evolving as well.

 in each of the now close to 100 cases the buyers have won they have done so despite the best efforts made to follow the PayPal User Agreement.    but every time a dispute is awarded to a buyer it can be linked back to several factors.    first one and most glaring is the method of payment.    the INR's lost each and every payment was a credit card.    dispute found in the buyers favor because if they found in my favor the buyer could do a chargeback and that would cost PayPal so its easier to take the money from the seller.  

A simple business decision - understandable.  Unethical, immoral and unprofessional, but understandable.

 the method of dispute and loss is evolving with the business ... i.e. PayPal/eBay.    buyers are smarter and more equipped to take sellers to the cleaners than ever before.    they have the ability to abuse the feedback system to force refunds from sellers, they have the ability to open a dispute for a payment 10 mins after made and then threaten the seller, they can open a dispute and used forged documents without recourse, they can make claims based on fictious policy and win a dispute get the funds back and have PayPal tell the seller that its a matter between the buyer and seller and nothing to do with them.  

 PayPal should be accountable for their own errors, they should be required to offer sellers honest, unbiased and effective investigation that actually reviews the documentation and information supplied by the seller.  

 clearly the last two cases demonstrate that no matter what the seller does in respect to compliance with the PayPal User Agreement the company will always favor the buyer in the case of a credit card payment to protect itself against loss in the case of a chargeback or they will determine the best PR status of a dispute and award based on their own buyer protection policy platform ...  

 no seller should ever receive an email stating we have granted your appeal in this case and apologize for any inconvenience caused.    WHAT TO DO NEXT ... contact the buyer and request the funds refunded to them be returned to you ....  

Buyers are getting better at abusing the system.  PayPal are not discouraging it - they are, in fact, enabling it...

(Now... why is it I get the feeling this has been said before?  Because it HAS ...  ad nauseum, in fact!)

... and, even when forced to admit they acted in error, deny any and all financial responsibility (despite having caused it) and send the seller to take on the buyer directly. You might be lucky enough to get a 'sorry' over the phone.

I find that absolutely priceless.  (I reckon there's a legal precedent in there just begging to be set!)


 most importantly the system needs to either be one rule for all or each country has its own unit of highly trained and qualified specialists to deal with the complexities and demands of meeting the constant changes in fraud detection and protection for the sellers forced to accept the payment method.  

Here, we move away from focussing on this seller and back onto the topic of this discussion as it applies to ALL sellers.  He expresses a sentiment much the same as my own ... not for the demise of PayPal - just simply that they conscientiously perform "A Duty of Care".  It seems, however, this this is Paypal's "Mission Impossible".


Now where did I see that before........?
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Philip.Cohen on March 29, 2010, 11:59:23 PM
Brum6y,

Interesting case study. Sort of says it all about both these devious, unscrupulous, dysfunctional organizations. With respect to eBay transactions I would suspect that PayPal knows they are expected to “protect” eBay buyers: eBay being so desperate for same of late. Regardless of whether the goods sold are real or not, are delivered or not, the only thing that eBay is interested in is the highest possible FVF.

And, Poor old “Bazza”; are all you horrible people still picking on our resident eBay stooge (what ever happened to the Riff, or is Bazza his new alias?). After all, someone has to look after eBay’s interests on this forum because no one else will: gee, I wonder why that is so?

Then, maybe if eBay offered some of us the same remuneration we too might be tempted to abandon our principles and become eBay/PayPal lobbyists too. Then I doubt the remuneration can be that good because they never seem to find stooges that are capable of winning any meaningful debate.

I started skipping over Bazza’s nonsensical posts very early on in the thread, but I do admire your fortitude for continuing the pointless task of engaging with him.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 30, 2010, 01:59:43 AM
I have no particular dislike for any poster - even when views differ.  Philip, you and I have had a couple of strong interactions in the past, yet we still acknowledge each other's efforts.

Sometimes it is debate on those very views which causes us to examine our own propositions, explore a subject more deeply and discover new aspects of a subject or possibly where the difference in views has originated.  I found that very situation here in this thread when responding to a casual dismissal of an analogy I gave.

