Slashdot Mirror
Judge Says Paypal's Arbitration Rules Unfair
MooRogue points to this article in today's San Francisco Chronicle, which reports U.S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel's ruling that Paypal "attempts to isolate itself from challenges," noting "Judge Fogel also refused to dismiss the class-action lawsuit going against Paypal." I guess I've been lucky with PayPal so far, but I know a few people who haven't.
"This is totally unfounded. Just because people use our system, doesn't mean we need to bear any responsibility for what goes on with are system! Jeez, you people are all acting like money is important and should be regulated..."
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
www.paypalsucks.com
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
Nice to see Slashdot isn't getting more than a few stories a day from the Register at this point.
m l
But just in case you love the vulture, they still beat 'em to it:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/27028.ht
I thought I remembered a story about a decision that would make ebay follow all the rules and regulations that traditional banks follow. What was the outcome of that and would that have prevented ebay from being able to screw people like this? IS Ebay even FDIC insured?
For local cases small claims courts work really well. Generally for about $25 you can file, there are no lawyers, the case takes place within a month of filing, the judge hears both sides and the thing is over in less than 15 minutes. Suprisingly often once you "sue" in small claims court you can get the other side to actually negotiate in good faith.
With the internet there is a great deal of "mail order" type business going on for a county based system to work. But the system itself works pretty well. I don't see any reason the Federal Government couldn't set up an internet based small claims court under the interstate commerce clause. Also maybe raise the limit to say $25k. For large cases hiring an out of state lawyer to handle a suit is not unreasonable its insane for small cases and there are lots of small cases.
I've used PP a few times, and it's gone pretty well for me. I've never 'deposited' money in them, mostly because I realise that *** They Are Not A Bank ***, just a western-union house. If only western-union didn't charge as much money for money-transfers, they could take over the paypal market. ($18US for a $40US transfer. Hello? Can you say unreasonable markup?)
Support FSF: Stop thinking with your wallet, and think with your imagination. (cc/non-commercial)
mentioning paypal on slashdot is almost worse than mentioning MS....this is going to get ugly
Satanists get good grades too...suspiciously good grades
route all your paypal transactions through online gaming. have people deposit money into gambling accounts and then withdraw into paypal.
paypal legally can't charge fees on money accepted from gambling sites... so they don't.
i save a lot of money this way.
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
by doing this, it greatly reduces the strength of a EULA i would think...clickwrap's value as a legal tool is being shown here as not being what companies would like it to be, which is good considering the draconian things they put in them...i seem to recall one a while back where the eula said you could not write an unfavorable review of the software....
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
I've been using paypal constantly with ebay - both selling and buying - I even take donations via paypal on my website. I havent had a problem with them at all. I read through some of the old slashdot's on this and it seemed that people who had LOTS of money (ie: more than 1 grand) in there PP account somehow got fucked over but the people like myself who have $100 or less in there at any given time are left alone just fine. Maybe this is something the conspiracy people should look into - like maybe paypal fucks with the people who put alot of money in there at once because they know they can get away with it because the majority of people who run small amounts won't complain and will stick up for PP.
Ave Molech Setting
I used PayPal earlier this year to accept credit card payments for a seminar I co-produced. It all went very smoothly: following the instructions in their online manual, I was able to add the Paypal button to my website and also pre-populate the signup form for new PayPal users.
Best of all, the fees were only $0.30 plus 2.9% per transaction, with no monthly minimum, terminal fees, etc. like with a standard credit card processor. This page at PalPal shows the comparison.
To me, this means that accepting credit card payments is not just a privilege of those who can "qualify" at a bank, but available to anyone with just a painless web signup. And the fees are less too.
If PayPal can ever get its customer service act together, it will really give banks a challenge. The credit card processors don't care: they're getting huge traffic from PayPal.
Doesn't delete your account even if you specifically ask them to do so after many emails, fax, etc... and if that wasn't enough, they still spam you with their newsletter and promotion...
I mean, it was one thing that they didn't give me that 5$ credit when my friend added himself, and sent them a message to confirm that he got refered by me, but blattantly spamming and keeping your information in their database like this even after repeated requests is just plain wrong.
