Anyone taken PayPal to the Small Claims over witheld money?

[perplexity]

It's correct English, but never the less: read for yourself

 

Are you kidding?

 

 

The information is provided on the understanding that the website is not engaged in rendering advice and should not be wholly relied upon when making any related decision. The information contained with the Website is provided on an ‘as is’ basis with no warranties expressed or otherwise implied relating to the accuracy, fitness for purpose, compatibility or security of any components of the Website. We do not guarantee uninterrupted availability of the whatconsumer.co.uk Website and cannot provide any representation that using the Website will be error free.

 

Disclaimer | Consumer Information

 

[perplexity]

Replaced by the Fraud Act 2006.

 

There are no longer any deception offences. I have no idea what offence (if any) will be applicable here though.

 

The Fraud Act covers what used to be covered, with the advantage that there need not be an actual deception, the offence being a representation or omission with such an intention, to gain dishonesty.

 

[mightymouse_69]

The Fraud Act covers what used to be covered, with the advantage that there need not be an actual deception, the offence being a representation or omission with such an intention, to gain dishonesty.

 

 

In essence, yes.

[Kraken1]

Interesting, not sure that this has legs, but interesting anyway. It seems that the withholding might be due to money laundering responsibilities, and part of the first couple of contracts - you have layered contracts, one with ebay, another with paypal and then another with the buyer. then you potentially have jurisdiction issues, and then possibly also agency issues to overcome; PP as an agent stuff. I don't think the privity issue would fly.

 

Not sure enough on all these aspects to give any certain view, not without chunky research, so I'm interested in the outcome and approach. This said, from a higher level view this will be very tough. And almost certainly expensive to pursue.

 

The lba as drafted seems a bit kooky and scattergun like. If I received it I think I'd probably bin it for lack of a clear cause of action. I think you need to decide on your argument and run with it. All the theft and criminal stuff, fairly pointless in my view unless you can persuade them that you really will launch a private prosecution.

 

Re consumer protection - in english law you are given rights by certain bits of law, often some of them have different definitions of what a consumer is. For eg the SoGA gives certain rights to a consumer buying from a business. In the absence of granted rights, then you are stuck with the expressly negotiated terms of the agreement - basic contract law. This is what you are left with in a consumer to consumer transactions.

[noomill060]

From the buyer's point of view (and notwithstanding your dispute with paypoo) you have a contract to supply the sax.

 

As you appear intent on breaching this contract by failing to supply, the buyer would have a case to sue you for loss of opportunty (if it can be shown that the sax is in fact worth more than the sale price )and an order for specific performance.

[perplexity]

Section 14 of the SoGA gives certain rights "Where the seller sells goods in the course of a business", and the business is defined by section 210 of the Enterprise Act.

 

The Enterprise Act 2002 (Part 8 Community Infringements Specified UK Laws) Order 2003 connects sections 13 to 15 and 15B of the SoGA directly to section 210, via Schedule 13 of the Enterprise Act.

 

The Enterprise Act 2002 (Part 8 Community Infringements Specified UK Laws) Order 2003

 

Ergo, a business includes—

any undertaking in the course of which goods or services are supplied otherwise than free of charge.

Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40)

[noomill060]

A thought has occured to me- did your listing state price to Spain, if not, how much did you quote the buyer for delivery to Spain, Mohawk?

 

(You do realise that you can charge for postage, packing and handling?)

 

You can protect yourself from rip off buyers by sending using a courier who offers trackable delivery. (ie they give you anumber and you can track it all the way there and get a signature at the other end, thus proving delivery.

 

 

 

Pack the sax very very carefully with loads of bubble wrap and get a quote from DHL and let the buyer know . If they are willing to pay this large figure you will be able to prove online deliverym so in they event of a fraudulent claim they will lose.

 

If not, you have a get out

 

But remember, its up to you to ensure the sax is packed well enough to withstand the trip.

[Kraken1]

Not sure I agree perplexity, I think you are referring to domestic/community infringements, the definition of such, and whether an enforcer (such at trading standards or the oft) can take action against a business for breach of certain legislation.

