Thread: Paypal

I've heard quite a few worrying stories concerning sellers on eBay and associated problems with paypal.

I see the Paypal company has its registered office in Luxemburg so I assume this would mean if it came to trying to issue a claim in the county court this may complicate matters.

Say I sell something and they buyer pays through Paypal, I then withdraw the money into my current account. I now have the money. I understand Paypal can request money back from me some weeks after the initial transaction if the buyer makes a dispute; i.e goods not as described.

I imagine Paypal would debit the money from my current account using the direct debit I have set up.

If the item I sold was 'as described' in my opinion, could I not tell the bank to reverse any direct debit under the direct debit guarantee?


The onus would then be on Paypal to initiate legal proceedings against me in the UK, which I could submit a defence for.

Is this a valid action plan for a honest grievence?

Do you have a particular issue that you're going through, or is this hypothetical?

Hi

I don't have a particular issue, I've had good experiences to date touch wood.
So this is hypothetical.

Hope this post is allowed.

Originally Posted by funkyparott

Hope this post is allowed.

Of course - just the answer would be different if you had a particular issue...

There is remit to issue proceedings in a county court for a company that is outside of the jurisdiction of that Court within Civil Procedure Rules.

As an example, RBS are based in Edinburgh, but claims can be issued against them in England with the Courts permission providing the criteria within CPR is met.

I don't believe this would extend to paypal in Lux, though.

Well, I've removed my debit card details from my paypal account, so only my direct debit exists now.

Reading several posts, it does appear the paypal terms and conditions are stacked up in weight of the buyer.

You can cancel the DD with your Bank and that will unlink your Bank Account from your PP account

Hi

My thinking is that because the guarntee the banks offer with direct debit, even if I found myself in what I considered an 'unjust' situation where paypal found in a buyers favour and took the money from my bank by direct debit - I could easily get the payment reversed through my bank.

This would place the onus on Paypal to take legal action against me which I could then defend in my local county court.

I as under the impression that debit / credit cards given as a contionous authority were a lot harder to cancel / retract.

I'm not looking to cause trouble, I just want to make sure my interests are best looked after.

I don't think they do reclaim the amount from your Bank - they "minus" it from your PP account, meaning you can't use it until the account has been funded with that amount.

I'm not sure what happens if you don't do that, though.

You could ask your Bank to cancel your Debit/Credit Cards, if you think the details could be abused without your authorisation

The trouble is - you either work within the scheme or you do not. If you sell an item, you are imlicitly agreeing for them to be the arbiter of the dispute, therefore it could be construed as bad faith to pursue your funds processor to get funds back (reasons being irrelevant). The secret would be not to permit a PP purchase or become your on CC merchant and you decide if/when to refund.

Having used their services as botrh a buyer and a seller, I have never had a reversal (lucky?) but instigated 5, four of which the sellers shouted blue murder, and the 5th agreed he'd not sent the goods and had a variety of reasons for doing so. So, it would appear that for any transaction to work, you need integrity on both sides, as it becomes a minefield if there isn't.

In a case that happened to me last year, I paid a seller £9.50 for 'secure next day delivery' of a mobile phone. It never arrived, and it transpired he had sent it by 1st Class Recorded, which has a compensation limit of £33. He was adamant as he had a stamped tracking number, his onligation to me ended. My contention was I needed to recieve the goods, and I got nothing. PP found in my favour, and the funds were reversed, but I only got 95% as their fees had taken the rest, but I was as 'happy' as I could be.

Now, what if YOU were the seller?

I stopped short of saying that if he charged me £9.50 for postaage, then sent it for £2.40 (or whatever) then I was hardly likely to be sympathetic as he was already ripping me off on the postage.

Originally Posted by buzby

The trouble is - you either work within the scheme or you do not. If you sell an item, you are imlicitly agreeing for them to be the arbiter of the dispute, therefore it could be construed as bad faith to pursue your funds processor to get funds back (reasons being irrelevant).

Can they 'disclaim' your right to seek redress through the courts just because of what paypal write in their terms and conditions?

A lot of the dilemas I have read appear very unfair to sellers in some cases. (for example in one case, a seller is sent an empty packet by recorded delivery. Paypal washed their hands of this saying the buyer had complied with their requirements for a payment reversal).

I can imagine in such situations, I'd prefer a judge to make their own mind up 'on the balance of probabilities' rather than a Paypal member of staff.

No issue of 'disclaim' - you have every right to pursue them as you think fit - much in the same way a theif employed by Royal Mail lifted tickets worth £200 for an envelope and put the remainder into a 'found in the mail' bag. I lost, because the pulled out an Act of Parliament that said under the Postal Services Act 2000, they were specifically excluded from liability, and the judge was forced to agree.

In your paypal issue, it would all hinge on whether a judge agreed to uphold their T&C's as something you willingly agreed to, and lost your claim (and the additional costs of bringing the action) because the agreement WAS legally binging.

It's Russian Roulette out there!

Two points: Why should the BUYER have to pay when they never recieved the goods you sent? The responsibility to get the item remains with the seller - it doesn't matter what they paid for, your shipping charge needs to reflect the cost of claiming for loss, it is for YOUR protection, not theirs so you need to budget accordingly when listing the item. This isn't rocket science, it is explained in many places on the site.

