PayPal Community

I can ask a similar question. So are you saying that there should not be any buyer's protection at all? I mean, if there could be disappointed buyers, what is the reason to protect them anyway? There are also scam buyers, so let's forget about scam sellers and focus on the easier target here. You make it sound perfectly normal, so next time you as a consumer buy something and later on realize something is wrong with it, just go with the disappointed buyer mood and pay to buy it again,  without demanding your consumer rights of course.   About my credit card. Please allow me at least to have a much better point of view regarding my own credit card and my own bank. When I compare it with Paypal, the difference is extraordinary. Something small as a clue. You cannot speak proper English with a Paypal representative. It is always someone with a terrible "country of origin" accent in which I cannot adjust to. Same goes for writing, the text and grammar errors is like writing to a primary school student. Well, at least from my experience so far, this is the case with me.   Finally, I wrote above that the item failed 13 months after purchase (390 days). Where exactly do you see my fault here? If you know of a way I could dispute my transaction in the first 180 days, possibly by predicting the malfunction about 7 months earlier, I would be very happy to listen and "learn" as you wrote. If not anything else, at least I will avoid such "faults" in the future.   Thanks for the replies anyway... ... View more

Paypal does not have any problem with "some" buyer and "some" seller, over "some" item when it comes to their "some" money. I disagree with your conclusion, "someone will always be disappointed". There should not be disappointed buyers when they manage to present hard evidence of the seller abusing a buyer again and again by exploiting this "some" system of Paypal. In my case, Paypal saw the item because I presented the evidence. 4 years later I still find their decision terrible by all means. It became the reason behind limiting my transactions with Paypal. I strongly disagree with your term "some" buyer. A buyer needs to identify himself/herself in all sorts of ways. We are not "some" buyers, we all have confirmed names, addresses, identity cards, bank accounts and tax registration numbers, all of them demanded by Paypal upon registration. I am not "some" buyer, same way nobody is "some" buyer. We all have confirmed identities, even though it suits these cases to have known buyers appear as "some". How is it possible that an identified seller that causes problems to buyers, just registers a new Paypal account when he/she is reported and just continues selling under the new account with the same abusing policy, without Paypal being able to identify him/her? I saw this happening with my case! The seller changed his Paypal account and name and continues to sell without problems. The worst of all, Paypal allows him/her to continue troubling the buyers. Talking about "some" buyer protection here, it surely falls aroung a single digit percentage. I do not know about credit cards in your area, but I have successfully received a refund 18 months after a purchase because the seller refused to fulfill his 2 year guarantee. On top of this, most credit cards provide additive protection when using them to purchase goods, I am sure you are aware of this already.   Buyers do not have access and surely do not search where their money is transferred once they pay for an item. This is not the way world market works. I made a purchase for an item which was advertised that it was already in Czech Republic. The item was in Czech Republic and I ordered it from an EU country. This is clearly a purchase within the EU, the reason for the price having additional VAT, regardless of where the money goes eventually. This is not an "international" purchase, I did not order an item located in Asia or America, at least to my knowledge and the advertiser's statement. Purchases within the EU are not considered international, there are no custom charges, the market is free and purchases are free of customs, therefore there is no need of "enforcement". There are regulations regarding the transactions within the EU and everyone should respect them. On top of this, when an item is in the EU, why should a buyer care where are the head offices of the website or company who sells the item? Should we maybe also check the servers of the website to see where they are located? If they are outside EU, are we not entitled 2 years minimum guarantee? Buyers are not investigators, they are consumers. As for me using Paypal, I just wrote down what I thought when I made the comparison with my bank and their credit cards. It was a plain statement/conclusion. I was in no way expecting you to care if I use Paypal or not... Thanks. ... View more

