Advanced

I tried to sell Linux Laptops with Paypal but they refuse to protect me!

Posted by usacomputertec on · 19 comments
nixedblog.thenixedreport.com; By Justin Breithaupt
Mail this story
Print this story

Paypal decided not to protect me against online Fraud when I sold Linux Laptops. I need legal help.

For the full story go here: [HYPERLINK@www.digg.com]

LEADING STORY PAYPAL WON'T PROTECT YOU! I am putting this story out because many of you don't know what you are getting into by using Paypal. Most people think they are protected by Paypal from Fraud no matter what. Here is a quote from Paypal's user agreement. “11.3 Qualification Requirements. In order to qualify for coverage under the Seller Protection Policy, you must meet the following requirements: a.You must have a Verified Business or Verified Premier Account at the time of the transaction, b.The transaction must be between a US, UK or Canadian buyer and a US, UK or Canadian seller, c.The payment must be listed as "Seller Protection Policy Eligible" on the "Transaction Details" page, or cleared by PayPal through Payment Review, d.You must accept a single payment from one PayPal Account for the purchase, e.You must not charge a surcharge for accepting PayPal, f.You must ship the purchased item to the address listed on the "Transaction Details" page, and that address must be identified as a Confirmed Address, g.You must ship the item to the buyer within 7 Days of receiving payment, h.You must have trackable online proof of delivery from an approved shipper to the address on the "Transaction Details" page. For transactions involving $250.00 USD or more, you must provide a proof of receipt that was signed or otherwise acknowledged by the buyer and can be viewed online, (If you paid in a currency other than US dollars, the following amounts apply for this section: $325.00 CAD, €200.00 EUR, £150.00 GBP, ¥28000.00 JPY, $350.00 AUD, 330.00 CHF, 1,600.00 NOK, 2,000.00 SEK, 1,500.00 DKK, 800.00 PLN, 55000.00 HUF, 6,000.00 CZK, $400.00 SGD, $2,000.00 HKD, $380.00 NZD), and i.You must respond to PayPal's requests for information within the time period PayPal specifies. Please note that in order to qualify for our Seller Protection Policy you must ship the item as required in this section. If you hand deliver an item, or provide delivery in any manner other than required in this section, your transaction will not qualify for the Seller Protection Policy.” So here my story begins. I started using Paypal 10 years ago and agreed to their agreement then. Since then they have changed it to include what you see above to say you must abide by those terms or Seller Protection is out the window. Paypal never told me their Seller Protection policy changed and therefore I thought I was protected. I sold a computer to a guy who stole another guy's ebay / paypal account and Paypal put the money in my account, verified the address as the sellers under the Details page and then I decided that it was legitimate. So I sent the $875.00 laptop to the guy and Paypal told very shortly afterwords that I owed the guy back his $875.00 and that I was not covered. In the first place ebay and Paypal encuraged me to sell world wide to increase sales. All the while Paypal makes money on every sale I make. So Paypal charged me an additional $35.00 for moving the money back to the original Paypal account and sucked all my money I had in their account out. Now they say I owe them -$790.66 USD. I say they owe me over $900.00 for being neglegent in trying to get my money back or my laptop and also for the $35.00 fee that was not for services I received. I sent this letter to them: I know I have complained before about this buyer protection being bad but this time I found something that is very misleading about the whole thing.

In the attached picture you will see how there is no mention of buyer protection. I know that somewhere along the line like in the details of the transaction it tells you if you are protected or not but just think about this picture first and tell me what you think.

Here is my original request.

This is a bill to paypal from: Computer Rescue 171 24th Street PO Box 485 Pomeroy WA 99347 1-208-750-5628

For two unauthorized transactions in the following amounts:

$874.60 USD Due to Paypal's negligence to try to get my stolen item 260144524495 back. $34.41 USD Fees charged by Paypal for services not received by Computer Rescue.

Total: $909.01 USD.

Hello, This message is to further clarify my response to Paypal.

In the bill presented below I am stating that because Paypal was legally negligent in it's responsibilities to put some effort out to get my item back and deducted $874.60 for the price of the item lost without it being authorized by Computer Rescue that Paypal owes me back the full amount of the unauthorized transaction.

This bill also states that Paypal owes Computer Rescue for services that were not received but were charged for in the form of a service fee. As indicated by your records this fee was $34.41. I am requesting that you refund our company for services that were not received.

Further more your company is in breach of it's contract because your Paypal representative in the escalations department clearly stated during the recorded phone call that he did not expect me to read the user agreement. By stating that he did not expect me to read it he also was stating that there was not a "meeting of the minds", a legal term I'm sure you are familiar with. I also asked him a series of questions asking if it was stated any where else or in an e-mail that you would not protect me in the case that I or anyone else had shipped outside the US, UK, and Canada.