However, my intent is to maintain focus on the core issue - encapsulated in the thread title - and feel obliged to address any 'side issues' or attempts to de-rail the presentation of this story.

In fact, this has been of such prime importance to me that I have deliberately avoided augmenting this thread with further examples of this seller's nightmares with PayPal.

I have given one, plus some hints that others exist - but I will make it quite clear that this seller has a number of cases currently in hand and they continue to present themselves.  

This thread is not isolated case for this seller.  Nor is it an isolated case in the world of eBay & PayPal.

It is just one example of a pandemic - where the effort has been made to present as complete detail as possible.  It has substance.  It is credible.  It is real.  It has been presented so that it can be clearly understood as to the exact nature of the problems sellers can encounter, to encourage their efforts and advocate their action, to let the world know what is going on and ....

to let sellers know ... they are not alone.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on April 23, 2010, 06:00:40 PM
THE WHEELS GRIND SLOWLY - BUT ARE MOST CERTAINLY STILL IN MOTION

Again, understanding that this story is but one small part of this seller's business, I have made a couple of low-key approaches for updates on how this story is progressing - and I have just now received their email....

As expected, this seller's business keeps them quite involved in a myriad of things both large and small ... including trade shows:

sorry for the delay in response.    i have been at the Canton Fair for the last 10 days and have not had time to think.


Also, as expected - since the matter has been escalated into the legal system - progress has not been dramatic, but it continues ... slowly and surely:

the status of the issue with the German boy has not changed much since last i updated you, the item is still being held by German customs, PayPal still have the money and i am waiting a court date in HK for the charges against him that i filed to be heard.      once this has been before the courts i will be able to get a court order against Hong Kong Post to have the item returned to me and also forward the outcome to the german police for action there.
 
i have spoken with them again and advised i would fly to Frankfurt to press charges in person if required.


'Due process' is the term, I believe.  Maddening and frustrating for the most part, but it is something to respect and observe.

In my personal experience, it has been made abundantly clear that, before you take the next step in any process, you must make sure you've crossed all your 't's and dotted all your 'i's - and when the legal system is involved, triple check all your lower case 'j's as well!

This includes allowing every opportunity for the party against whom you have issue, to address your concerns and provide satisfaction - even PayPal - whether you expect them to, or not.  If you don't, you're going to look like the bad guy if a judge asks you if you gave them a chance to fix things and you said 'Errrr... Not really'.

Indeed, one of the most powerful arguments you could offer (from my lay understanding) is that you have given the other party multiple opportunities and have exhausted the possibilities for the matter to be resolved under their processes.  Doing so is not only prudent and expected by the legal system, it is also a potential gold mine in uncovering specific details of actions, policies, etc. that may prove invaluable in proving your case (and our seller has picked up some real gems!).

I'm sure we are all aware how the legal system loves the details....


Anyway, getting back to our seller's journey ... with matters edging slowly through the official channels, we now await news from the courts.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *CountessA* on April 23, 2010, 09:21:08 PM
Sometimes it can seem as though one is the Court Jester when waiting for legal due process to occur... slowly... over time...

.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on June 16, 2010, 04:26:23 AM
THE WHEELS ARE STILL TURNING

Painful, isn't it.

I checked the tracking information for the laptop, but it is no longer available through the online facility. Apparently it is only kept up there for 3 months.

When I asked our seller for an update, the response was simply:

thanks for the email.    still working on the case with the german boy but have had 5 more since last we spoke.


I know I said I wanted to focus on the laptop issue in this thread and I shall endeavour to continue to do so, but since the timeline is rather sparse of detail at the moment and it is topical, I will divert your attention to the two examples the seller provided in the remainder of the email. It can be found here: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care: When is an iPhone not an iPhone? (http://www.ozroundtable.com/index.php?topic=2573.0)

No prizes if you come up with the answer before I give it....!!
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on December 18, 2010, 10:50:11 PM
HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!   

