Paypal Scam, I need help!

[noomill060]

Absolutely.

 

Cases such as this (on a larger scale, for goods worth tens of thousands of pounds) have come to trial and at least one judge has described Ebay/Paypal as a crooks charter.

 

But still, when a member of the public makes a complaint to the Police, they are invariably told that it is a civil matter.

 

Maybe he has a house full of goods obtained in this way. He seems to know what he's doing.

 

I suspect you arent the first seller he has scammed.

Edited April 2, 2010 by noomill060

[ClampingKing]

The timing in this is critical

 

The buyer paid roughly 30 minutes before arriving at your home? how? If they are in Norfolk that would not be possible.

 

The buyer then reversed teh payment roughly the same time (30 minutes) after collecting the goods.

 

That in iteslf would suggest to me that the buyer and the individual who collected the goods are either the same person or working together on this [problem].

 

Clearly Paypal have a part to play in this. Only the buyer would have your address to collect the goods from. To make payments via paypal, you have to log in. Only someone with the correct details can do so.

 

You need a colleague to contact paypal officially to obtain the name address of the paypal account holder. You must establish if that person is the same person as the one who collected your goods. Obviously you cannot do this in an official capacity yourself.

 

What identification did they show you?

[ClampingKing]

Can I suggest you contact the following company:

 

World of perfumes

116 Kingshill Drive

Harrow

HA3 8QB

 

 

This company apparently sold an item to the same buyer via ebay recently. It is possible they have the correct address for them if they posted the item. If you think like me you will immediately be thinking that the above adddress is roughly 30 minutes from your home.

[noomill060]

Now that is an excellent idea!

[ClampingKing]

Name & Registered Office:

RJS LIMITED

116 KINGSHILL DRIVE, KENTON

HARROW

MIDDLESEX

HA3 8QB

Company No. 06018684

[SQ1]

Can I suggest you contact the following company:

 

World of perfumes

116 Kingshill Drive

Harrow

HA3 8QB

 

 

This company apparently sold an item to the same buyer via ebay recently. It is possible they have the correct address for them if they posted the item. If you think like me you will immediately be thinking that the above adddress is roughly 30 minutes from your home.

 

I do indeed. I think i'll go in a more formal matter to hopefully get a better result. Just had an email from ebay... Oh My Days, who on earth reads the enquires people send in. Talk about getting the wrong end of the stick!

 

Here is a reply. Talk about a standard response! I didn't report a member selling a stolen Xbox!! Might start looking though to see if mine turns up there!

 

 

 

Thank you for your report against the member who is selling a stolen

Xbox (item no. 230455395709) on eBay.

 

We're eager to prevent the sale of stolen goods on the site. If we find

a seller has been selling stolen items we'll take action on their

account. This action includes (but isn't limited to) account suspension.

However, we can only investigate such a serious allegation if it comes

from the police, or trading standards.

 

I recommend you contact your local police and ask them to get in touch

with us. The investigating officer can then use the "Contact Us Webform"

link on the following page to contact our Trust and Safety team:

 

eBay UK: Safety Centre: Law Enforcement

 

Again thank you for your email, we know your time is valuable and we

appreciate you taking a moment to express your concern to us.

 

Kind regards,

 

Henry Johnson

eBay Trust & Safety

____________________

 

Learn more about buying and selling safely on eBay. Visit the eBay

"Safety Centre" by clicking on the link at the bottom of the eBay

homepage.

[MARTIN3030]

A considerable response.

Will move this into the appropriate forum.

[SQ1]

What does that mean?? Sorry Martin I am new on here.. I might stick around to.

[ClampingKing]

Yes, again without saying too much I have also had the 'have you contacted the police' response in the past.

[ClampingKing]

It just means that the administrators will move the whole thread to where it would normally be. you posted this all in the 'new member; section which is really to introduce yourself.

 

Don't worry. It will be easy to find.

[SQ1]

I got it, Well I guess I had better introduce myself..

 

I am a Police officer of 12 years london service, I have the outmost integrity, caught some of the most hardened criminals in London, been given the freedom of the city and have a lovely certificate to prove it, and just got scammed!!!!

[ClampingKing]

On a postive note, I am sure we have met. (no I am not one of the villains).

[SQ1]

I am sure we have!! My screen name is a bit of a giveaway!! I am the only one in London

[perplexity]

It is not too clear what exactly is happening here.

 

The Distance Selling Regulations entitle a consumer to cancel a distance contract and thus be reimbursed, and with no obligation to give a reason to cancel, in which case the seller would then be obliged to collect the goods from the consumer if he wants them back, and the seller would have to request to collect the goods.

 

It makes no difference if the goods were collected from the seller in person so long as the contract was concluded at a distance.

 

What then if the buyer cites the right to cancel? A charge of fraud could be laughed out of court.

 

[ClampingKing]

It is not too clear what exactly is happening here.

 

The Distance Selling Regulations entitle a consumer to cancel a distance contract and thus be reimbursed, and with no obligation to give a reason to cancel, in which case the seller would then be obliged to collect the goods from the consumer if he wants them back, and the seller would have to request to collect the goods.

 

It makes no difference if the goods were collected from the seller in person so long as the contract was concluded at a distance.

 

What then if the buyer cites the right to cancel? A charge of fraud could be laughed out of court.

 

 

Wrong. This is a private seller. He is a professional police officer, not trader. The distance selling regulations you have quoted on more than one thread do NOT apply unless it is a trader selling.

