Was scammed $3,000 using PayPal!

[bcr229]

Unfortunately this scam described by the OP is being reported by vendors in the motorcycle and firearm accessory industries as well; high-end optics in particular are a favorite target. Also, it's not the buyer's bank that is ultimately removing the funds from PayPal to return to the buyer, it's the credit card company / merchant processor doing it because the buyer backed up his PayPal account with a credit card, and not a bank account.

Of course, it costs the CC companies nothing to resolve the dispute in the buyer's favor, and in fact they would prefer to keep their customers happy and continuing to use credit, which makes them money. And perhaps it's snark on my part, but the CC company also hits PayPal with a chargeback fee, so maybe there's a bit of additional incentive to 1) ding a competitor, and 2) discourage vendors and small from using PayPal.

If there is a practical and viable alternative to PayPal for internet payment processing, I sure would like to hear about it.

As the OP has shown, PayPal is becoming extremely risky for sellers, and very safe for buyers as long as the payment is backed up with a credit card and not a bank account since the CC company will fight for you if there's a dispute (or if you're a scammer). There are alternatives but which to use depends upon how much risk the buyer and seller are willing to accept.

For instance, merchant processors such as Square or EMS+, that don't have a monthly fee but just a swipe fee per transaction, are becoming popular with small businesses that may only run a few CC transactions per month. All you need is a smart phone or internet connection, and you can process credit cards. While there is still the risk of a chargeback, at least you - and not PayPal - are dealing with the merchant processor.

Programs such as Chase QuickPay facilitate no-fee ACH transfers between the sender and recipient's checking accounts. While very safe for the seller, it's very risky for the buyer as there's no way to initiate a chargeback. So, the buyer would have to do his due diligence and research the seller's reputation before sending the payment.

As always, there's the good old USPS money order. Not very safe for the buyer but safe enough for the seller, assuming he cashes it to the post office.

Finally, there's crypto-currency but not a lot of people are using it yet. The most well-known example is BitCoins. Due to their value fluctuations compared to the dollar on a day to day - and sometimes minute to minute - basis, I would be hesitant to use them as a seller unless I could watch the payment post to my account, and then immediately make a transfer to my regular bank account.

 

[BoBlueSleeves]

They made it sound like they have nothing to do with the bank's ruling, and once the bank decides on it, there's no appealing it. For example, if the bank already refunds their customer who filed a chargeback, they're not going to take that money away from the customer and be an Indian giver. "Sorry, we have the money back to you once but now we need it back because it was a mistake," is only going to create a very angry customer and bad reputation for the bank.

PayPal (and eBay) both tend to lean more towards the buyer rather than the seller because they assume that the buyer is the one at more of a risk, putting down their money before actually receiving the item. However, it seems like a lot of scammers know this and are now using it to their advantage.

Also, I hate how you speak to a new rep every time you call or email them, and you have to re-explain your entire situation every time. I always ask for their name, but they must have a ton of people who take calls and respond to emails, because they always tell me that the person I want to speak to isn't there or isn't available when I call. and that's the other thing - different reps tell you different things. Don't they all work for the same company? Don't they have an established protocol for things, so that they're not just pulling random, false info out of their butts and telling people different things every time? If two people say two completely opposite things, one is obviously not providing truthful or accurate info. Is that even allowed? To give false info to a customer to persuade them to complete a task? For example, one rep told me that I would need to submit my Photo ID (why do they need a photo if they are never going to see me in person to compare?), proof of SSN like W2, and proof of address like a utility bill, and that once they confirm my identity, id be good to go. I submitted all that and I still ended up losing $3,000. I called again, and the other rep tells me that there was no need for me to submit any of that info. Wtf? Now I just allowed my personal info to float around cyberspace to be sent to someone I don't know, for no reason?

