[wje]

 
[size=1.333em] Quite the donnybrook is brewing on the Internet over PayPal's decision to order a customer to destroy a purportedly rare violin.[/size]
A [size=inherit]Regretsy.com reader named Erica related yesterday how she sold an old French violin "that made it through WWII" to a buyer in Canada for $2,500. However, the buyer disputed the authenticity of the label and demanded his money back. When the buyer contacted PayPal with his concerns, the payment processor instructed him to destroy it and refunded the purchase price.[/size]
"Rather than have the violin returned to me, PayPal made the buyer DESTROY the violin in order to get his money back," Erica wrote. "They somehow deemed the violin as 'counterfeit' even though there is no such thing in the violin world."
He even sent the seller a photo of the destroyed violin ("The buyer was proud of himself," Erica wrote.)
"It is beyond me why PayPal simply didn't have the violin returned to me," she wrote.
So why didn't he? Apparently PayPal's [size=inherit]user agreement includes a dispute resolution process for items "significantly not as described" that gives it the last say on items it suspects are fakes:[/size]
 

 

[MorbidToaster]

Sigh. This is completely ridiculous...
 
I've been having my problems with PayPal as of late, but this person had it much worse.

 

[Dubstep Girl]

wow thats messed up.

 

[Kirosia]

It's possible that PP and/or Bank of America pocketed $412 of my money. I say "possibly" because the seller who scammed me claimed he'd paid the amount to PP to get a hold removed, but seeing as he fled once I canceled the dispute, he may have just lied. I'm out $600. I have his email, name, and address. Can I do anything?

 

[Radio_head]

My first paypal account was hacked and my account was promptly frozen.  I was not refunded on fraudulent charges - all my assets in paypal at the time were frozen.  It took a year and a half and the threat of litigation to get them to sort out the issues and unfreeze my account.  I never keep money in balance with them anymore, and try to send gifts wherever possible to circumvent giving them any money.  As soon as there is a viable convenient alternative that becomes widely accepted I'll close my paypal up for good.  

 

[bcasey25raptor]

I prefer to pay for things with a credit card directly. Though i have bought things with paypal before without issue.

 

[kiteki]

 
Sorry I'm confused, he claims it's a counterfeit, paypal asks for a picture of the destroyed counterfeit item, and then paypal sends him $2,500, from paypal or forced from the seller?
 
This makes little sense.
 
 
I spoke to paypal on the phone yesterday, they were pretty good.
 
Their number is 1800 073 263, keep selecting "other" and you'll get to talk to a human eventually.

 

[MorbidToaster]

This is how I understood it. 
 
I hate the way that they 'investigate' claims. I expected them to look at both sides of the coin in my 'item not shipped' dispute, but they literally told me on the phone that if I didn't have absolute proof of delivery it didn't matter if it'd been lost or was held at customs (I had proof of it still being in customs after 2 months). 
 
So essentially if something gets stuck in customs and your customer gets impatient they can just get their money back at any time (within 80 days). This is wrong.
 
Quote:

 
Sorry I'm confused, he claims it's a counterfeit, paypal asks for a picture of the destroyed counterfeit item, and then paypal sends him $2,500, from paypal or forced from the seller?
 
 
I spoke to paypal on the phone yesterday and they were pretty good.
 

 
 

 

[wje]

Personally, I think PayPal became much worse after eBay purchased them.  Now, all of the eBay transactions are essentially tied to PayPal to the point where if someone chooses to "Buy It Now" - they are taken to PayPal to take care of the payment.  Also, as a seller, I find it getting plenty frustrating dealing with approximately fees of 10% to sell an item through eBay and then get a buyer who pays with a credit card so another 3.#% gets taken from me.  I say if eBay insists on connecting themselves with PayPal for their payment system, then eBay should waive the fees on the PayPal payments so the sellers don't get slammed with all the fees.
 
Additionally, PayPal has different levels of protection.  If you buy something that wasn't on eBay, you'll find that PayPal provides very little support for you.  However, if you went through eBay, they'll provide all kinds of support benefits to you.  In closing, I'll still use PayPal as it has basically become the de-facto standard for on-line payments.  Though, I really hate how they lock up your money for a few weeks when you sell something on eBay and only after certain conditions are met - buyer has left feedback, you've inserted the tracking number, yada, yada, yada, then they finally release your money to you.  I do realize this is form of protection for the buyer.  But, with such a policy, it seems as though they think of all their sellers on their site as criminals.

 

[BobSaysHi]

Quote:

It's possible that PP and/or Bank of America pocketed $412 of my money. I say "possibly" because the seller who scammed me claimed he'd paid the amount to PP to get a hold removed, but seeing as he fled once I canceled the dispute, he may have just lied. I'm out $600. I have his email, name, and address. Can I do anything?

Send pizza to his house. 
 

 

[MorbidToaster]

Brilliant. I'd do this.
 
Quote:

Send pizza to his house. 
 

 
 

 

[bcasey25raptor]

Quote:

Send pizza to his house. 
 

Lmao. I would pay to see his reaction.

 

[garetz]

There is obviously a conflict of interest when the auctionhouse (ie ebay) is tied to the payment method, and they profit from both. If sotheby's or any other auction house said you can only pay through one financial institution that they owned and controlled themselves, and benefitted from financially, then that would be considered anti competitive. How is it ok that ebay/paypal can do this ?

Not to mention that when they are the arbiters of any kind of conflict. It benefits them to give the money back to the buyer, as the buyer is more likely to spend that money on something else that they will pay with paypal for, so paypal get another lot of fees. However if the seller gets the money there is no guarantee they will get another fee payment, as the seller may not buy anything, but keep selling which doesnt make paypal money as they need a buyer to make a purchase before the fee is charged to the seller by paypal. If that makes sense. So buyers make them money, but they see sellers as worthless.

 

[kiteki]

 
"The buyer was proud of himself, so he sent me a photo of the destroyed violin.

I am now out a violin that made it through WWII as well as $2500. This is of course, upsetting. But my main goal in writing to you is to prevent PayPal from ordering the destruction of violins and other antiquities that they know nothing about. It is beyond me why PayPal simply didn’t have the violin returned to me.
I spoke on the phone to numerous reps from PayPal who 100% defended their action and gave me the party line.
Erica
 

I forwarded this e-mail to my contact at Paypal several days ago. They have not replied.
UPDATE: I neglected to mention in the original post that the violin was examined and authenticated by a top luthier prior to its sale.
UPDATE 2: Thanks to sharp-eyed reader Mr. Pete, who found this paragraph in Paypal’s Terms of Service:"
 
 
 

 

So... paypal first required evidence of the destroyed violin, and then forced $2500 from Ericas account.
 
 

 

[kiteki]

 
Obviously paypal owes Erica $2,500 now, but they have also asked for the destruction of a highly valuable item instead of returning it, which I agree, that is beyond idiotic, and several reps defended their actions on the phone to her saying it's in the TOS.
 
 
This is what happens when people blindly follow TOS, rules and paragraphs and can't think for themselves.