At least I'm lucky, I didn't do the mistake of running a merchant service with them, especially after all the horror stories I've heard.
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
However, I NEVER leave money in the paypal "account"!!!!!! Use it for what its for, sending/recieving money and you should be ok. It is NOT and never claimed to be a bank!!!
The unfortunate thing is that Ebay and Paypal were (and still are, I s'pose) linked so closely. I just sold about 30 items on Ebay and almost all of the inquiry e-mails I received contained the line "Do you accept PayPal? That's the only way I can bid." I ended up caving and getting an account just to up the chance that I would get a decent price on everything. Lo and behold, half of the auction winners ended up paying that way. So far, I've had no problems but plan on closing it immediately after I've finished collecting and shipping.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that Ebay acquired Paypal. Do they have any known plans to let it die slowly and shove their credit card program to the forefront? Have similar problems emerged from the Ebay cc service?
Does slashdot still use paypal as the only billing option for subscriptions?
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
yep, I am certain there is some bias here. As a note, real magazines and newspapers point out when they are involved with something they are coverering (eg. a magazine talking about their parent companies stock, will point out they are owned by the company in the feature)
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
Paypal does need some sort of governing body to prevent it from just taking peoples money. Regardless of whether there a bank they are a company dealing with consumers money and need federal regulation as the money comes across state lines.
So far, in my life, I have joined three class action suits, all basically after-the-fact since I had no intention of suing on my own behalf and the letter said basically "join or give up your share".
In one, I don't actually know why someone filed suit, only that I got a free movie rental. In another, I got a whopping $4.00 (four *dollars*, not hundred) in exchange for well over a hundred dollars in abusively-applied late charges from my CC company (who I have only "fairly" paid late twice in over 10 years). In the other, I got less than the cost of the stamp to mail the response (don't even remember what company I got *that* cash-cow from).
After the CC deal, I resolved never to join another class-action suit.
The actual people who got screwed... get screwed again, by the lawyers, who make hundreds of millions. And, these settlements don't even "punish" the companies involved as a result, since it "costs" them less to pay off the occasional suit than by changing their offensive business practices.
I'll join another class-action proceeding when it involves the executives of the offending company going to prison. Other than that, I see no point in lining yet another up-and-coming lawyer's pockets with *my* suffering.
After the thread regarding junk faxes/telemarketing calls a few weeks ago, I am happy to say I won my first case. The company I was going to sue over a prerecorded call agreed to pay $300 plus a promise to never call again.
However a few things are incorrect in your statement. Filing fees can vary greatly. In my county, for a claim of less than $100, there is a $79 fee. For anything between $100 and $5000, it is $96 (I know, strange but true). In several states, you are allowed to have a lawyer represent you, so it isn't just person vs person, although the judge may provide you with a lot more leeway. I now have one suit pending and am prepared to file another if they do not meet my demands within another week. Judgement is the easy part, collecting can be impossible.
Cave, wreck, and deep diver.
There can't be that many people who think that PayPal sucks!
You need to get people to deposit their Paypal dollars with you. You offer them say 6% interest. As soon as you get any paypals you redeem them for USD$ This action puts pressure on paypal to keep coming up with cash. Eventually they have to devalue their currancy. When they change the exchange rate to .8 USD$ to 1 Paypal you buy back paypals and restore everyones account. This is how George Soros made over 1 billion USD$. Instead of paypals he did the same thing with 3rd world currencies
Free cell phone tracking
They're all regulated for a good reason. They hold other people's money. There's a strong temptation to abuse such a position. Historically that's been a major problem, and thus there is regulation. PayPal is no different.
For the panel, I would recommend Theo de Raadt, Richard M. Stallman, Eric Raymond, Alan Cox and Hans Reiser. Peace and harmony for all!
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
The one single point that jumped out of this article for me, was the allegation that Paypal would be collecting interest on the frozen accounts. That is a big no-no, and should move
this discussion away from the civil/class action
stuff, and straight into federal-pound-me-in-the-ass charges for the people at the highest levels of the company.
