Paypal dispute - bank return

bluesmith

I have been sent an email from paypal saying a buyer of an item i sold (for £270) last october has told their bank they did not authorise the payment, the bank have reclaimed the money and paypal have opened a dispute and put the transaction on hold and minused the money from my paypal account. They have said the only way i can get the money back is if i can prove i posted the item - obviously i cant as it was 10 months ago and i have chucked the receipt. I have spoken to managers at paypal and they have admitted it is not reasonable to expect me to keep a receipt for 10 months but they will not cancel the dispute. It seems ridiculous that the buyer can do this, they are obviously trying it on. Is there anywhere i can go with this or am i down £270?

wealdroam

Sue the buyer?

StuieUK34

Doesnt sound right to be honest... the story that is........

If it were easy to do that, i would have a field day going through paypal now on my old purchases, and then informing my bank i didnt authorise half the transcations, etc etc.....

Takecareofthepennies

Silly question maybe, but ...
Assuming this relates to an eBay sale, did the buyer maybe leave feedback for you?

soolin

StuieUK34 wrote: »

Doesnt sound right to be honest... the story that is........

If it were easy to do that, i would have a field day going through paypal now on my old purchases, and then informing my bank i didnt authorise half the transcations, etc etc.....

The bank though migh ttake a dim view of you claiming your card was used without your knowledge on many different occasions and consider you to be making fraudulent claims. Otherwise wouldn't every thief and scammer be buying evrything on credit cards and just claiming back the money?

Takecareofthepennies wrote: »

Silly question maybe, but ...
Assuming this relates to an eBay sale, did the buyer maybe leave feedback for you?

Makes no difference whether they left feedback or not.

bluesmith

Takecareofthepennies wrote: »

Silly question maybe, but ...
Assuming this relates to an eBay sale, did the buyer maybe leave feedback for you?

No they didnt leave any feedback although i have numerous emails asking questions about the item after they had bought it. I've offered to send them on to PP but they have said anybody could have sent them.

Doesnt sound right to be honest... the story that is........

We thats exactly whats happened

Takecareofthepennies

soolin wrote: »

Makes no difference whether they left feedback or not.

Well if the buyer left feedback (other, obviously, than saying they did not receive the item), that should be pretty conclusive proof.

InsideInsurance

All kind of immaterial given that there is no feedback on eBay but ultimately just because an eBayer says they received the item doesnt mean that the bank account holder is one and the same person.

Unfortunately there is little you can do if you no longer have proof of sending and PayPal tend to side on that of the buyer rather than the seller (just like merchant services do).

Send a letter by recorded delivery to the buyer advising you intend to court proceedings within 7 days unless you receive the funds in full by postal order or bankers draft. You can then issue county court proceedings online but without proof it is going to be one persons word against anothers and so come down simply to who the judge believes.

misssarahleigh

Just because the buyer claimed that he didn' authorise payment, does that actaully mean the OP is left with the debt?

Sound stupid, but from their end, they sold something, posted the item, had correspondance after the sale and didn't hear anything for 10 months.

Is the OP actually responsible for the debt as they haven't done anything wrong. If there has been fraud on the card, it's obviously not the OP thats the one responsible, just the one thats got involved by chance.

If somebody stole my card, bought a TV from argos and went on their merry way, I would expect my card company to be giving me back the money, not argos themselves.

This is only my opinion so doubt the law see's it that way, I just don't see how the OP is responsible for the debt.

InsideInsurance

It is the same as if you bought an item off of eBay that turned out to be stolen goods. The true owner of the item would be entitled to have their property back even though you have paid someone else "good money" for it.

You would be left out of pocket for the money you paid for the item and the item would be returned to its original owner. It is then up to you to get the money back from the seller you bought it from.

In this case however it is the "ownership" of the money that is in dispute rather than the goods. As I already said, there is no way of knowing for certain that the person who's account the money came from is the same person that received the goods.

One of the risks of being a seller - either private or a business - is you are open to fraud from your customers and that banks, merchant services, paypal etc almost always side on the buyer as a default (rightly or wrongly). You are however open to use the court system to recover your money or goods if you believe you are still owed them. Thankfully the hurdle rate in civil caught is only "on the balance of probability" so basically simply who the judge believes.

In this case the bank account owner is neither here nor there really. The OP has a named buyer and it is that buyer that owes them the money and that buyer that the OP would need to litigate against to recover their money or goods. The emails afterwards would certainly help persuade a judge that the buyer did in deed receive the goods - though obviously at this point there is no evidence to say the buyer is disputing this just that the bank account owner didnt authorise the payment.