IT'S NOW ONE YEAR AFTER THE SALE!! ... AND THE WHEELS ARE STILL TURNING

It feels like I'm repeating myself - but since the legal process is somewhat glacial in its progress at times, I am posting this update as an assurance that the matter is still grinding its way along....................................

I have been keeping in touch with the seller every now and then asking about any progress, but have refrained from posting too much incidental material, preferring to keep a focus on the main subject.

However, I thought it might be of some interest to present a few of the things which the seller has passed on to me.  In the following, I give an approximate time - and the seller's comments, as I have previously:

August, 2010
give me a couple of days as i will have an update on the German Boy ... he is holidaying in Portugal at the moment but dont worry, i am on his case and keeping him well within my target.

Whilst I did not get an update, I was not overly surprised nor worried - but it's nice to see the holiday business in Portugal doing OK.

October, 2010
still going there no further result as waiting for the police to finalize their investigation still

December, 2010
the German boy is still where it was at this stage

 - but then the seller continues....

though the website is getting plenty of hits and he is now number one on google when searching his name ...

Website?

Yes, it seems the seller has organised one of those 'shame the scammer' type websites and, as my test confirmed, Google does indeed return this website as the top of the search results, when you plug in the German buyer's name.

The website gives a lot of information - unmistakeably identifying the person, with photos and a whole lot more, so the matter is certainly in the conscious thoughts of a few people.


I strongly suspect this matter will continue into the New Year.  I will be maintaining an interest in its progress and presenting updates when provided.

In the mean time, I have one or two other things provided by this seller that I think would be of interest, which I will post in other Paypal's "Mission Impossible" threads, as time permits.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: HellWest'nCrooked on December 19, 2010, 06:43:55 AM

It is a long story Brumby but still an interesting one!
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 28, 2011, 04:19:36 PM
AMIDST UNCERTAIN PROGRESS - ANOTHER ADMISSION!!!

A few days ago I received an email from our intrepid seller and while the precise legal status of this matter is still hazy, it seems the idea of 'celebrating' (wrong word, I know) the anniversary of this story is one that the seller also embraced.

The seller's subsequent email to the buyer evoked a reply that begins with this admission:

"I was already convicted for sozialwork!"

The seller was not sure what this meant ... and I had no idea.

I approached someone who had, I believe, quite appropriate credentials to offer an opinion on this statement.  They were familiar with this story and provided the following response:

I suspect the buyer in question meant to say "Sozialwerk", which would mean he's been convicted for cheating on Welfare.

(I did a bit of checking, because the term for "Welfare" with which I was familiar was "Sozialarbeit"... and even though "Sozialwerk" does not appear in my German dictionary, it is definitely the way the term's being used currently in Germany.)

A convicted welfare cheat...?  I can't say I am surprised.

That interpretation certainly reads very well in the context given and the explanation indicates the translator has direct knowledge of current language usage.

However, they then added this observation:

Anyway, in a nutshell, this buyer seems to be pleading for special consideration since he's apparently already in trouble. But all he's done, really, is expose himself as an habitual cheat - a thief who, without remorse, takes money or items not belonging to him, somehow comforted by offical forms or online paraphernalia into thinking this distances him from actually committing a crime.

A miserable, sneaky, unapologetic thief.


There is not much more I can add to that.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 29, 2011, 12:55:15 AM
NEWS!

It has become clear there are two quite distinct issues at hand in this case.  The first is the criminal action on the part of the buyer to intentionally defraud. The second is the disposition of funds of which the seller had been deprived.

On the matter of the criminal complaint against the buyer, that is still bring followed through.  Our intrepid seller feels it is important that prosecution be pursued so that a message is sent to those who feel eBay sellers are 'fair game' for fraud.  We await progress on that subject.

HOWEVER, on the matter of the funds involved, there has been a resolution!

<typing up next post - please be patient>
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 29, 2011, 02:53:05 AM
SUCCESSFUL RESULT FOR SELLER!