They are simply not allowed to do this, and one of the most important things that enables them to claim that they are "not a bank", which they point out repeatedly in their agreements, is that
they fully insulate the deposit money from their corporate assets. Collecting interest on the deposit money is exactly the opposite of this.
Did you think they put that detail in the licence agreement because it sounds good? No! They put it there because it is the very thing that allows them to operate outside of banking laws.
If they don't do this, then there might be some serious consequences -- instead of having a judge merely suggest that their arbitration policies might be unfair (which was simply a wave of the gavel intended to remove a barrier for the procedure of a specific lawsuit), they could find themselves on the wrong end of a judicial ruling to the effect of, despite their claim to the contrary, PayPal is a bank, has function as a bank, and has violated federal, state, and local banking laws. Tack on a few mail fraud violations, and you might get to see pictures of another suit in handcuffs.
Looking forward to it.
I replaced my CC after somebody (not through paypal) was abusing it and because I forgot to change the numbers on Paypal they locked my account and wouldn't reactivate it with the new numbers and only with my checking account.
Needless to say, they have not seen a dollar since from me.
If you sell something online please offer more payment options then paypal!
With all due respect, it sounds more like an Ebay problem more than anything else. Paypal is just the money handler...they're no better or worse than a bank or a credit card company in this case. The negative feedback to the company will add up over time...eBay is most effective since it manages itself via the herd mentality. Still doesn't mean you got burned on a good deal, though.
John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
I have used PayPal for over two years now, I have the debit card and use it often. I earn around 2% on my balance and can move money to and from my actual bank accounts. I have never had ANY problems with it. I've used it mainly for eBay transactions, but I still keep a $300-500 balance and have never had any issues.
"We shall show mercy, but we shall not ask for it" -- Winston Churchill
Ebay is as much of a gamble as PayPal. If you're already *hoping* that the item you ordered on Ebay is truly what it is, one more gamble that you'll actually get your money sent is only reasonable.
This is my digital signature. 10011011001
Ok, so paypal sucks. Are there any good alternatives though?
Yes.
They are FDIC insured, so you have some recourse if they screw you.
I come from a small country in Eastern Europe (Estonia) but I have lived in the US for the last three years. One thing that surprised me most when I moved here was the backwardness of the US banking system (this is not meant as a flamebait, just the sad truth). In my home country there's a very advanced electronic banking system. Some examples:
1) Whenever you open an account in any bank, you always get free Internet access to it and full control over your account (since 1997).
2) You can transfer money from any account of any bank to any other account of any other bank, the account number system, routing and other issues are standardized by the central bank (since 1995).
3) In most banks, all Internet-based transactions are free (since 1994).
4) Proper security. None of this 4-6 digit PIN nonsense, you get either at least two passwords (one made up by you, the other comes on a password sheet that contains tens of different passwords and changes from session to session), or a smart card (since 1996).
I guess there are lots of other features by now but these are the ones that were implemented 5+ years ago and still aren't implemented in the US.
I find it truly weird that I have complete control over an account and I can handle all sorts of transactions in my home country that is thousands of miles away but I still have to walk over to my local bank that is just 3 miles away every now and then.
Just one example of how useful the system was: When we went out to lunch with friends, we never had to go through this bill-counting ritual (got change for 20?) when paying for it, one guy paid for lunch, and the others just transferred money immediately and directly to his bank account.
If only the US banks got their act together and implemented a normal bank-to-bank transaction system, we wouldn't have this discussion here.
When men used to be men
>McDonald's is jsut cutting edge for serving coffee 40 degrees hotter than your home machine can make it.
Look, either way she'd be hurt rather badly.
I just wish the coffee contained acid -- that way this dumb idiot would be part of the Darwin Awards and she wouldn't have seen a dime (dead witnesses don't talk).
Seriously, though, it doesn't matter how bad the damage is, if you do something clearly unintended and dangerous with a product, YOU ARE STILL AN IDIOT.
Sheesh, next thing you know someone will sue a rat poison company because it fell and got mixed in with the veal, causing the person eating the veal to go blind due to the abnormally high concentration of POISON in the rat poison on his veal.
Oh, look, I spilled HOT coffee on my lap and today it is ABNORMALLY hot coffee, so I think I'll sue.
I'm just waiting for a now deaf person to sue the manufacturer of their stereo for making it abnormally LOUD.
But, as I'm not a coffee connoisseur, maybe the point of coffee is to drink it lukewarm? Only avid coffee drinkers can attest.
I am a bit of a stereo connoisseur, though, and part of the point of a stereo is to have as much headroom as possible to help ensure the best dynamic range and quality. I guess you just can't compare coffee, rat poison, and stereos, though.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
??? What other species post here regularly ???
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Actualyl being from Seattle i know that coffee is to be server burning hot. Part of the ritual of coffee is adding whatever you want to while it cools down to YOUR desired warmth. Everyone likes it a different temp and you can get it hotter once you get it to if you go to a REAL cafe it is HOT. I doubt anyone gulps it right away but i also assume they dont spill it on themselves.
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
If they charged your credit card, you shouldn't have been calling for a refund, you should have been insisting that they deliver the item, even if they had to go out and buy a new one somewhere. Don't offer, acceptance, and consideration add up to contract?
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
If you're unhappy with PayPal, PayPalWarning.com lists a bunch of phone numbers. Call (877) 672-9725 if you want to reach them toll free.
Here's a bunch of known paypal numbers:
(402) 935-2000 / (402) 935-2001 / (402) 935-2062 / (402) 935-2258 [this is Craig, complaints resolution manager] / (402) 935-7733 / (402) 537-5740 (fax) / (650) 251-1100 / (888) 221-1161 / (800) 836-1859 / (877) 672-9725 / (866) 272-9725
And addresses, in case you need to send a process server or wish to register a complaint in person:
PayPal, Inc.
1840 Embarcadero Rd.
Palo Alto, CA 943030
PayPal, Inc.
11128 John Galt Blvd.
Omaha, NE 68137
I signed up for paypal because it was the only way someone who had something I wanted to buy would accept payment. But I wouldn't allow them access to my checking account. They won't let you spend more than $250 through their service unless you allow them direct access to your checking account.
After reading PayPalWarning.com, I decided that I never would use them again.
I was unaware until recently that by giving PayPal access to your checking account, you forgo the liability protections that a credit card vendor is required to give you.
So if you pay a lot of money through paypal for some merchandise you never receive, you basically have no legal recourse - you're screwed. If you had paid with a credit card, you could dispute the charge with your credit card company and they'd have to give you your money back.
I think I'll call Craig when I get up and ask him to delete my account.
-- Could you use my software consulting serv
I live in Louisiana. My bank is in Texas. When I sell things on eBay, often times when a person mails me their check and I mail the check to my bank, it takes less time to get my money than it would have taken through PayPal.
Then use Western Union's Bidpay service, as another poster in this sid pointed out. Bidpay will mail you a money order.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The result of that deregulation is of course the current shipwrecks of Citicorp and others, who once the leash was off decided it was OK to lie, cheat, and allow other to steal their stockholders' money (e.g. by giving it to Enron).
There is a reason that the federal government regulated banking in the first place: moral hazard is implicit in banking operations, and the amounts of money that get processed are an irresistable magnet for those of weak character.
sPh
Why are USians resisting that push? Simple: they aren't stupid. In the US there is common law, written law, and precedents stretching back to colonial times that grant reasonable levels of protection to consumers when they engage in paper based transactions. If I give you a paper check, you and I both have certain rights and duties, and we know where we stand if something goes wrong.
There are no such protections for electronic transactions. None. Nada. Zero. And the big boys want the little suckers, I mean people, to go all electronic. Care to guess why?
sPh
Do you mean that it's not very common, or that it has some fundamental problem? If the latter, what's the problem with Citibanks's c2it? I just heard about it today in this article.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
- finance charges: paypal doesn't even offer lines of credit, so there's no comparison. Nobody forces you to take out a c2it credit line instead of linking to checking, savings, or your credit cards.