I have had a Paypal account for 10 years. Over these 10 years I had two separate accounts. I was not aware I had two accounts and recently closed the first one. During the time of my first account I was under the impression that I had up to $1,000.00 of coverage on my account without restrictions. This is why I asked your escalations department specialist if the agreement had changed. He said that the agreement had never changed. I then told him that I have done business over the last 10 years with Paypal. I asked if the seller protection policy could have changed? He stated that it had changed. Which is it?

The first thing I asked was if I was covered under FDIC. Your escalations department specialist informed me that I was covered completely %100. I am covered for fraud.

I informed the man in the escalations department that I had been told by ebay that selling worldwide would be better because it would increase my sales. I asked him if Paypal would do anything other than allow the user to read the agreement to inform their customers that by selling worldwide they would not be covered. His response was that Paypal absolutely would not try to discourage anyone from selling worldwide.

I have a question to ask you. If you had a store and someone who had a stolen credit card or check book came in and bought an item and left with it would he not be stealing from that store? In a literal perspective yes he would.

The people on the phone I spoke with told me that seller protection and insurance were not the same thing and since I had been informed in the past (during the transition to seller protection) that I was covered up to $1,000.00 and never informed that there was a change I assumed that there was a difference between seller protection and insurance and that I did not need seller protection to be insured. I was also under the impression that the FDIC insurance would cover me if Paypal would not. This is the reason I believe that a false sense of security has been presented by Paypal to the masses.

I want to inform others of exactly what seller protection covers so that they do not suffer the same fate. It would seem that I am not the only one that this has happened to. I suggest you do the same via e-mail, TV, radio, and by other means of communication.

This is a bill to paypal from: Computer Rescue 171 24th Street PO Box 485 Pomeroy WA 99347 1-208-750-5628

For two unauthorized transactions in the following amounts:

$874.60 USD Due to Paypal's negligence to try to get my stolen item 260144524495 back. $34.41 USD Fees charged by Paypal for services not received by Computer Rescue.

Total: $909.01 USD.

So Far Paypal has only responded telling me that they thank me for reporting this other guy from Nigeria and that I'm not covered by seller protection. I think I need to accuse them of a crime. If anyone can help me please do. I would sure appreciate it.

Full Story

  Nav
» Read more about: Groups: Linux; Story Type: News Story

» Get new stories by e-mail: nightly or as they are published

« Return to the newswire homepage

  Related stories
» More like this

Comments (19)

1. Guy uses Paypal and ASSUMES that somehow these folks are regulated like a bank.

2. Guy SELLS hardware to someone in NIGERIA.

3. Oddly enough, guy in Nigeria isn't paying up (weird isn't it?).

4. Guy wants Paypal to give him the stolen money from the Nigerian scammer.

If you're going to get into business, you NEED to understand the risks and realize that YOU have to do your own due diligence with regards to sales. Especially if you are using an unsafe, unregulated broker like paypal.

No news here. IMHO, the person needs to get hit for the $900+ as a LESSON LEARNED. Shoot, it's a whole lot cheaper than taking a class nowadays.
> I have no sympathy on this one.

Oh, I sympathize. The school of hard knocks is always a rough teacher. However, you are absolutely correct. There's no way Paypal can or should be responsible.
I don't see from the article how Linux figures into this at all... It seems to me that had he been selling laptops with no OS or even with Windows he'd still be out the $$$ in this case, or did I miss something?

Anyway, I never do any kind of business with foreign buyers/sellers on auction sites... especially not from places like Africa and most especially not from Nigeria which is known to be a haven for scammers of all sorts.
Oh you can do business there. Just make sure you get paid up front. In cash (the fake cheque scam is also very popular with online scammers).
It was Malaysia if memory serves correct. Here's what actually happened.

1.) Person wants to purchase a computer with Linux on it via E-Bay.

2.) Justin Breithaupt checks out the username on E-Bay and the user in question has a high rating.

3.) After checking the username out, he goes ahead and puts together the computer and ships it to the country in question. Now here's where the first one to post a comment screwed up.

4.) Justin got paid through the username's PayPal account into his PayPal account.

5.) It turned out that the person in Malaysa (unsure of spelling btw) had hijacked somebody else's account. The real owner of that account got their money back.

6.) Here's where things get tricky. There is FDIC Insurance involved. However, in their agreement, PayPal misdirects people by not making things clear up front. As it turned out, FDIC Insurance only applied to those who sold in the U.S., Canada, and the U.K.

7.) The person in the escalations department told him that the agreement was not clear and the intention was to make sure that it was not clear (not good, especially since the phone call was recorded).

8.) E-Bay (or the people there anyway) were surprised that PayPal refused to protect Breithaupt, and instead charged him an additional fee and according to them, he owes them money.

Folks, I've heard of problems with PayPal before, which is why even though I am PayPal certified, I generally do not use it at all at the moment. I know these things can happen, and when they do, a coporation provides no assistance whatsoever. Justin checked out the username, and there was a high rating. How was he supposed to know that the account in question was hijacked? Answer that one.
I have no sympathy fo the bloke.... he used Paypal.
Quoting: I have no sympathy fo the bloke.... he used Paypal.
Why do you hate paypal?