Sellers often attempt to say in listings that they are not responsible, but as this is contrary to the actual rules, it can be safely ignored.

I sold some Amazon vouchers on ebay and was paid via paypal, the vouchers were electronic so once they were paid for I just emailed the code to the buyers.
However one of the buyers was a [problem]mer and used chargeback to reclaim the cost, I sent paypal screenshots of the email I sent with the code and of his ebay rating showing that he had done this to lots of people.

His card company found in his favour and as I had already been paid and my paypal balance was zero paypal asked me for the £50 back. I refused and have just received a letter from a debt recovery agency called intum justitia for the £50, do I have to pay this?

There's always a risk when accepting paypal for transactions of 'virtual' goods. You'll need to refer to PayPal's T&C's which you agreed to aide y - and as they are in the position to refund the (dishonest) buyer, you are left to make restitution to PayPal.

Whether you wish to pay PayPal back, only you can decide - I'm not aware of any sanctions they can impose against you (other than stopping you using their service again) as for small amounts, formal court action is unlikely.

Originally Posted by GaL21

I sold some Amazon vouchers on ebay and was paid via paypal, the vouchers were electronic so once they were paid for I just emailed the code to the buyers.
However one of the buyers was a [problem]mer and used chargeback to reclaim the cost, I sent paypal screenshots of the email I sent with the code and of his ebay rating showing that he had done this to lots of people.

His card company found in his favour and as I had already been paid and my paypal balance was zero paypal asked me for the £50 back. I refused and have just received a letter from a debt recovery agency called intum justitia for the £50, do I have to pay this?

Intrum Justitia are toothless lol Formal court action is not only unlikely - it is well beyond the ability of these idiots. My advice, if you have done nothing wrong then why should you pay. I managed to get shot of Intrum Justitia for my girlfriend (in a similar position). Only took two letters - with a bit of knowledge you can tangle them up like you wouldn't believe. Disregard any threats they make, it's all hot air and meaningless. Also, don't fall for the old we'll send someone round to see you - more nonsense. Firstly, such action would cost a dam lot more than the amount they are trying to recover; secondly - they have no legal right to visit you (only an implied right under common law - like the posty or milk man).

If you want the letters I used for my gf let me know and you can have them to use yourself. I found them to be very effective.

All the best,

TFT

Just had them on the phone, explained why I wasn't paying and the guy just said "O.K. I'll put that on your file".

Can I tell them not to call me if they do again?

TFT, can you PM me the letters?

Thanks

Originally Posted by the_freedom_trail

Intrum Justitia are toothless lol Formal court action is not only unlikely - it is well beyond the ability of these idiots. My advice, if you have done nothing wrong then why should you pay. I managed to get shot of Intrum Justitia for my girlfriend (in a similar position). Only took two letters - with a bit of knowledge you can tangle them up like you wouldn't believe. Disregard any threats they make, it's all hot air and meaningless. Also, don't fall for the old we'll send someone round to see you - more nonsense. Firstly, such action would cost a dam lot more than the amount they are trying to recover; secondly - they have no legal right to visit you (only an implied right under common law - like the posty or milk man).

If you want the letters I used for my gf let me know and you can have them to use yourself. I found them to be very effective.

All the best,

TFT

Yep..I agree, IJ soon give up, just ask them for details of the paypal transactions and how you are liable.

Iqor are even dimmer (they cant even write to me at the correct address) and easily dismissed too.

Andy

Hello
Im having trouble with IJ, would it be possible for me to see what letters where sent to them please, ive just sent you a PM I hope you can help these cheeky wotsits leave a lot to be desired!

J.BLOGS

A1, THE BUILDING

THE ROAD

THE TOWN

THE COUNTY

THE POSTCODE

REFERENCE: 000000000A

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO INTRUM JUSTITIA OR YOU CLIENT paypal

Dear Sir or Madam

I am writing in response to correspondence received from you on the 01st January 2009 (dated 01st January 2009).

I have received an invoice from you for the amount of £00.00 for an alleged debt you claim I have with your client PAYPAL. I can advise that I do not acknowledge any debt to either Intrum Justitia or your client PAYPAL.

As you advise in your correspondence that you have commenced formal debt recovery action against me I am formally requesting, pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, that you provide me with a true copy of the credit agreement on which you are seeking to enforce the alleged debt. In addition, I am also requesting a statement of account for the alleged debt.

In the case that Intrum Justitia are not the creditor, I draw your attention to the fact that s.175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties.

Your attention is also drawn to ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR).

I enclose a postal order in the sum of £1.00, which is the statutory fee. Please note that these funds are not to be used for any other purpose.

If you are unable to comply fully and properly with this request, you should confirm this in writing at the earliest opportunity, and certainly within the statutory time limit for compliance, and return the fee.

Please also note that any future communication must be by written letter and addressed to me only at the above address. On the occasion that you continue to telephone me, any calls will be documented and answered by my representative.

Yours Sincerely

** Do not sign your name – debt collectors may use this to falsify your signature **

J.BLOGS