Buyer sending a cheque

lovinituk

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

My concern in this case is that the buyer is already a slightly odd character. Why on earth would anyone buy on eBay and want to send a cheque rather than use PayPal? The chances of them being a scammer, to me, is now much higher than that of someone I chose at random.

The levels of paranoia between ebay buyers and sellers astounds me sometimes! Just becuase a person wants to pay by cheque does not instantly make them a scammer. I receive payments for ebay sales via cheque and postal order regularly - just received a cheque this morning. I also provide my bank details for those that want to pay by transfer - its just good business.

Some people simply prefer to do things the old fashioned, less technical way. Perhaps the buyer doesn't like using Paypal because they have read all the horror stories surrounding it? Perhaps they are older and cheques are the way they have paid for things for years?

Jumping to the conclusion that they must be out to scam is really over-reacting. Then again I suppose it is a sign of the times!

hermum

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I agree in theory, but it does depend on the starting conditions. I've got no problems in giving my bank details (on a cheque, for example) to a trader who I found in the local paper (for example). I agree that the chances of fraud are tiny. The chances of the person I picked being a scammer is very small.

My concern in this case is that the buyer is already a slightly odd character. Why on earth would anyone buy on eBay and want to send a cheque rather than use PayPal? The chances of them being a scammer, to me, is now much higher than that of someone I chose at random.
They may have some scam ready for which they need bank details. They buy a dozen items on PayPal and offer to pay by cheque hoping that one or two will suggest a bank transfer. Boom.

I'm not saying that the buyer is a scammer, just that they are doing something odd which would make me suspicious.

I guess that we're all different, I carry my cash-debit card around in my purse & I know that a scammer could use that far easier than just having my bank account & sort code, that gets sent out every 3 months in the post on my bank statements anyway.
I've bought things for my parents on ebay, they don't have or want a paypal account but if the seller accepts cheques or bank transfer that's how they pay, saves transferring money into my bank account & me paying by Paypal.
I wouldn't class them or their behaviour as odd.

JimmyTheWig

Fair comments, both.

I certainly didn't say that they would be a scammer. Just that I'm on my guard when someone does something unusual when it comes to money.

macfly

JC_Derby wrote: »

which he said in his second sentence, that you seem to ignore.

My fault, expecting you to fill in the blanks was a bit presumptious.
details are on every cheque - hence that is nowhere near enough to open you up to fraud.
Also, to suggest a buyer is a bit odd as he doesn't want to sign up for paypal, hence a possible scammer, is ridiculous.
He gets your bank details then boom? Boom what?

lovinituk

Just to balance out the argument a little here, have a read of this...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/jan/07/personalfinancenews.scamsandfraud

Now personally this has not stopped me accepting bank transfers and an important bit to point out is...

The charity is one of many organisations that do not need a signature to set up a direct debit.

macfly

All covered by the direct debit guarantee. A nuisance, but no danger of losing your cash. Anybody could go on the electoral roll and make trouble for you if they wished.

lovinituk

macfly wrote: »

All covered by the direct debit guarantee. A nuisance, but no danger of losing your cash. Anybody could go on the electoral roll and make trouble for you if they wished.

I appreciate that and I'm all for cheque payments and direct bank transfers (see my previous posts). I was just showing the other side of the coin so to speak.

Crowqueen

Direct debits are not once-off bank transfers. Paying in money to someone's account does not give you access to anything other than the ability, should you so choose, to pay more money into their account. A DD gives you the authorisation to take money from someone's account, which is another kettle of fish entirely, so it's another side of a completely different coin.

lovinituk

Crowqueen wrote: »

Paying in money to someone's account does not give you access to anything other than the ability, should you so choose, to pay more money into their account.

You haven't read the story correctly! Thats exactly what Mr Clarkson thought!

martindow

Yes, but Clarkson had the option of claiming the money back under the DD guarantee. He chose to let the payment stand. 500 pounds is probably small change to him.