Before I continue, you will no doubt not be surprised to hear that, as part of the settlement, the seller is bound by a confidentiality clause.  Now, while I have taken great care to (hopefully) keep the identity of the buyer and seller from being known, there are a number of people who are already familiar with the identity of the seller - since they are already aware of the story from other sources.

The other party involved here is PayPal - and they are very clearly identified.

As a result, anything I say here may be treading on thin ice, so I am going to try and be rather careful.  Part of this caution will involve me not quoting anything from the seller's communications with me as I have done in the past, as well as excluding specific details.


The Resolution occurred earlier this month and came out of the dispute process which involved the Seller, PayPal and the Australian Financial Ombudsman Service.  It would appear that PayPal has made payment to the seller for the sale amount plus the shipping cost of the item in question.  So, the seller is no longer out of pocket for the eBay transaction.

As for the effort in arriving at this result, they are philosophical and take their satisfaction from having achieved the desired outcome.

In regards to the total amount of funds PayPal have remitted to the seller, the seller has expressed some rather positive positive sentiments.  I must admit one particular statement quite surprised me, yet it quite clearly painted PayPal as being generous (Yes, I am serious).  This is even more notable when you consider the settlement involved a number of other items, with the total being an amount that I would regard as being quite significant.


It would seem the future for our seller should be a little less bumpy, since they have presented their credentials and business skills.  If I were PayPal, I would be assigning an account manager to make sure of it.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *FluffyDuckee* on March 29, 2011, 07:15:20 AM
Well I'm glad the seller got a resolution.  But, obviously not without time, effort and pain.. For that I am sorry. 
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Philip.Cohen on March 29, 2011, 08:51:43 AM
This seller is to be congratulated. What a shame so much effort had to be expended to reach this undoubted just conclusion. No doubt this seller will be "flagged" by both PreyPal and the eBafia and he may well even get his own personal account manager—one that is not simply a computer algorithm. Unfortunately all this does absolutely nothing for every other eBafia/PreyPal user. Life will go on as it has before for everyone else serving under the yokes of these two most unethical and unscrupulous, fraud-facilitating, commercial entities.


“Bank customers of participating financial institutions will have the option to select a Visa account as the destination for funds when making a personal payment. By simply entering the recipient’s 16-digit Visa account, email address or mobile phone number, consumers can send funds directly from their bank account to a recipient’s Visa account.”—Visa (16 March 2011)

Draft Media Release re PayPal

“It is with great sadness that eBay’s Chief Headless Turkey, John Donahoe, announces the probable demise of eBay’s most ugly daughter, PayPal. Donahoe says that PayPal is expected to be soon stricken by particularly virulent strains of Visa/Mastercard simplified “online” payments processing, and these afflictions will be greatly aggravated by PayPal’s lack of any direct financial institutions support and a great deal of PayPal merchant dissatisfaction, particularly with respect to PayPal’s grossly unfair, “all responsibility avoiding” user agreement, most primitive risk management processes, and grossly unprofessional, buyer-biased and fraud-facilitating (indeed, effectively non existent) transactions mediation—to name just a few of the problems that PayPal “merchant” payees have to endure.

“Donahoe says that after such affliction PayPal’s health may be expected to deteriorate rapidly and, if ultimately not completely incapacitated, will most likely be kept alive only with the aid of the “life support” provided by eBay’s mandating the use of PayPal on what little there will eventually be left of the Donahoe-devastated eBay Marketplaces. There is no cure for this condition and the “eBafia Don” is particularly saddened by the inevitable presumption that it is unlikely that PayPal will be able to continue to underpin the eBay Marketplaces’ deteriorating revenues too far into the future.”

Yes, it’s a send-up but, still, it accurately describes PayPal’s unregulated, most unprofessional, “clunky” operation. Had the developers of the original “bankcard” concept ever behaved the way PayPal behaves, towards its payees in particular, credit/debit cards would never have gotten off the ground, and we would still be paying for all our purchases with bits of paper and little metal discs.

PayPal is not a “bank” and is not prudentially regulated as are the banks. PayPal has been forced down the throats of eBay merchants—much to the distaste of most of them. Without eBay’s mandating the use of PayPal it would still be little known (and conversely, without PayPal, the eBay Marketplace would be going down the toilet at an even faster rate than it presently is) and, regardless, PayPal is the most despised, unprofessional, unscrupulous, wire fraud-facilitating payments processor on the planet.

No thinking person should ever allow PayPal to draw funds directly from a bank account. PayPal should only be given access to funds via a retail bank-branded Visa/Mastercard credit card account: that is the only way to get any protection from PayPal’s fraud-facilitating practices and to get any effective transaction mediation—and then not from PayPal but from your retail bank via their real credit card transaction-mediation process.

All the payments processors that do not have the direct underlying risk-managing and real transaction-mediation support of the retail financial institutions (the “banks”) that are ultimately involved at either end of each transaction—as does have the likes of Visa/Mastercard—suffer all the same material handicaps that PayPal suffers. The “banks” may be disliked by some but they at least supply a “professional” payments processing service.

Undoubtedly, if and when the retail banks decide they want to take the final step (and probably the greater risk and extra work involved) and offer a simpler, “online” payments process, similar to that which PayPal offers, to the many amateur merchants who may otherwise not want (nor qualify for) a bank credit card “merchant” account, and the banks offer that service in their usual professional manner via the likes of Visa/Mastercard, the clunky PayPal will very quickly disappear into the history books—there is nothing surer than the sun will rise in the morning.

Enron / eBay / PayPal / Donahoe: Dead Men Walking.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *CountessA* on March 29, 2011, 12:13:06 PM
Brumby, your seller is to be congratulated for his tenacity. From what you've said, he's had to fight tooth, nail, claw, Uzi, frying pan, cannon and WMD to get justice in the form of his money returned to him.

Philip has pointed out that this represents a victory for this one seller rather than changing PayPal's practices. That is true. Sadly but inevitably it is true.

When a seller fights to get his/her money returned in a case of fraud such as this, it is always a one-off.

Brumby, do I understand correctly? The seller considers PayPal to be GENEROUS because PayPal was forced by the Financial Ombudsman to give him his funds? (I must have read this incorrectly. My head is spinning.)

I further understand that the seller is still not content with allowing the perpetrator, the lying cheating little weasel of a greasy-fingered buyer, to get away with his fraud, and that he is pursuing criminal charges - is that correct?

(If so, I applaud the seller wholeheartedly.)
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 29, 2011, 02:02:02 PM
While the process of resolution was obviously facilitated with the involvement of the Financial Ombudsman Services, there has not been any direct statement that PayPayl were forced, as such, to make the payout.  From what I understand of the process, the Ombudsman will hear the case presented by both sides and give multiple opportunities for a settlement to be negotiated along the way - before it flexes its muscle with legal orders.

The impression I got is that PayPal took one of those opportunities and made an offer that would simply end the matter... and that the seller saw the figure presented as one that would do just that.  Again, I am only presuming, but it would seem that, as an experienced business person, this seller might have been philosophical if something a little less was offered and accepted it as a reasonable compromise.  As such, this seasoned seller may use the word 'generous' where many other sellers might simply say 'I expected nothing less'.  JMHO

If it was a case of PayPal 'seeing the writing on the wall' rather than a formal order, then many will consider this a mere 'technicality' when it comes to the idea of PayPal being 'forced' to pay up... but it these technicalities that can give rise to significant problems including lawsuits for defamation.  I am no legal expert, but it would seem rather dangerous to try and defend a defamation lawsuit by attempting to prove that 'seeing the writing on the wall' is being 'forced' in the eyes of the law.  A formal order to 'pay up' is something quite different, but I the information I have indicates that no such order was issued.


Personally, I am not overly surprised in the settlement, since the dispute was based on amounts processed through the payment service (PayPal) and did not have anything directly to do with the goods themselves, other than as evidence, so cost price of goods, compensation of 'loss', etc. were irrelevant - just the payment amounts denied to the seller.


I am the first to admit that this - and any other - victory is a 'one-off' case-by-case exercise.  From my observations, precedent has little place, it would seem, in PayPal's dispute resolution process.

There is also a critical component in this seller's success which has not been concisely spelled out here which includes meticulous record-keeping and respect for due process.  These things (and more) have been raised elsewhere, but I shall endeavour to present a summary here a little bit later.

The purpose of this thread was to present one such case and provide as much detail as practicable so that others may know what actually happens, the frustrations, the effort and the persistence required to achieve success... and that time is measured by the calender, not the clock.


Forewarned and forearmed, it is hoped sellers will be encouraged to pursue matters, when these situations present themselves.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 29, 2011, 02:23:09 PM

I further understand that the seller is still not content with allowing the perpetrator, the lying cheating little weasel of a greasy-fingered buyer, to get away with his fraud, and that he is pursuing criminal charges - is that correct?


Yes.  The seller has made it quite clear that such actions are not to be dismissed simply because their funds have been returned.

I believe this is a matter of principle for the seller involved - as well as being a part of saving another seller from being ripped off by the buyer.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on March 29, 2011, 02:28:37 PM
Just one further point - there is no indication that PayPal have actually recovered the funds from the buyer and that the settlement paid to the seller is more than likely sourced from PayPal's own funds.  I have no idea whether PayPal will pursue the buyer for their loss or write it off as being uneconomical.

My thoughts: On one hand, it would seem responsible to do so, since it would reduce the incidence of fraud by the buying public becoming aware of such action .... but, on the other hand, such news might be seen as a discouragement for buying activity which would impact the bottom line.



Hmmm... feels like this line of thought is entering into familiar territory..........
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: Philip.Cohen on June 08, 2011, 04:54:53 PM
If you want to understand how PayPal can tell a seller that the buyer has paid for the goods and a couple of days later (after the seller has promptly dispatched the goods) then tell the seller that the buyer has not paid, see the exchange of comments between “pbreit” and myself on the “Letters to the Editor” thread at:
http://letters.auctionbytes.com/cgi-bin/blog/blog.pl?/comments/2011/6/1306675412.html/3/26#1307495542

Apparently, if eBay is authorised to access funds from a buyer’s banking account (~30% of their transactions), they do that by direct debiting the buyer’s banking account (via their banker, GE Money Bank, Ugh!). This is by far the most cost-effective way of accessing buyers’ funds and so PreyPal would always prefer a banking account to be their first port of call.

Apparently, at the same time that they instigate that direct debit they also tell the seller that the buyer has paid, but, at that point in time, PreyPal has no way of knowing if there is sufficient funds in the buyer’s bank account to honor the direct debit and, if there is insufficient funds, a day or two later the direct debit will be reversed by the buyer’s bank. Obviously, if there is a backup source of funds PreyPal will then try that source; if there is still no funds …

Unlike with credit/debit card transactions, with direct debit transactions there is no immediate confirmation that funds are or are not available. And, unfortunately, a seller has no way of knowing how PreyPal is accessing a buyer’s funds and therefore has no way of knowing if indeed the buyer has the funds available to pay when PreyPal initially tells the seller that the buyer has paid. It is therefore not wise to dispatch anything of value within two days of PreyPal’s advice that the buyer has paid lest you receive another advice that the buyer has indeed not paid.

In such circumstances, if indeed there is insufficient funds, then the clunky PreyPal does not want to be out of pocket so they simply reverse their payment to the seller and the seller then loses both the goods and the money. Thereafter its up to the seller to put a great deal of effort into pursuing the clunky PreyPal for compensation for his loss which has been caused wholly by PreyPal’s negligence.

What a totally clunky, irresponsible, unprofessional, potentially fraud facilitating operation. No wonder PreyPal has such difficulty managing its financial risk.

