Pay pal

cyril82

stevew8975 wrote: »

Every forum has its bar-room lawyers that know everything despite having never sat a law exam in their life.

It's the dangerous area between fact and opinion.

Ok, Steve, i know this legislation from a mix of personal experience and working in consumer law related industry, albeit not as a solicitor.

But if i am a "bar room Lawyer" giving wrong advice, it should not be too hard to provide documented proof that i'm wrong should it.

So as i said either prove me wrong, with documented evidence from a respected source, or shut up!

TurkishDelight

cyril82 wrote: »

or shut up!

I didn't know Martin Lewis had changed his name..... oh wait he hasn't. This isn't your forum, neither is it any of ours, but with (very fragile) respect, you can't tell us what to do. You think we spead misinformation, I think the same about you. All forum users either have to put up with everyone who wanders into here or go elsewhere.

victor-meldrew_4

soolin wrote: »

Rather than join this thread then you might want to read up on the actual rules, not the ones people 'think' or 'hope' are correct.

It is actually fairly easy to defend a claim against a fraudulent use of a card, you don't even need proof of delivery.

Paypal is not perfect but the only way to stay safe in a situation is to understand it and read the rules.

i take it the op shouldnt have joined the thread because he hasnt got a dilusional loyalty to a company that often acts outside the law.
everyone who has ever lost on ebay/paypal didnt follow the rules.
the op must be stupid as he has lost 7 times,he obviousley didnt follow the rules.
are you all that naieve.
it is hard to believe.wake up.do you have your own opinions.or do you have to agree and boulster each others opinions.even when someone gives you facts you wont accept them.jobsworth sheep.

cyril82

TurkishDelight wrote: »

I didn't know Martin Lewis had changed his name..... oh wait he hasn't. This isn't your forum, neither is it any of ours, but with (very fragile) respect, you can't tell us what to do. You think we spead misinformation, I think the same about you. All forum users either have to put up with everyone who wanders into here or go elsewhere.

I did not mean shut up all together, post whatever tripe you want to.

I meant, since the same people keep popping up everywhere i post to basically say "thats wrong" "don't listen to cyril he's and idiot", "bar room lawyer" either stop heckling and prove me wrong, with documentation from respected sources or shut up with the personal jibes aimed at me.

What ever else they/you post is of no interest or concern to me!

marleyboy

Cyril82 has a point, so far as the rules are concerned I see a lot of posters saying "no no your wrong", as well as jibes, but they are all just words, I have not seen anyone back these up with any kind of documentation as yet. Turkish, you go one better by deflecting the question to merely throwing a tantrum with the old "This isnt your forum" - very VERY weak reply.

I dont know enough about the rules and regulations to say either of you are wrong or right, but at least one poster has posted guidelines showing they know at least SOMETHING, whereas others are merely disagreeing for the sake of argument. AFAICS.

Heckling is neither proving nor dis-proving anything, its merely throwing rattles out of prams.

soolin

victor-meldrew wrote: »

i take it the op shouldnt have joined the thread because he hasnt got a dilusional loyalty to a company that often acts outside the law.
everyone who has ever lost on ebay/paypal didnt follow the rules.
the op must be stupid as he has lost 7 times,he obviousley didnt follow the rules.
are you all that naieve.
it is hard to believe.wake up.do you have your own opinions.or do you have to agree and boulster each others opinions.even when someone gives you facts you wont accept them.jobsworth sheep.

Should we just let people like that then continue to lose money when their position is defendable. I'm fine with that actually as I don't like the idea of a nanny state, if people want to lose money then you appear to suggest that we should all just say fine, carry on losing. I mean, come on..7 lost claims for fraudulent use of a card.

Seems an odd way to offer assistance and I prefer to try and help people rather than just post to say this company or that company is rubbish.

cyril82

soolin wrote: »

I prefer to try and help people rather than just post to say this company or that company is rubbish.

If this is in fact true soolin then why do you so often object to me helping people, such as the op of this thread, usually your objections arise whenever i criticise paypal, which is a little misguided after all here is a brief list of just some of my criticisms of paypal:

• telling the op he owes them money because they refunded a buyer without his permission who had no legal right to a refund, then harassing him through a dca who threatened to ruin his credit file, despite it being a near legal impossibility. Quite possibly breaking the law in the process.
• telling users that they are required under EU Anti Money Laundering Legislation to freeze accounts when x amount of money is received in any 12 month period despite the fact NO SUCH REQUIREMENT EXISTS.
• Facilitating fraud by operating a severely biased refund system whereby it is widely known that if you buy something on ebay and pay via paypal all you need to is wait for the goods, claim back the money, post an empty box back to seller by recorded delivery and bingo, you have the goods and your money back. Scammer heaven.
• The fact paypal ignore and flaunt our laws and expect us to accept it, they have no right to freeze money for six months legally, they have no legal right to force refunds on any goods auctioned online as defined by the consumer protection (distance selling) regulations 2000..........

