R50/53 I think I have gotten scammed but I was wrong
5th Gear
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco
Thread should be deleted so it does not show up on Google.
5th Gear
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco
That may be accurate, but I dunno for sure.
One thing that PayPal had to adjust to is when people use PayPal to pay with a credit card.
PayPal used to to have a SOL claim and chargeback policy that was real short. But people that funded a PayPal payment via an independent credit card simply made a claim with the CC company. The CC company would then do a chargeback against PayPal rather than the company the payment was made to, via PayPal.
So PayPal had to change their policies because many CC companies have more lax chargeback policies, that is, looser than PayPal's requirements for a refund, such as time limitations.
This is a roundabout explanation that one can check with his or her debit or credit card directly to get a refund. The CC company dings PayPal as the "seller" of sorts, so in the end PayPal is left holding the bag. [After a chargeback PayPal simply went after the account holder / seller who got the payment. But that's between PayPal and the seller/account holder, not the buyer.
For example, my Bank gives me six months to make a debit card claim for dissatisfaction or whatever. It's even longer for some types of ID theft, and a different time line for fraud.
In any event, even though it sounds like his issue is resolved, contacting his CC company may have given him a longer time to make a claim.
But you are right, if one uses PayPal funds to pay, or if PayPal has access to one's checking account to make payments, then the 60 days applies.
By the way, the above is why one should NEVER give PayPal direct access to your bank account to make payments. With that direct access you have no recourse and are at the mercy of PayPal's draconian policies.
Tie PayPal to a low limit credit card and you should be OK since you can seek recourse via the CC company and bypass PayPal.
See www.paypalsucks.com
One thing that PayPal had to adjust to is when people use PayPal to pay with a credit card.
PayPal used to to have a SOL claim and chargeback policy that was real short. But people that funded a PayPal payment via an independent credit card simply made a claim with the CC company. The CC company would then do a chargeback against PayPal rather than the company the payment was made to, via PayPal.
So PayPal had to change their policies because many CC companies have more lax chargeback policies, that is, looser than PayPal's requirements for a refund, such as time limitations.
This is a roundabout explanation that one can check with his or her debit or credit card directly to get a refund. The CC company dings PayPal as the "seller" of sorts, so in the end PayPal is left holding the bag. [After a chargeback PayPal simply went after the account holder / seller who got the payment. But that's between PayPal and the seller/account holder, not the buyer.
For example, my Bank gives me six months to make a debit card claim for dissatisfaction or whatever. It's even longer for some types of ID theft, and a different time line for fraud.
In any event, even though it sounds like his issue is resolved, contacting his CC company may have given him a longer time to make a claim.
But you are right, if one uses PayPal funds to pay, or if PayPal has access to one's checking account to make payments, then the 60 days applies.
By the way, the above is why one should NEVER give PayPal direct access to your bank account to make payments. With that direct access you have no recourse and are at the mercy of PayPal's draconian policies.
Tie PayPal to a low limit credit card and you should be OK since you can seek recourse via the CC company and bypass PayPal.
See www.paypalsucks.com
Last edited by MichaelSF; Jul 13, 2008 at 03:36 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post