 

S14 SoGA is unlikely to apply here unless the seller is a business. Even then, not sure how that would help the OP.

 

Incidentally, there is a fair bit of case law on what is or isn't a business, especially from the motor trade.

[Last of the Mohicans]

Thanks for all the input, for me this is what CAG is about 8) -

 

I think we can all agree that theres definately a problem with the way PayPal operate - regardless of their stated motives - and if there is a way to make them either pack in the maltreatment of straight up innocent users or modify their practices I think it would be good to formulate that.

 

I dont *per se* think that what they are doing is bad - for instance, I think that they would be sensible to start with a 50% hold on transactions until you had satisfied for instance £250 worth of transactions or 10 items.

This it seems to me would be more effective, as it would immediatly kybosh the [EDIT] who opens an account and buys 11 lightbulbs off his mate for 99p each and is then (pretty much) free to sell whatever he likes. Figures plucked from usual place of course but overall I don't think thats unreasonable*provided* that it's all 100% transparent before you sign up for eBay and you know what to expect.

[Last of the Mohicans]

A thought has occured to me- did your listing state price to Spain, if not, how much did you quote the buyer for delivery to Spain, Mohawk?

 

(You do realise that you can charge for postage, packing and handling?)

 

You can protect yourself from rip off buyers by sending using a courier who offers trackable delivery. (ie they give you anumber and you can track it all the way there and get a signature at the other end, thus proving delivery.

 

 

 

Pack the sax very very carefully with loads of bubble wrap and get a quote from DHL and let the buyer know . If they are willing to pay this large figure you will be able to prove online deliverym so in they event of a fraudulent claim they will lose.

 

If not, you have a get out

 

But remember, its up to you to ensure the sax is packed well enough to withstand the trip.

 

I take all that on board mate thanks. I have to say I don't think the guy is a wrong 'un - but (as we said earlier) I'd be a mug to send unless the P&P was 110% watertight, and that costs money - plus, there is the issue of his right to just back it simply because PayPal say so.

[Last of the Mohicans]

Are you kidding?

 

 

 

 

Disclaimer | Consumer Information

 

 

 

I think you're being unduly antagonistic. If you've ever employed a solicitor you'll find that even they wont guarantee to be right and win your case.

To turn back around what you said to me - please prove that what they say is wrong - that way we all learn something.

[perplexity]

I think you're being unduly antagonistic. If you've ever employed a solicitor you'll find that even they wont guarantee to be right and win your case.

To turn back around what you said to me - please prove that what they say is wrong - that way we all learn something.

 

The gist of disclaimers provided by advice agencies is to warn that it's the legislation that counts, so if you want to learn something, read the legislation. I provided the hyperlinks.

 

"In this Part [Enforcement of certain consumer legislation] references to consumers must be construed in accordance with this section [210]."

 

That is what it says.

 

Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40)

The challenge was put to tell us what removes the protection, if perhaps there would happen to be a statute to cite that refers to "used" or "second-hand" goods, or a precedent to such an effect, but it did not yet appear, end of story.

 

The EU Directive 1999/44/EC on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees provides that the time period of guarantees for second hand goods may be shorter and it is generally understood that the fitness for purpose is similarly proportional, but that is the only removal, apart from a public auction, which eBay does not pretend to be. Otherwise the fact of the matter is therefore that second hands goods are covered, as goods consumed.

 

EUR-Lex - 31999L0044 - EN

 

P.S.

 

And with regard to "business" versus "private", this could hardly be clearer:

 

(2) Whereas the internal market comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is guaranteed; whereas free movement of goods concerns not only transactions by persons acting in the course of a business but also transactions by private individuals; whereas it implies that consumers resident in one Member State should be free to purchase goods in the territory of another Member State on the basis of a uniform minimum set of fair rules governing the sale of consumer goods;

N.B. "transactions by private individuals"

 

Edited March 15, 2010 by perplexity
P.S.

[Last of the Mohicans]

Have you read Article 1, 2 © of the above?