- credit card fees: paypal doesn't shelter you from credit card cash advance fees either. If you put money into your paypal account from your credit card, and your credit card charges that, you'll also get hit
- international fees: yep, $10 to transfer money internationally, while then paypal imposes a withdrawal fee on the international recipient, in addition to the percentage they get from the sender (and in the case of business accounts, the receiver).
No good competition? c2it is good competition, as is Yahoo Paydirect which is run by a reputable bank (HSBC). Nearly every service out there is better, cheaper, and more fair than paypal. They just don't have the name recognition because paypal was the first major player in the market.If I give you a paper check, you and I both have certain rights and duties, and we know where we stand if something goes wrong.
There are no such protections for electronic transactions. None. Nada. Zero. And the big boys want the little suckers, I mean people, to go all electronic. Care to guess why?
Estonia has had an electronic signing law for a while, electronic documents are just as binding as papers.
Also, we are discussing big guys screwing little guys in the US, not in Estonia, so it kinda disproves your point, doesn't it?
I guess that when there was a shift from gold coins to paper money then there were also many guys like you raising panic. But history has proven that the new system's efficiency far outweighed any other concerns.
When men used to be men
As I said in the original. If the transaction takes place on the internet no reason the case can't as well. People submit their stories via. email; use IRC (or the telephone) for Q&A, documents by snail mail or email (they generally aren't many physical documents with an internet transaction anyway) and that's about it. I don't remember doing anything in small claims court that required my phyical presense.
I daresay that the ultimate magnet for those of "weak character" is politics, not banking!
In any case, I don't really see much evidence of govt. loosening their grip on financial regulation. They're busy adding new restrictions to what the online stock trading businesses can and can't do, for example. (eTrade just got in trouble for one of their business practices a few weeks ago.)
I don't have a problem with federal govt. doing what they're constitutionally bound to do when it comes to maintaining the federal reserve and minting currency. I just see an awful lot of red tape of very questionable value when it comes to such things as computerizing the banking industry and electronic funds transfers/payments.
The bottom line: If I have cash, I can carry it, store it, loan it, or give it away to anyone I please with no restrictions. If that same cash becomes an electronic number in a computer (instead of a physical piece of paper), all of a sudden it's 1000 times more confusing and convoluted.
Interpretation is up to the supremem court. $20 relative to average income might be pretty high.
We've had something like 4000% inflation since 1791. Throw in even 3-4% real economic growth per capita over 211 years and you pick up another 511-3926 multiplier. Even using the low figure:
$20 x 40 inflation x 511 for economic growth = $40k.
I'm not an economist but $20 back in 1791 was a lot of money.
Trolls post here all the time. (:
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
You seem quite focused on debunking Libertarian politics as unworkable.
On the contrary, the only real problem I see with the Libertarian party is the number of clueless people who profess to believe in it, yet don't really understand it. (This, of course, happens constantly with the Republican and Democratic parties too. I guess it just makes it easier to single out thoughtless comments when the party in question has a small minority of constituents.)
Regarding your specific questions about Enron and Libertarian beliefs on handling fraud:
I truly believe much of the corporate fraud (a la Enron) we see today is enabled and encouraged by our current state of government. They built this monster themselves with endless legal regulations (and loopholes), and then try to play the hero when they enact new legislation (or enforce current legislation) to halt it after the fact.
Certainly, Enron's C.E.O. should be punished. I've never met a Libertarian who believed fraudulent business practices were acceptable. (At its core, Libertarianism can pretty much be watered down to one basic concept. You should have the right and freedom to do whatever you like, *as long as it doesn't infringe on another person's right and freedom to do the same*.)
The more legal "fine print" you introduce into a system, the more opportunity arises for a crafy individual (or in these recent Enron-style cases, accounting firm) to doctor records and make things appear on the "up and up".
The most useful tool in the hands of the individual attempting to defraud another is confusion. Even in the case of the street con who challenges people to "guess which cup the ball is under" or to play a card game with him for money, he's only able to cheat people because they can't understand how his scheme works.
Government red-tape makes the perfect blanket to hide fraudulent business practices under.