Thanks for the reply. So you are telling me that Paypal will only accept disputes about reception of items or if they do not fit their description? Well, I have to say my experience says Paypal will not even cover those. In a previous claim by me regarding an item listed as new but received without a box, broken in a cheap bag, Paypal dismissed my claim and allowed the seller to successfully sell an item as new without its original packaging and clearly broken. So if Paypal does not care about warranties or the EU legislation, why should I continue using Paypal? Not receiving an item you have paid for or when an item is not as described (like receiving a charger instead of a battery) is only basic market logic, widely accepted when trading goods. It is not some extraordinary and exclusive Paypal benefit, which of course brings us to the fact that Paypal does not provide any beneficial protection at all. What I am trying to say is that I can use my credit card instead. It clearly provides me better protection than the so much advertised Paypal. I have tested and confirmed this many times until today. My bank's behavior is great when it comes to consumer rights and online trading or purchases.   "Despatch depots" are not in my country, I clearly described this above. The company is in China but EU legislation does not provide the consumer warranty based on where the company is located. The consumer protection is valid for items sold within the EU and in my case, this is an item sold within the EU, because it came to me in the EU, from another EU country. If what you wrote was true, then no European consumer would have a 2 year guarantee for most products in the European market. Electronics for instance would come with a "worthless" guarantee (as you said), since most companies are based in Asia. Same would happen to US products. Those companies also dispatch internally, don't they? The internal dispatch is still not the case here. The product originates from Czech Republic. If it starts there and ends in another EU country, it is in EU soil and the EU legislation is valid and active. ... View more

@sharpiemarker  I had not realized I could mention you in my post. Did you maybe read my reply? ... View more

Hello sharpiemarker and thank you for your reply.   After dealing with such an unreliable merchant, I believe my refusal was justified. There was no assurance this merchant would not present further claims in order to avoid refunding me. I asked for assurances the merchant would finally refund the full amount payed but I never got any. I had every reason to suspect the merchant could raise more matters in order to avoid a proper and honest solution, after dealing with him for 3 months! What made me extremely cautious was the part "return item in good condition", when I had already declared the item arrived broken! This "good condition" was over from the day the merchant decided to ship the item in a bag without any kind of protection. How could I be sure the merchant would not react again after receiving the item and say the item was not in good condition? I am sorry if I sound naive here but I do not have some sort of habit to dispute my purchases over eBay. I purchased a new, boxed, unused and undamaged item as it was listed and instead received an unboxed, damaged item, which could have been as well used before it was sent to me since it had no box. I was clearly unhappy with the way the merchant dealt with the whole procedure and I claimed that since he did not honor his own listing (item listed as new), he was solely responsible for the item arriving broken. He chose to send it outside its retail box, he should accept the responsibility for any damages! That's where I based the item was not as described. The merchant listed the item as new and according to eBay new is "A brand-new, unused, unopened, undamaged item in its original packaging (where packaging is applicable). Packaging should be the same as what is found in a retail store, unless the item is handmade or was packaged by the manufacturer in non-retail packaging, such as an unprinted box or plastic bag.". I received an item that was not new, since all the above conditions were not met. About PayPal. What exactly were the circumstances that PayPal examined? They did not ask for a single piece of evidence, a photo, merchant's messages, some sort of certification! I even offered to send the item to a local dealer if there is one, in order to confirm the item was broken. There was no examination, apart from the merchant providing proof of selling the item. I seriously doubt they even checked the tracking numbers I sent them! Unlike PayPal I offered alternatives before they closed the case. I asked for a boxed, undamaged item shipped from the merchant, followed by a return shipment of the item I had in my hands. I would then drop the dispute. Nobody cared to comment on this, which proves I wanted the headphones, not the money. During the time they expected the tracking number, they were sending me reminder email messages asking me to provide the "following documentation". The specific emails I still have , did not list ANY following documentation. Have a look at this printscreen. hxxp://prntscr.com/pquj0a Returning the item for a refund was not a wise option as I described above. There was no assurance I would receive this refund. Seller was playing with me for 3 months, promised 2 times to replace them item, 1st time he claims he shipped it without tracking (...), the 2nd time he gave me a tracking number for another person in another part of the country. I am sure by now he never shipped any replacement. He then offered refund but found it "difficult" due to problems with accounting department and PayPal, as he informed me in a message. When dispute was escalated, he refused replacing the item or providing a refund, again this proves he had no intention of replacing or refunding. If I would return the item to him without any assurance, I would lose my only card on the table.  Finally, I really have to say this. It is SO obvious the merchant did not behave well. New boxed, unused and undamaged item in his listing, unboxed, used and damaged item arrives. Is this my fault according to PayPal? I ask for replacement, he does not provide a replacement after 3 months of me waiting 30 days for each replacement attempt to arrive and after depositing the amount he asked 6 months earlier! Fake tracking numbers and promises after I left positive feedback for him as he requested and after rewarding him for promising a replacement by purchasing more items from his store! Don't you think the case speaks for itself? Even if the chosen topic for the dispute was not the best option, isn't it obvious for PayPal that the merchant was not honest to the buyer? How can PayPal completely ignore these facts, reward the merchant and close the case against the buyer without taking into account the facts I presented? It really makes absolutely no sense to me... ... View more