 

© seller: shall mean any natural or legal person who, under a contract, sells consumer goods in the course of his trade, business or profession;

[noomill060]

I take all that on board mate thanks. I have to say I don't think the guy is a wrong 'un - but (as we said earlier) I'd be a mug to send unless the P&P was 110% watertight, and that costs money - plus, there is the issue of his right to just back it simply because PayPal say so.

 

If you send it by a trackable method you WILL cover yourself against a fraudulent claim of non-delivery. Just get a price for this and let the buyer know what he'll have to pay if he wants his sax.

 

Simples.

 

Is the amount he has paid just the amount of his winning bid or does it include an amount for postage and packing?

[Last of the Mohicans]

If you send it by a trackable method you WILL cover yourself against a fraudulent claim of non-delivery. Just get a price for this and let the buyer know what he'll have to pay if he wants his sax.

 

Simples.

 

Is the amount he has paid just the amount of his winning bid or does it include an amount for postage and packing?

 

The amount he paid (past tense - I backed it as you rightly suggested) was Sax + delivery (I allowed £60 to Spain based on a quick check around its less than 10KG and 600 x 500 x 400 when the hard case is well overpacked with corrugated)

I dropped the guy a message explaining I was backing his payment because I didnt think it was fair that Paypal should have his money while we worked out what to do (no reply)

I sent him another private emailsuggesting he pay me direct to PayPal but referencing the item - ie, not on the invoice, but making it obvious what it's for for his own protection. This according to an experienced eBayer I spoke to allows it through OK, since PayPal dont have jurisdiction to swallow non-eBay payments.

No reply to that.

In fact no nothing from him since the first couple of messages after he bought.

Maybe I should just message him asking for his proposal to pay other than PayPal within 24 hours or I'll strike his contract?

 

Edit: I just did a check using Parcel Force (Global up to 5 day, tracked & compensation up to £300 which covers) and it came out just under £93

Would you suggest that I write to him saying that if he wants to pay by PayPal he has to accept the additional costs (another £33) and pay the £93 seperately in order that I have cleared funds on the delivery prior to sending?

 

(THIS is why it hacks me off so much - to be honest if I'd been paid I would have blamed myself for undercosting delivery and swallowed it on principle - but as it stands, no way will I lay out best part of a oner on spec - which is what it boils down to. It's no longer the contract he and I agreed, it's something totally different that if he'd offered me I would have turned down flat)

Edited March 15, 2010 by Last of the Mohicans

[hightail]

You don't seem that keen to sell to this buyer anyway so why not refund him and go for a mutual cancellation. You'll get your ebay fees back and can sell it through a different channel. If Paypal was offered as an option then you have to accept it (ebay rules not mine) whatever extra conditions you put in the listing so your buyer hasn't done anything wrong.

[Last of the Mohicans]

You don't seem that keen to sell to this buyer anyway so why not refund him and go for a mutual cancellation. You'll get your ebay fees back and can sell it through a different channel. If Paypal was offered as an option then you have to accept it (ebay rules not mine) whatever extra conditions you put in the listing so your buyer hasn't done anything wrong.

 

 

It's possibly heading that way. For the record, I don't blame the buyer in any way. He's been duped as much as I have into thinking PayPal would honour his payment to me.

I doubt (though havent checked) that PayPal make great play in their T&Cs that if you send money to a seller they 1) arbritrarily re-write the deal you had with them 2) not pay them the money you've sent to them and 3) screw the pooch for both of you.

[noomill060]

Mohawk- you are going to face exactly the same situation each time you sell something on Ebay until you have 10+ feedback.

 

Paypal is fantastic for buyers as they are totally protected from [problematic], so virtually everyone pays that way now. Its years since I had a cheque.

 

The buyer hasnt been duped, they simply chose to buy from someone who doesnt quite *get it* yet.

 

"I dropped the guy a message explaining I was backing his payment because I didnt think it was fair that Paypal should have his money while we worked out what to do (no reply)"

 

Im not suprised- if I were your buyer, I'd write you off as another newbie muppet and find another sax to spend my money on.