-- KDE/SuSE 10.2 - Unix since 1984, Linux since 1993, SuSE since 2004 Linux 2.6.23-rc7-default #3 SMP Wed Sep 19 20:20:53 PDT 2007 i686

Because paypal gets to have all of the (monetary) advantages of a bank without the gazillions of dollars of regulations that banks have to adhere to.

It's sort of like creating your own government and tax system because it's more convenient. Or perhaps creating your own police department... etc...

{quote] Why do you hate paypal?{/quote]

I don't believe they can be trusted. They are able to make up the rules as they go along, and in the years that I've been watching them they have. They spam you for ever and a day if you supply them with your real email address. Lastly they are not a bank, and are completely unregulated, they are basically a law unto themselves.
I didn't sell to Nigeria. I sold to Indonesia and in the phone conversation the guy even says it's not a bad place to sell to.
ya cjcox you are right. PayPal gets to have all of the advantages of a bank without any regulations. They claim you are 100% protected against any kind of fraud with FDIC insurance no matter what. However their seller protection only applies in the US, UK, and CANADA. Seller protection is separate from FDIC insurance. They both have different policies and user agreements. The information I received from PayPal via e-mail about 100% protection is not the same as what it says in their actual user agreement. FDIC is world wide protection. However the US FDIC insurance is only supoes to protect bank accounts, credit cards, and the like. PayPal is trying to extend it to their own "money handling" service. It's not an account. Yes PayPal does hold your money and invest it, Yes PayPal does take it out of your account without asking you if they think you owe them, Yes if I gave them my credit card number or account number they would suck my money out.

Now as far as what this has to do with Linux? 1. I sell primarily Linux Laptops. Very few people request Vista. 2. PayPal uses Linux on their servers I believe so PayPal is giving us a bad name.

Now PayPal says they are very secure right? Ok maybe they are but if they are so secure then how come people get into other people's accounts and take them over? It's because of phishing and weaknesses in IE + flash + Myspace. The fastflux viruses that in tale IE + flash + Myspace = spyware, fraud, phishing, and Trojans. And as if all this was not enough now M$ puts their spyware in Windows. Yes thats right. They are watching you if you have WMP11, Vista, or those spooky automatic updates without your permission.
Although I haven't used it in some time, I just closed my PayPal account. I referenced this story as the reason for closing. Don't know if that will help Justin or not, but...
> It's sort of like creating your own government and tax system because it's more convenient. Or perhaps creating your own police department... etc...

I disagree, because PayPal is entirely voluntary.

If you don't like their service, don't use it.

Not so with government, by definition.
Bob_Robertson wrote:
Quoting:I disagree, because PayPal is entirely voluntary.

If you don't like their service, don't use it.


What popular alternatives remain besides so-called "voluntarily" using PayPal for online payments? Providing online bank-account routing-information ? Providing online credit-card information ?

And really just HOW secure are both these and PayPal's online payment services anyway?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_card_fraud

Given all this, plus their ever-increasing fees and add-on conditions as best noted by others above, just HOW exactly is the "voluntary" monopoly-aspiring PayPal your payment "Pal" !!!??? Hmm?

> What popular alternatives remain...

Google Checkout? You could also deal with a professional credit card processing service, but that's probably cost prohibitive.
'If you don't like them don't use them' is one tactic. 'Hold their feet to the fire and make them keep their word' is another, though obviously a lot harder. Kudos to the people who put up a fight.
TC -

Have to agree. Caveat emptor is not the law of the land. People who lie and defraud should be liable for their acts.
> 'If you don't like them don't use them' is one tactic.

To be used before getting burned.

> 'Hold their feet to the fire and make them keep their word' is another, though obviously a lot harder.

Once damages have been incurred.

> Kudos to the people who put up a fight.

Couldn't agree more.

> Caveat emptor is not the law of the land.

Yes, it is. If I don't read a contract I sign, that's _my_ problem. By law. Be careful, first.

> People who lie and defraud should be liable for their acts.

I've never said anything contrary to this.
Quoting:What popular alternatives remain...


Here in The Netherlands we have a system called "Ideal" which works pretty well. In essence it's just a common API that the Dutch banks built together. When you're on a webshop and head for the checkout, Ideal is listed as a payment option (just like credit card or PayPal is). When you click it, you're taken to your own bank's website. You login as you would normally with whatever system your bank uses (one-time codes, dongles, request-response, whatever) and you use you own bank's system to make the payment. When the transaction is complete, you're taken back to the webshop.

It works pretty well. The major advantage of this system is that I do not have to trust the webshop's or some other 3rd party's transaction system. I only use the one from my own bank (and if you don't trust your own bank then you had better look for another bank). All the webshop ever sees is that I want to pay amount XXX through Ideal and whether I completed the transaction or not.

Post a comment

A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.

Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help

Sign up and post (it is free)  or  Log in and post