Enron / eBay / PayPal / Donahoe: Dead Men Walking.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on February 19, 2012, 09:41:38 PM
CALLING TO ACCOUNT - THE LEGAL PURSUIT CONTINUES

As has been mentioned previously, our intrepid seller has held true to their principles not only in the conduct of their business, but all through the process of recovering their funds from PayPal - and it also continues with calling to account the person who initiated the fraud - the boy in Germany.

I have contacted the seller a couple of times since my last post and they have responded with a report similar to the one I received today:

thanks for the email.    german boy saga continues with lawyers and police.    made more difficult because i am out of country but working on it.

While some may question the ongoing effort - even after having recouped the financial loss - I find it somewhat commendable, for one simple reason.  The growing world of eCommerce requires a stronger sense of accountability from buyers and sellers as well as service providers such as payments and logistics.  Commensurate with this will be an appropriately developed legal framework, with the infrastructure to ensure enforcement.  This will not happen unless noises are made in pushing the available facilities to their limits and demonstrating their inadequacy.

Should our seller's efforts result in a successful prosecution, publication of that outcome would be a sight I long to see.  It sends a signal that, even with our current, limited measures, the perceived anonymity and sense of being 'untouchable' through remoteness will not save you from fraud.


On the subject of an account manager, here is part of what our seller has to say:

the account manager has made a significant difference to the manner in which the account is handled.    a lot less issues and when there are issues easily resolved.

So it would seem the efforts in discipline and persistence that our seller made from the outset have paid a dividend in a much reduced impact on business.  It would seem rather obvious to say, but they wouldn't have that benefit by simply taking the 'easy way out' as has been urged by some.


Further updates will be made, when information comes to hand.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *CountessA* on February 20, 2012, 09:33:24 AM
Brumby, if the seller needs any help at all in communicating with authorities in Germany, please let him/her know I'm happy to be of assistance.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *smee* on February 20, 2012, 11:51:30 AM
Dont mention the war
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *CountessA* on February 20, 2012, 05:11:42 PM
Ich werde an das Kriegsministerium berufen, wenn ich es will! Ja, lasst uns über den Krieg reden!

Achtung! Achtung!
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *smee* on February 20, 2012, 05:18:53 PM
Ja vol Herr kommandant
 
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *Brum6y* on January 25, 2013, 08:40:23 PM
CALLING TO ACCOUNT - THE LEGAL PURSUIT SHIFTS INTO TOP GEAR!

It has been some time since the last update, but that has not been because the matter has been abandoned and thrown into the 'too hard' basket.

Quite the contrary.

The legal path can be a challenging one - especially when international borders are involved - yet it is not an impossible one to traverse.  Our determined Seller stated that they would be prepared to travel to Germany, if necessary, to pursue the matter.  While some may question the value in doing so, in the current state of international law enforcement on such matters, it would not seem unreasonable.

Well, true to their word, our intrepid Seller recently made that journey.

There, a police report was filed for the theft of the computer.

From the seller's email:

the police advised me not to make contact with him as it could be deemed harassment and harm any case they bring against him.

based on the evidence they were preparing an arrest warrant and will arrest him and charge him with theft, use of a carriage of service to defraud and providing a false statement in respect to the police report.


One word there is key: 'evidence'.  This will be the details, records, etc., etc. that were thoroughly and painstakingly kept from the outset.  Those pieces of paper and other records to which many people do not pay much heed and let disappear or fall into disarray.  It is at times like these that the nitpicking pain-in-the-neck process of record keeping pays off big time.

For all who care to pursue any similar course of action, the lesson is clear.  Keep track of anything and everything you possibly can.  Such a regimen has clearly paid off in this case.



Are you interested in what comes next....?

I certainly am.
Title: Re: Paypal's "Mission Impossible" - A Duty of Care
Post by: *CountessA* on January 25, 2013, 08:44:56 PM
This has been a long time coming... but it seems that at last the seller's tenacity will pay off.

I do not like cheating thieves ripping off honest individuals. It's one thing if someone steals out of desperation (e.g., stealing food when starving)... It's another to do it cold-bloodedly, without remorse, with glee even... just for the heck of it.