Are PayPal's new rules a bad deal for sellers?

magicsnaps

I posted the following message in another forum but it was suggested that this was a better place for it. Am I alone in feeling that PayPal is taking advantage of eBay's success?

magicsnaps wrote: »

Might it be time to devote a forum to sorting out PayPal's high-handed treatment of users? I am specifically concerned with it's naturally cosy relationship with eBay. In the past, an eBay deal was struck in cash or by cheque and settled within a couple of days, to mutual satisfaction. I am not a frequent seller of items on eBay, but recently experienced the effect of new rules, which FORCE sellers to offer PayPal at no cost to the buyer but very considerable cost to the seller. This would be a fair system only if both buyer and seller shared the charges equally, but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to realise that it would then be far less profitable for PayPal as there would be little incentive to buyers to opt for PayPal unless they wished to 'purchase' the security aspect. To add insult to injury PayPal now insist sellers also accept PayPal's right to hold onto your money until either good feedback is posted or they have held your money for a period of weeks, without interest. I recently sold a computer on the third of December, immediately received rave feedback from my buyer but have yet to receive a penny from PayPal. Do the sums, PayPal is making a fortune out of slow paying and thereby ruining the eBay experience. Sheer greed! I have the feeling that a groundswell of hostility is building against these terms, which should be directed towards reforming them more fairly. What do you think?

RFW

magicsnaps wrote: »

To add insult to injury PayPal now insist sellers also accept PayPal's right to hold onto your money until either good feedback is posted or they have held your money for a period of weeks, without interest.

Only in a small percentage of cases.

Without getting into an argument with AN Other user on here, Paypal don't receive interest on monies they have held it is against the Financial regulations they are bound by, although this point is open to debate, some say it isn't the case but have yet to prove otherwise.

To ask the buyer to pay part of the charge is not a good idea, they wouldn't want to, so that should be factored into the sale price.

If Ebay want you to use Paypal and you don't want to, don't sell on Ebay, sell elsewhere.

In the sale you mentioned, have you called Paypal to ask where the funds are and what the hold up is? They are fairly efficient by phone so should be able to sort it.

magicsnaps

Firstly, it seems to be defeatist to say that we should accept a unilateral change in the rules when that heavily disadvantages us, the customers. The system was working well as it was.
Secondly, how can you factor in their charges in an auction? They are inevitable under the new rules but cannot be offset.
Thirdly, Ebay are the premier auction site and have no real rivals to whom you can transfer your business. It is not a level playing-field.
Finally, the PayPal phone experience leaves a great deal to be desired, but perhaps I am difficult to please....

asset2004

OP you are not alone.
I rarely sell on ebay but now I am forced to offer paypal. I used to accept paypal payments by bank transfer or paypal funds as this wasn't charged but now paypal take their fees off this to.
As a seller I was on the receiving end of a credit card chargeback to the tune of £500.
The item had never been posted because the buyer (in USA) only wanted to pay the British postage price. (yes really!) Even though I opened a non paying bidder dispaute and won I was astounded to discover a month later than I was in the red of my paypal account by £500. It took 4 months and many letters from me before the chargeback was cancelled. I eventually got through to paypal who were very unhelpful. In the meantime I was unable to use my paypal account and kept getting emails requesting payment.
I never received an apology from them once it was sorted.
Now because I have sold quite a few high value items in the past year and I am reaching the credit limit of £1700 paypal want me to pay them more money for a credit check.
I understand the convenience of paypal but what is wrong with cheques, postal orders or best of all bank transfers?

magicsnaps

asset2004 wrote: »

OP you are not alone.
I rarely sell on ebay but now I am forced to offer paypal. I used to accept paypal payments by bank transfer or paypal funds as this wasn't charged but now paypal take their fees off this to.
As a seller I was on the receiving end of a credit card chargeback to the tune of £500.
The item had never been posted because the buyer (in USA) only wanted to pay the British postage price. (yes really!) Even though I opened a non paying bidder dispaute and won I was astounded to discover a month later than I was in the red of my paypal account by £500. It took 4 months and many letters from me before the chargeback was cancelled. I eventually got through to paypal who were very unhelpful. In the meantime I was unable to use my paypal account and kept getting emails requesting payment.
I never received an apology from them once it was sorted.
Now because I have sold quite a few high value items in the past year and I am reaching the credit limit of £1700 paypal want me to pay them more money for a credit check.
I understand the convenience of paypal but what is wrong with cheques, postal orders or best of all bank transfers?

I agree with you that it is the way PayPal is now setup that will spoil the ebay experience. Regarding your credit limit, to be fair to PayPal, my understanding is that it does not cost you anything, because the sums used to check the card are refunded. Am I correct in this assumption, folks?