The list goes on, but the point is with company policies and indiscretions like that it is no wonder i and others criticise them.

Why should we be telling people to shut up and accept paypals policy? especially when it is not even legal?

I think the problem is there is no one around here who really understands the laws that paypal are breaking or how to get paypal to release money, stop chasing people for refunds that they are not obliged to give, etc etc and so it is much easier to just tell people, "chalk it down to experience" "it was your own fault" and "there is nothing you can do".

Sometimes that's true but a lot of the time you can do something, i just don't know why it upsets some people so much when i tell people that they can do something, and how to do it?

Perhaps i have just disturbed the hierarchy that existed here before i started posting and some people don't like having their authoritive views challenged....................

cyberbob

victor-meldrew wrote: »

even when someone gives you facts you wont accept them.jobsworth sheep.

mmm Facts its all just been opinion

Just for those that seem to be a little confused

noun 1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact. 2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact. 3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.

as for opinion

noun 1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. 2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.


Hope that clears that up

soolin

cyril82 wrote: »

If this is in fact true soolin then why do you so often object to me helping people, such as the op of this thread, usually your objections arise whenever i criticise paypal, which is a little misguided after all here is a brief list of just some of my criticisms of paypal:
..

I object to your blanket approach that paypal is evil so sue them or ignore etc without appearing to either understand the rules or even what you post.

I'm sorry I am prepared to have a discussion on here with most people but I cannot begin to argue with someone who has such a limited understanding of what is actually going on.

Please go ahead continue to 'help' people in your unique way.Sometimes though pretending everything will go away if you forget about it or call enough businesses or people bad names is not actually helpful.

cyril82

soolin wrote: »

I object to your blanket approach that paypal is evil so sue them or ignore etc without appearing to either understand the rules or even what you post.

I'm sorry I am prepared to have a discussion on here with most people but I cannot begin to argue with someone who has such a limited understanding of what is actually going on.

Please go ahead continue to 'help' people in your unique way.Sometimes though pretending everything will go away if you forget about it or call enough businesses or people bad names is not actually helpful.

Soolin i have to say that post is total rubbish and out of order.

I do not have "a blanket approach that paypal is evil" but i know when i and others are being lied to.

I know, because i have actually read it, that the EU Anti Money Laundering Legislation which paypal state places a requirement upon them to freeze users funds actually contains no such requirement, and so, as happened last week when someone comes on here worried that they won't be able to get their money for six months i tell them what to say to paypal to get the money released, and it works, yet for some reason you get a bee in your bonnet because you would rather i said, "it's in paypal’s terms and you agreed to it when you signed up so just do what they say and hope they let you have your money"......Great advice.

I also know, again because i have read them, that the consumer protection (distance selling) regulations contain certain exceptions regarding returns and that private sellers or any seller who auctions their goods, including internet auctions, is exempt from the distance selling regulations and therefore is not legally obliged to accept returns, and therefore paypal had no right to refund money on the op's behalf without his authority and them claim the money from him as a debt due under contract.

I also know, yet again soolin, because i have read it, that the administration of justice act states that any company or their agents that wishes to pursue a debt alleged to be due under contract must not send letter of demand designed to cause alarm, or purporting to have some official carrector that they do not. Threatening to record negative information, or even implying that they can in this case could be seen as intending to cause alarm in an attempt to coerce money from the op, since they can not record negative information on his credit file it is an empty threat and therefore clearly constructed to coerce him into payment by causing alarm, If a court agreed, it's criminal offense, simple as that.

i could go on but i won't, i'm now handing over to you to justify, how exactly you conclude from the above that

soolin wrote: »

I cannot begin to argue with someone who has such a limited understanding of what is actually going on..

I think i have demonstrated quite a good understanding of "what is going on" above. If your in any doubt here is a couple of links to the distance selling exceptions guidance on the OFT website and a link to the Administration of justice act 1970 and the relevant paragraphs about making threats to alleged debtors.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/advice_and_resources/resource_base/legal/distance-selling-regulations/regulation-exceptions

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1970/cukpga_19700031_en_5 look at section 40

soolin wrote: »

Please go ahead continue to 'help' people in your unique way..

There is nothing unique about what i do Soolin, people have been using fact and legislation, supported with hard documentary evidence for centuries, it is only on this board of bad advice that such practise is "unique"

I have listened to you and your loyal tribe of supporters for weeks now, i've taken your jibes on the chin, but i will only take being called a fool by those with less knowledge than myself for so long before i expose them for their lack of knowledge, it is worth noting, several posts have been written in response to my post yesterday challenging you and your gang to either provide documentation and evidence to prove me wrong or stop levelling your jibes at me and telling people to ignore me. so far none of you have provided one shred of proof that i am wrong, yet you still keep saying it.

All words, no action, i have provided supporting text for my advice, if you want to disagree it will take more than words. Prove me wrong or accept that i am right and stop the personal jibes.