 

[hhmoore]

For example, if the bank already refunds their customer who filed a chargeback, they're not going to take that money away from the customer and be an Indian giver

That isn't necessarily the case. If the injured party proves his case, they do return the money; and take the loss themselves, if necessary - I've been in that situation. (well, it was different; but the bank had already paid the other party based on the "proof" provided...and when I provided the rest of the email stream, I got my money back. They didn't take it back from him, though they should have, IMO; but all I really cared about was not getting charged for a free replacement I'd been promised nearly a year earlier.)

I don't doubt that the amount of money can be a factor in their willingness to take a loss - my situation was much less money ($300).

PayPal does have its downfalls, and their protections suck for non-eBay transactions; but it seems a good part of your complaint is with the customer's credit card bank.

 

[Charis]

This was very interesting reading, thanks for sharing!
I'm also interested in hearing about alternative payment methods as well. Unfortunately, with pretty much all the methods and services I'm aware of, there is either risk on both sides, the seller is super safe but the buyer can get taken with near impunity or vice versa. Doesn't seem to be a perfect payment service that offers complete safety to both parties.

 

[BoBlueSleeves]

I guess you can't quote using the mobile tapatalk app?

"If the injured party proves his case, they do return the money; and take the loss themselves, if necessary...."

If that's truly the case, here's another example of how PayPal presented me with false info. They were adamant that bank rulings were final and could not be appealed.

An interesting fact I recently learned. PayPal is very difficult to contact via email, and when you do, you typically get a generic response. eBay, who owns PayPal, got rid of their emailing services all together. All questions now requires calling them. Why? So they don't leave anything in writing. If on the phone, unless you record the conversation, it becomes a he said, she said situation, and they can get away with not following through with what they tell you, or with different employees telling you different things.

I've recently signed up for PopMoney, Skrill, and Intuit QuickPay. The two latter ones are accepted by eBay, but Skrill surprisingly doesn't have a mobile app. I'll be experimenting with them over time to see if they're any good, and will post updates.

I emailed Skrill recently, and they sent me a response within a few hours, and it was a customized response - not a generic copy and paste that doesn't even address the question you asked. They actually take the time to read your email and type out a response.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[shadowsnakes]

Don't mean to necro a thread but I am curious about Robert's experiences with PopMoney, Skrill, and QuickPay as I am also looking into PayPal alternatives. Anything new to update?

 

[BoBlueSleeves]

PopMoney has been great so far. I don't feel like I'm being "used" anymore. With PayPal, you had to trust your money to a third party, whereby they have access to your money. They can withhold it for six months, or even reverse it without your consent. It's your money that you have the rights to, but they take advantage of their powers and take over the control of your money. On the other hand, PopMoney doesn't store your money. There's no PopMoney balance where your money is kept. Instead, PopMoney transfers the buyer's money from his bank account and places it directly into the seller's bank account. If there is ever an issue, PopMoney does not become involved to try to represent you (poorly) like PayPal does. All conflicts become dealt directly by your bank and their bank. You represent yourself, and have to provide evidence directly to your bank. There's no wondering whether the third party (PayPal) has done everything fairly to try to help you. There's no questioning whether they actually submitted all of the evidence you provided, to the buyer's bank. Consider PopMoney to simply be the "teller" at the bank who helps you with money transfer from your bank to a different bank. The only drawback is that not all banks are participating members, where some of the smaller banks don't support the service yet.

QuickPay doesn't work out as well without a website that supports the input of a credit card number, such as eBay. Otherwise, you have to manually enter the cc#, which means that the buyer would have to email you his card #, expiration date, and security code, and few buyers are going to be trusting enough to supply that info to a complete stranger.

I haven't used Skrill yet. I set up an account because it's an alternative form of payment that eBay claims to accept. However, eBay seems to make you jump through hoops to use anything other than PayPal (owned by eBay). The Skrill option is unavailable when selling an item via eBay mobile. Also, a lot of eBay sellers, especially those outside the US, don't accept Skrill, either because it doesn't support international credit cards, or because word of it just hasn't spread outside the US yet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk