Then the CC company relates that info to PP -- MY POINT is: from now on, PP will be lieing about the REAL REASON for the c-back & tell EVERY SELLER every time that the reason was:
posted on December 18, 2003 09:15:20 AM new
For 3 years I've been coming here, waving my PayPal Pom-Poms, blathering about the fact that all one had to do was read PP's rules and...
FOLLOW THE RULES
And one would be protected from dis-honest c-backs, because PP had the SELLERS PROTECTION POLICY!
I'm now saying that PP has drastically changed that policy, essentially rendering it totally 100% worthless!
After my present set of auctions end, me & Ralphie have a whole lot of thinking to do...
posted on December 18, 2003 09:25:33 AM new
tom,
are you saying your transaction is 0.00??
or your loss is 0.00
please elaborate.
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on December 18, 2003 09:31:23 AM new
I have never lost a penny to a chargeback or reversal -- AND I AIM TO KEEP IT THAT WAY!
BTW: what does the fact of the CC company deciding who wins a chargeback have to do with the price of aardvark eggs in Elbonia anyway??
That concept is neither here nor there!
The whole concept of the PayPal SPP was to protect sellers from chargebacks -- PP promised to EAT THEM ALL if the seller FOLLOWED THE RULES!!!!!!!
EXAMPLE: Buyer EB COOPER files a c-back with his CC company for NON-DELIVERY...THEN...the CC company finds IN HIS FAVOR & charges PayPal for the c-back + fees...THEN...PayPal checks to see if you the seller followed the rules:
IF YES YOU DID FOLLOW THE RULES, THEN PP PROMISED TO EAT THE CHARGEBACK!
posted on December 18, 2003 09:39:55 AM new
"The whole concept of the PayPal SPP was to protect sellers from chargebacks -- PP promised to EAT THEM ALL if the seller FOLLOWED THE RULES!!!!!!!"
No, PP did not promise to eat them ALL - they provided a seller protection plan that applied to only certain kinds of chargeback situations, and offered protection against only THOSE kinds of chargebacks if the seller followed the guidelines.
SPP has never applied in quality of merchandise disputes..
posted on December 18, 2003 09:49:47 AM new
cc5 wrote: After almost 4000 book transactions they had a chargeback?
That is a very small percent. Why the hostility?
I offer 100% refund no matter what so the PP agreement has nothing to do with me. And, guess what? I only had one request in 4 years and thousands of transactions. And, that one request was justified. A book had a missing page (or so the buyer said). did I ask him to mail it back? No. Did the $18 refund affect my financial well being? NO. And neither did I let the specualtion of whether he was cheating me or not affect my mental well being.
Come on folks. Unless you are selling items that go for over $100 it really doesn't matter in the overall scheme of things. Definitely not worth the anguish people spend wringing their hands over it. All that energy could have been spent making more listings and making another $100+.
I have sold to every type in america from lps that attract very strange people to postcards that attract the nicest of the bunch.
S##t happens. Always has and always will. How you handle it is the key to happiness and prosperity!
Edited to add: Don't they make the buyer return the item before the charge back? If so you really haven't lost anything.
posted on December 18, 2003 10:06:10 AM new
Linda:
If I can see the loophole in PP's SPP, don't ya think the crooks can see that same loophole?
My conclusions are:
1) The SPP is dead
2) PP is swayed by the feeBay Shrillpoint culture of: "screw the seller!"
3) One must depend on law-enforcement agencies for protection from pretzel-chokers!
I'm thinking about shipping all USPS items with SIGNATURE CONFIRMATION...
posted on December 18, 2003 10:36:59 AM new
what does it have to do with stuffing envelopes at home and make a few thousand dollars??
what does it have to do with using flour tortilla as eggroll skin or pancake for moo shiu pork??
what does it have to do with tea in india or china or rwanda??
tom,
we have heard enough of your gripes,your fairy godmother turns out to be a jerk,so close your account with paypal and accept money order only.
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on December 18, 2003 10:44:36 AM new
Just a comment in defense of the so-called crooks.
