I'm not sure if somebody from Paypal reads these postings. It would be great if they do because they would be able to fix some pitafflas they are doing with Working Capital. We all know small companies are often rejected by banks when applying for loans nad Paypal offers a great solution but should make some important modifications to the program. Since probably the majority of the applications are granted, rejections can be dealt by a small Paypal staff on case by case basis. For instante in the case of CarolinaHorse (previous post) who was supposely denied for having had a chargeback, a red flag could be sent to an risk analyst. That analyst could easly find out that the chargeback was an exception (meaning few chargebacks compared to transactions' volume), eventually email or phone her and perform a due diligence as a way to make a human decision to denied or approve the cash advance. In my case there were two reaosn for rejection: 1) a temporary limitation of the account during a few hours due to the fact that I was operating from an IP in Germany instead of operating form my usual IP in my country of residence. Besides having prove my identity in matter fo hours and limitation was over, I could have explained the analyst that I was a director of a Fine Art Biennial in Berlin and therefore operating from there in Paypal transactions; 2) having had more refunds than usual in the last months. When talking to a Paypal representatiuve she had the ocassion to confirm that in all cases refunds were done when a duplicated payment was performed by the buyer indicating an error immediately and honestly solved by us (our buyers have to upload large files in the same payment form and sometimes by being unseccesful in the upload they believe the payment wasn't done and pay again for the same service; we noted that and make a refund. But in both cases by not sending a notice to an analyst and relaying in an algorythm there's no way no understand what is actually going on. Until they do not solve this problem by having analysts studying cases automatically rejected by the computer, and deciding on a manual basis (probably the majority will be right rejections and the analysis will be very fast, other will be subject to manual analysis and approved). A risk analysis computerized system has two problems: it is usually done by programmers who do not necessarily understand risk analysis neither can understand how a Paypal seller works, and can't make decissions based on inteligent analysis such as why an account was limitated for x hours, or why there was a charge back or a transitory small negative balance, or stationary sales, or refunds done my mistake of the buyer rather that refunds based in claims for defective service or goods. Dear Paypal: if you're reading this, please evaluate all the discontent from customers that are main drivers to make your business profitable, listen to the experience of those who are in the field, and never leave 100% of the decission in the hands of a computerized business. Please also modify your Customer Service representatives, so they can be able to stop telling people 'keep applying' and escalate our claims to risk analysts and then come back to us.
