I am writing this to the community, not to complain about the decision Pay Pal made, but to try to understand it. Maybe someone who has had more experience with Pay Pal can enlighten me. Last month I ordered a DVD that, a month later, had not arrived. I emailed the seller but got no response, so I opened a claim. Then the seller responded through Pay Pal and said they thought they had sent it, but were not sure, and they would send another. They did, but when I played it there were problems. It kept freezing, and at one point the damage sent the DVD back to the beginning. So it was unwatchable. One possibility is that the DVD was damaged during shipping. When I took it out of my mailbox I noticed the DVD was loose in its case, and it had been sent in a thin plastic wrapping instead of the usual bubble wrapped Media Mail envelope. When I opened it there was a chip out of a side of the plastic case. Another possibility is that I was sent a used copy instead of a new one, because the edges of the case were not sealed, and it was not wrapped in cellophane as a new one would be. So the DVD might have been damaged before mailing. I explained all this to Pay Pal, and reported it damaged, but it took them all of 5 minutes after escalation to deny my claim, with no explanation. Yet in their protection statement they say an item will be covered if, "the item was damaged during shipping," or, "you bought an item described as 'new' but received something that was used." One of those two things has to be true (althought the DVD might not have been specifically described as "new" by the seller. But one assumes they will be sent a new one if it is not described as "used.") So I do not understand their ruling. And there is no rebuttal. The case is closed. So there is no talking to Pay Pal about it further. Does anyone in the comminity have an idea why they might have ruled as they did? It's a shame that a seller can get away with selling a defective product, and it makes me reluctant to buy DVDs online again.
... View more