I came home yesterday to find 4 packages sitting at my door. All from Ebayers and all had delivery confirmation. Which means, yes, the postman checked them in, but were they delivered? Fortunately, yes. But what about people who don't live in an upstairs apartment or in a safe neighborhood. No one could see these packages unless they actually walked up the stairs to my door.
I have had my license plate stollen, my car broken into, etc. in the "safe" area I live in so do you think these would have been sitting here had they been left at a downstairs apartment.
What good is dc if the postman can drop them at your door and run?
posted on December 18, 2003 10:58:23 AM new
what good is dc if the postman can drop them at your door and run??
rent a mail box .
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on December 18, 2003 11:11:14 AM new
stop: I didn't mean for me...I meant for the people who claim they never receive their packages and then the wonderful sellers get upset and call them crooks!
They could have been stolen. They should not have been left at my door. Had the seller insured rather than dc they would not have been left! Plain and simple. I have always said dc was a ripoff. Doesn't gaurantee delivery! And, if not delivered (to me personally...in my hands) I will file a chargeback with my cc and I will get it.
So, are you saying every single bidder on Ebay should have a PO box? Come on! Get real.
Just merely stating a fact for all you people who think dc covers you when it doesn't do anything!
posted on December 18, 2003 11:14:24 AM new
As far my customers, I offer 100% guarantee and have had to refund 2 that stated item was never received. OK, I lost $18 in refunds. I have saved over $1600 in not using dc!
You figure which is better protection.
No matter what some people say, the majority of bidders are not crooks. And, the entire point of my ramblings has been: If you would just refund and move on you would be happier and would make more money in the long run.
posted on December 18, 2003 11:24:58 AM new
We're getting into a whole other discussion here that has nothing to do with PP. This has to do with what is the seller's responsibility? We're going to get different opinions. I think that on small items, if the seller can prove that it was delivered, that's where the responsibility ends. On more expensive items, the seller has to decide how much risk to take because the decision can go either way. It makes sense that on items of $250 and up, you should get signature confirmation.
I once ordered a $1300 camera. The mailman delivered it to another house with the same number on a different block. The person was nice enough to call me (of course we get each other's mail constantly even though the street names are not even close). It had been sent at my request with signature confirmation and insurance. Now had that seller been dumb enough not to take those services (some sellers charge an "insurance fee" and then claim they are self-insured) and had that package disappeared, I suspect I would have charged it back and won. But should a seller be forced to do this for cheap items? Signature confirmation adds 1.30 to 1.80. Insurance adds another 1.10. And since paypal only gives you 7 days to get proof of signature delivery and it takes weeks to get it, you have to request proof for every package you send just in case someone makes a complaint. The PO charges about $7 for proof. So to be fully covered with PP (against claims of non delivery only) you have to add about $9 per package.
The purpose of DC is for the seller to prove that the item was shipped and received. It works fine for most packages. It is the buyer's responsibility to deal with the safety of the delivery destination. If the mailman routinely leaves packages in an accessible area, the buyer should consider this when buying online. The seller should not be held responsible for the buyer's poor security.
While I agree that most buyers are honest (I have never received a bad check in hundreds), the few who aren't are not satisfied with a $10 ripoff. And once they discover the joys of PP, there's no stopping them. There have been numerous stories about ebay sellers getting together and discovering that the same crook ripped off dozens of people. Makes you wonder why PP didn't stop them after the first, second, third time. It gives new meaning to "always free." The damage they do can really hurt. I can usually spot the frauds on my website immediately. They are the ones who place credit card orders for 10 digital camcorders.
posted on December 18, 2003 11:32:16 AM newyisgood: you said it better than I could!
The reason I'm considering S-Confirmation is not for PP's benefit (as I'm now convinced that their new policy is to declare ALL chargebacks, whether true or NOT, to be NOT-AS-DESCRIBED issues), but for LAW ENFORCEMENT purposes.
Since I use the USPS, it seems that signature would be pretty powerful proof for the POSTAL INSPECTORS??
posted on December 18, 2003 11:33:21 AM new
lindajean,
the trend these days is to pay as little as possible,45-55 cents is cheaper than 1.30-2.20 for insurance.
what does dc buy ??nothing in my opinion.
