PayPal Credit rant

JimmyTheWig

Yes, caught out by not noticing the significant bit buried in the terms.

newuser111

Test test test

Tildaplum

You cannot just bury  important bits in small print on page 99 you have to put key facts up front

PaulW922

dazzaofdagenham said:

PaulW922 said:

dazzaofdagenham said:

Think I got caught out almost same.
bought my daughter a Mac Book pro for her college work...think cost was £1600 over 12 months interest free.... paid £700 off in six months and by month 12 the only amount outstanding was about 70 pounds...so I thought by month 13 and month 14 the interest would be a very small amount.....
how wrong was I......it turns out if you don’t pay all the outstanding amount by the 12 month deadline, interest is backdated to the purchase date...and doesn’t take into account the payments you have made.

Who was the lender?

Argos

OK - so nothing to do with Paypal Credit then? And not the same issue in fact, because this is not what happened to the main poster. (I do understand your frustration though) 

PaulW922

I am afraid that I think this is a non-issue. The OP appears to have misunderstood what has happened. They have actually benefitted from having Paypal credit follow what is a legal requirement, and have paid les interest as a result. 

A_Lert

"PayPal Credit is like a credit card, without the plastic." Though I can't find out what its status is legally.

Allocation of payments to the highest interest debt is standard for credit cards now and is favourable to the borrower.

Nobody said anything about Paypal Credit backdating interest. Other people posting about that from completely different lenders are off-topic.

stehouk

I use paypal credit and very happy with it, what's not to like about it, 4 months 0% and being able to buy at bargain prices on ebay, i buy an item spread the cost over the 4 mths @ 0%, when iv'e paid it off i then buy another item, not complicated when you have self control.

coachman12

I tend to take the same line as Tildaplum on this issue. Other posters are of course quite right that Paypal are acting perfectly legally. BUT.......we are all human and there are not too many people I know who read the full terms and conditions ( as someone said on this thread....who's going to be looking at a condition on page 99 of a long boring list of mainly trivial stock T&Cs ? ).
With something as crucial as the dilemma faced by O/P, I think a fact as "game-changing" as that should be up-front as part the major facts as well as in the minutiae of the full T&Cs. A bit naughty of Paypal ( of whom I am an avid user and otherwise staunch supporter )-----IMHO only of course.

[Deleted User]

Why do you believe it is 'naughty of PayPal?'?

Not only are they following the law, but it benefits the OP.

If they consider it 'game-changing', I don't know why they would want to change the game back.

coachman12

Deleted_User said:

Why do you believe it is 'naughty of PayPal?'?

Not only are they following the law, but it benefits the OP.

I think I gave my reasons in my posting and I also said Paypal were operating within the law. But big douceur of 0% interest for 4 months as the headline selling-point does not actually say "0% interest for 4 months so long as you buy only one item in that period". I think the O/P might well have preferred to have paid off the 0% for the one item it applied to and then started a new offer 0% offer on his second item after 4 months. He may wish to tell us if my assumption is correct. My views are much the same as Tildaplum's. But of course, you are right in telling us all to read full T&Cs ( though I fear it will remain human nature not to do so when we are dealing with a big trusted company name).