 

(The Ebay world is full of people selling saxaphones)

 

Whether or not you find Paypal fair is not their problem. The fact that you now want to deal off-Ebay (thus reducing my protection) would ring alarm bells and have me running for the hills.

 

Sorry, I know this is a bit harsh, but thats the way it works

Edited March 15, 2010 by noomill060

[perplexity]

Have you read Article 1, 2 © of the above?

 

which is thus a reference to a listed directive, which must be construed in accordance with section 210 of the Enterprise Act, whereby a business includes "any undertaking in the course of which goods or services are supplied otherwise than free of charge".

 

That is what it says, in black and white, in so many words. It is required by law, section 212(4) of the Act:

 

Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40)

 

To buy and sell is to trade.

 

 

P.S.

 

You are making far too much of a meal of it. If you come on like this to Paypal or the buyer I am not so surprised if the World would then seem to be all against you. You are all but asking for it.

 

Edited March 15, 2010 by perplexity
P.S/

[noomill060]

Just write this down to experience and work at getting 10+ selling feedback.

 

THEN relist the sax.

 

Might go for even more next time

[Last of the Mohicans]

Mohawk- you are going to face exactly the same situation each time you sell something on Ebay until you have 10+ feedback.

 

Paypal is fantastic for buyers as they are totally protected from [problematic], so virtually everyone pays that way now. Its years since I had a cheque.

 

The buyer hasnt been duped, they simply chose to buy from someone who doesnt quite *get it* yet.

 

"I dropped the guy a message explaining I was backing his payment because I didnt think it was fair that Paypal should have his money while we worked out what to do (no reply)"

 

Im not suprised- if I were your buyer, I'd write you off as another newbie muppet and find another sax to spend my money on.

 

(The Ebay world is full of people selling saxaphones)

 

Whether or not you find Paypal fair is not their problem. The fact that you now want to deal off-Ebay (thus reducing my protection) would ring alarm bells and have me running for the hills.

 

Sorry, I know this is a bit harsh, but thats the way it works

 

All fair comment, I cant argue with any of it, however I'd tend to qualify the "he thinks I'm a newbie muppet" bit, since although I am - he's only 7 feedback himself (I'm on 2) and all his are as a buyer (only 1 of mine is). I guess what I'm saying is - PayPal would look fine to him, because he hasnt sold anything, so hasnt been caught in the mangle himself. If he had... maybe we wouldnt have an issue.

[Last of the Mohicans]

which is thus a reference to a listed directive, which must be construed in accordance with section 210 of the Enterprise Act, whereby a business includes "any undertaking in the course of which goods or services are supplied otherwise than free of charge".

 

That is what it says, in black and white, in so many words. It is required by law, section 212(4) of the Act:

 

Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40)

 

To buy and sell is to trade.

 

 

P.S.

 

You are making far too much of a meal of it. If you come on like this to Paypal or the buyer I am not so surprised if the World would then seem to be all against you. You are all but asking for it.

 

 

Yeah cool. Thanks for your input.

[noomill060]

"I'd tend to qualify the "he thinks I'm a newbie muppet" bit,"

 

I didnt say that, I said (given the same situation) thats the way I would veiw the situation.

 

Signing off.

[SOD'EM]

Sorry to hijack the thread. But I've just sold my first item on ebay for £25 (was worth a hell of a lot more).

 

Have just had an invoice from ebay for £3.55:eek:

 

Robbing b******s!!!!

[andydd]

Sorry to hijack the thread. But I've just sold my first item on ebay for £25 (was worth a hell of a lot more).

 

Have just had an invoice from ebay for £3.55:eek:

 

Robbing b******s!!!!

 

Well..don't sell on there then, thats there commison, my mum just sold some vases at a proper auctioneers and their commision was huge, a lot more than ebay charge, and they prob only have a fraction of the potential buyers that ebay has, for the most part Im quite happy with ebay, I've just bought myself lots of goodies to build a new downhill mountain bike and ive saved a fortune by careful ebaying, i've sold a few unwanted items as well.

 

If you wernt pleased with your selling price you could of put in a reseve price (although this does put some buyers off).

 

Andy