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on December 18, 2003 02:25:37 PM new
This is scaring the heck out of me. I'm seriously considering switching to Bidpay for online payments. If I reduce the total due by the Bidpay fee, then Bidpay would be free for the customer and there's no reason why they shouldn't use it.
It might be a good time to short sell Paypal's stock.
posted on December 18, 2003 02:28:12 PM new
bidpay max amount is 700 dollars or around that.
paypal you can go to thousands.
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on December 18, 2003 02:42:08 PM new
Just read everyones comments, interesting. My humble opinon is that Paypal is ripping sellers off with the charge backs. I was charged back for a sale made three months ago! The customer said that the item was never delivered. I provided Paypal, the same day they asked for it, with the confirmnation number(it was shipped the day after payment was made and delivered three days later), a copy of an email that the customer sent me stating that item was delivered and that he was happy with it (he never did leave feedback, I left positive feedback when I got paid). The address was a confirmed address from a verified user. I thought I had all the bases covered. Wrong! Paypal took back the money even thou I followed all the rules and proved that the item was delivered! Sorry but PPBP is a joke, a sham, and a lie. I have brought my account with paypal down to zero and withdraw monies each time a customer pay via them. I figure it this way, Paypal can't take money from me that ain't there. If I get charged back again, I'm dropping paypal all togeather.
posted on December 18, 2003 10:57:25 PM new
I've never had a bit of a problem with Paypal and a chargeback is the least of my worries. The main reason they don't worry me is because I never signed up with them and I have no intentions of ever using their service until they become subject to oversight by a government agency that will lay down a set of rules that protects all parties involved. I find it incredible that a company that deals in that much money and has access to that many bank accounts and credit card accounts is allowed by the State of California to operate on the honor system without having to answer to any regulatory agency. It reminds me of some of the Afghan warlords and their relationship with the government in Kabul. I've been Accepting Bidpay for over two years and have never had a bit of trouble with them. Even though the customer pays the fees, there is nothing to keep me from splitting the fees with the customer or paying them myself if the sale is one that would warrent that consideration. If the amount exceeds the $700.00 Bidpay limit, I would prefer a cashier's check anyway. They just recently changed their name to Western Union Auction Payments. I suspect we'll see some serious movement soon to court Paypal users in the auction payment market.
The light at the end of the tunnel will turn out to be an oncoming train.
posted on December 19, 2003 10:55:05 PM newNever has been, never will be. You expect PayPal to guarantee your buyer will be happy with their merchandise? Do you expect PayPal to tell VISA that they won't honor any quality of merchandise claims?
uaru,
The biggest problem with that statement is the credit card companies will also make you prove that the merchandise was actually returned, or at least attempted to be returned in order to get a chargeback. In PayPal's case, they just charge it back.
I say, lets promote Yahoo Paydirect. It is cheaper and just as reliable and easy to use. I get two - three payments there a month which doesn't seem like a lot, but to consider it was only 1 payment roughly ever other month a year ago. It will grow if more of us sellers promote it.
posted on December 20, 2003 06:09:11 AM new
yahoo paydirect is worse,yahoo customer service is terrible,just ask the yahoo shopowners.
if you get a chargeback,yahoo paydirect will just take the fund out of your account.
same with amzn one click,same with aol direct.
if you have your own merchant account,you will be notified to present your case,but there is no guarantee that you will win.
to look at this chargeback problem from a broader prospective,there will always be risk and losses,we just have to make enough to absorb some losses and sadly these days,the margin is just razor thin.
dont feel bad about marking up your shipping and handling charge,your customers are not paying state and city sales tax.
next time when you get a car repair bill,just think of what i just told you.
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on December 20, 2003 06:25:54 AM newSW: everything you say is CORRECT, but...so what?
Tis not germaine -- the discussion revolves around the question as to whether or not PP's SPP has any value for us sellers what-so-ever!
A few days ago, I would have argued that the SPP was POWERFUL PROTECTION for us!
Now, after reading the NEW (but NOT improved) SPP TOS, I've concluded that PayPal's SPP is a shameful & cynical sham -- an insult to the intelligence of all honest eBay sellers!
REGARDLESS...
Please folks: READ PayPal's TOS -- everything is laid out there in B&W, and it is...
