policy update for "substantially not as described"

[Theo411]

Paypal's new policy update summary says in part: For “Significantly Not as Described” claims under our Seller Protection Program, we are clarifying that the item may not be returned to sellers or sellers may be required to accept the returned item and pay for the return shipping costs.  Rather than clarifying, this language seems totally unclear to me, and I haven't been able to find any language in the legal agreements that deals with, or elaborates on, this.  What does "may not be returned to sellers" mean?  That it's an option to not return the item?  Or that it's prohibited to return the item? (and, for extra credit, where would I find this provision in the User Agreement?)

[BePP]

(Apologies in advance for the length.  When annoyed, I tend to go on.)

Not that I have an answer to your question (I have the same question), but judging by other internet corporations' user policies, we can be sure that the only functional reason for this change is to disempower:

1) users of PayPal (i.e. us)

2) sellers using PayPal, or

3) both.

Companies like this LOVE to create new ways to up their already obscene profits at the expense of the very people they need in order to make those profits.  You see this literally (and no, I don't mean 'figuratively') all the time across the business world.  Users agree to these frequently changed terms because, as the notice clearly stated, if we don't agee the only other option we have is to close our account.  We need a PayPal account for obvious reasons, and we become so used to giving up our rights as consumers that companies know they can do whatever they please and we will meekly accept anything they dictate.  Who wants to bother complaining to the company (wouldn't make a bit of difference unless many, many customers did it) or complaining to whatever overseeing government authority (is there even one in my province / state and would they even act on a complaint from a citizen?).   

(They also like to do this in devious ways, like the way I had to agree to the use of my information being shared within this community when I signed up for this 'forum account', even though there was a button that said "Not Now"---i.e. ostensibly giving me the option to not agree to my info being shared with everyone.  But, lo and behold, the "Not Now" button didn't work, bringing me back four times to the same page before I gave up and clicked "Agree".)

Each time after we agree to everything they say, they inevitably:

A) abuse our personal information (even more) to up their shareholder profits even further,

B) utilize the new freedoms their contract adjustments give them in ways that cut customer service to us and make their lives even easier.

As to the language they used in this contract change, of course it is unclear.  It's not only unclear but, as you point out, can be interpreted in several different ways.  This is deliberate.  Why?  See above.

You might also note that it's been three days since you posted your observations, yet I'm the only person who's responded---and that, out of millions of users of PayPal, none of whom apparently read the contract changes.  And for you, the one person who actually searched for legal clarification in the documents, no information.

I'll let you figure out what I feel about this situation.

[Theo411]

While I agree with your sentiments in general - and while I still wish I could find some definitive wording somewhere - I think there is one somewhat logical interpretation of the sentence, namely, that it's a badly worded attempt at saying that there are two options for dealing with items that are "substantially not as described", i.e., there's a choice (at whose discretion: seller? buyer?) to either (1) not return the not-as-described item, or (2) return the item, in which case the seller must reimburse the buyer.