Paypal reversal

chancesare_2

richto wrote: »

Read above as to what proof of posting is according to Paypal and you will find that I am absolutely correct.

If you want to report a post because you are wrong, thats your problem.

I see you found the edit button to take our your offensive rude remarks. Petty, very petty and quite unnecessary, but I find people resort to that sort of behaviour when they are wrong.

The OP didn't need to 'raise an appeal' as the case is open.

Also, you don't need tracking, that is for INR. You need proof of posting, which the OP had. You can use tracking to add as pop, but you seem to miss the point. THERE IS NO TRACKING NEEDED FOR THIS SORT OF CHARGEBACK. Donut.

Jamie_Carter

chancesare wrote: »

I see you found the edit button to take our your offensive rude remarks. Petty, very petty and quite unnecessary, but I find people resort to that sort of behaviour when they are wrong.

The OP didn't need to 'raise an appeal' as the case is open.

Also, you don't need tracking, that is for INR. You need proof of posting, which the OP had. You can use tracking to add as pop, but you seem to miss the point. THERE IS NO TRACKING NEEDED FOR THIS SORT OF CHARGEBACK. Donut.

Actually you do need on line tracking in order to comply with the seller protection policy. If you don't have it then Paypal will use this fact as a get out clause.

Also as Paypal said that this was a fraudulent transaction, then tracking information should state the actual address delivered to, and who signed for it.

chancesare_2

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

Actually you do need on line tracking in order to comply with the seller protection policy. If you don't have it then Paypal will use this fact as a get out clause.

Also as Paypal said that this was a fraudulent transaction, then tracking information should state the actual address delivered to, and who signed for it.

No, you need tracking for INR.

This is an unauthorised chargeback, for which the proof of posting is sufficient.

Read it and see.

chancesare_2

I knew there was a picture here somewhere....!

This is the point. A lot of people just assume that oh its a paypal dispute, I need tracking.

The point here (that richto) seems to be missing is that tracking is NOT needed, all that is needed is proof of posting. If you have tracking then you are also covered for iNR, but this dispute was a chargeback, not a INR dispute.

Jamie_Carter

chancesare wrote: »

No, you need tracking for INR.

This is an unauthorised chargeback, for which the proof of posting is sufficient.

Read it and see.

As someone else previously said, Paypal make it up as they go along. I have been in a similar situation to the OP, and when I asked Paypal about the seller protection policy, they said "you are not covered because you didn't use a courier with on line tracking". That was their words. You have to remember that they will try to wriggle out of any pay outs under the seller protection policy. So regardless of what it says on the website, you want as much information as possible. Especially as it involves fraud.

Jamie_Carter

chancesare wrote: »

I knew there was a picture here somewhere....!

This is the point. A lot of people just assume that oh its a paypal dispute, I need tracking.

The point here (that richto) seems to be missing is that tracking is NOT needed, all that is needed is proof of posting. If you have tracking then you are also covered for iNR, but this dispute was a chargeback, not a INR dispute.

I thought it was a fraudulent payment, not a chargeback?

theonlywayisup

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

I thought it was a fraudulent payment, not a chargeback?

I thought I had included this in the sticky, but if not I will add.

There are basically 3 types of paypal dispute.

1. INR - item not required. This can ONLY be defended with tracking.

2. SNAD - significantly not as described - self explanatory.

3. Chargeback/reversal.
This can take the form of a 'security review' where you are given the option of refunding or waiting for the outcome of the review. Or it will take the form of an unauthorised chargeback - where the buyer is either aware or not. This can be a chargeback via the credit card for non delivery or snad (confusingly), or with the cardholder/account holder saying the transaction is fraudulent. These only need a certificate of posting. They do give the option to add tracking if you need, but as this is a money saving site, we prefer to give the free cop/pop option.

I hope that clarifies.

theonlywayisup

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

As someone else previously said, Paypal make it up as they go along. I have been in a similar situation to the OP, and when I asked Paypal about the seller protection policy, they said "you are not covered because you didn't use a courier with on line tracking". That was their words. You have to remember that they will try to wriggle out of any pay outs under the seller protection policy. So regardless of what it says on the website, you want as much information as possible. Especially as it involves fraud.

Paypal do give incorrect info on the phone, which is why if you refer them to their own T&C you are covered and it should be easier to resolve.

You may wish to 'belt and braces' but there is no need. A lot of people don't send the item tracked but insist it is to the Paypal address, so they wont ever have cover for INR but they WILL have cover for UC if they get a cop/pop. By the way, we suggest you keep the certificate of posting for 180 days. That is the general upper limit, although even this can be exceeded in exceptional circumstances.

Hope that makes it clearer.

steveE2

chancesare wrote: »

I knew there was a picture here somewhere....!

This is the point. A lot of people just assume that oh its a paypal dispute, I need tracking.

The point here (that richto) seems to be missing is that tracking is NOT needed, all that is needed is proof of posting. If you have tracking then you are also covered for iNR, but this dispute was a chargeback, not a INR dispute.

Maybe a current screenshot would help

[IMG]http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/<a href=http://imgur.com/rL6QN target=_blank>[/img]

Jamie_Carter

theonlywayisup wrote: »

Paypal do give incorrect info on the phone, which is why if you refer them to their own T&C you are covered and it should be easier to resolve.

You may wish to 'belt and braces' but there is no need. A lot of people don't send the item tracked but insist it is to the Paypal address, so they wont ever have cover for INR but they WILL have cover for UC if they get a cop/pop. By the way, we suggest you keep the certificate of posting for 180 days. That is the general upper limit, although even this can be exceeded in exceptional circumstances.

Hope that makes it clearer.

Many of Paypal's own t&c's don't comply with the law. So when you have a battle on your hands with them to get your money back you need as much evidence in your favour as possible. The OP has tracking info, and this will help.