 

This most certainly is fraud and would be dealt with very seriously by any magistrates court.

[perplexity]

You may call it wrong on an internet forum; that is cheap and easy enough to do, but to call it wrong in a court of law you would need to known an appropriate statutory exception or a precedent to cite and you don't, do you?

 

The notion that a so called "private seller" is somehow excepted from a statutory duty is a myth, a foolish fallacy. If you search the databases for such a description it draws a blank. The consumer protection legislation refers to no such thing apart from this from the EU Directive 99/44/EC

 

(2) ... whereas free movement of goods concerns not only transactions by persons acting in the course of a business but also transactions by private individuals;

EUR-Lex - 31999L0044 - EN

 

and this from the Distance Selling Directive 97/7/EC

 

(2) Whereas the free movement of goods and services affects not only the business sector but also private individuals;

and this from the UK Distance Selling Regulations:

 

"operator of a means of communication" means any public or private person whose business involves making one or more means of distance communication available to suppliers;

Furthermore, Section 210 of the Enterprise Act defines a consumer sale in order to enforce the consumer protection legislation, according to which

 

[8] A business includes—

(a) a professional practice;

(b) any other undertaking carried on for gain or reward;

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

Enterprise Act 2002 (c. 40)

 

(4) of Section 212 specifically requires that "References to a listed Directive must be construed in accordance with section 210", and the Distance Selling Directive is listed [by Schedule 13], so this applies to the enforcement of any distance contract within the European Union.

 

[noomill060]

It is not too clear what exactly is happening here.

 

The Distance Selling Regulations entitle a consumer to cancel a distance contract and thus be reimbursed, and with no obligation to give a reason to cancel, in which case the seller would then be obliged to collect the goods from the consumer if he wants them back, and the seller would have to request to collect the goods.

 

It makes no difference if the goods were collected from the seller in person so long as the contract was concluded at a distance.

 

What then if the buyer cites the right to cancel? A charge of fraud could be laughed out of court.

 

 

 

 

BUT the "buyer" hasnt cancelled the contract, also this wasnt a distance sale- they buyer collected in person and thus had the opportunity to inspect.

 

The contract wasnt concluded at a distance. Its the same as if the "buyer" saw an ad in the paper.

 

Also, intent comes in to play- instead of contacting SQ1 and bringing the thing back, asking for a refund, he simply reversed the payment and appears to believe he can keep the xbox.

 

This is analagous to cancelling a cheque and keeping a purchase.

[perplexity]

It's a distance contract if and when the contract was concluded at a distance. The collection of the item is a fulfilment of the contract, not the conclusion of it.

 

If a buyer pays a seller in cash when he collects an item (which is the sensible way, if only to avoid a Paypal fee) there is then an argument to be made to the effect that this concluded the contract, but not if an item is already paid for, at a distance. As soon as that happens the contract is thus concluded; a seller is obliged to deliver, etcetera.

 

I am not judging the issue, not with only one side of the story heard, just pointing out that the devil is in the detail. If a buyer expressly informs to the false effect that an item was not delivered or collected when it was, or if he tells Paypal that an imposter made a payment which he'd made himself, there is then a case to try, but if he informed Paypal that he has cancelled the contract, he is entitled to do so, and I am not then so sure that Paypal owns the right to retain the money on behalf of a seller, or to move money from the buyer's bank account if it was not yet transferred. It all depends on exactly what the story was.

 

In the mean time, the terms of the Paypal User Agreement are clear enough:

 

PayPal retains full discretion to make a final decision in favour of the buyer or the seller based on any criteria PayPal deems appropriate.

[section 13.9]

 

If you don't like that, don't use Paypal. If it looks too bad to be true, it is probably true.

 

Edited April 2, 2010 by perplexity
Expanded.

[noomill060]

All very interesting, but back in the real world, SQ1's problem isnt with Paypal but with the buyer.

 

Has the buyer intentionally and permanently attempted to deprive SQ1 of the sum of £199? If so, a crime may have been committed.

 

As there appears to have been no rejection of the item under DSR, or any other contact from the buyer since they reversed their payment, it seems to me that they have acquired an xbox by deception and/or owe SQ1 the £199 that will be needed to balance his Paypal account.

[perplexity]

I am wary of this because of the countless number of times that similar stories were seen before, on the eBay Community message boards for instance.

 

Buyers and sellers routinely post accusations of "fraud" as if there were no tomorrow, and then it turns out that everything was in order legally, except that the order was not yet understood by the victim, and the impression I have of this is not of a member well versed with the ins and outs of online business.

 

A well advised seller would not be accepting Paypal for an item to be collected in person, because it is well known that if a dispute is referred to Paypal the only thing they notice is the fact of whether or not a proof of delivery exists.

 

It runs like clockwork, not as if there were any sort of intelligence to it. Paypal justice is justice not seen to be done, justice on the cheap, not as if it were already covered by taxes paid to a government, the sort of consideration that a victim is acutely aware of when he complains to the Police about something that happened on eBay and the Police don't want to know, telling the victim that it's a civil matter, not an offence for the Police to investigate.

 

 

What goes around comes around.

 

[ClampingKing]

A well advised seller would not be accepting Paypal for an item to be collected in person, because it is well known that if a dispute is referred to Paypal the only thing they notice is the fact of whether or not a proof of delivery exists.

 

 

Now THAT, I do agree with 100%

[SQ1]

Hi everyone, thanks for your responses.

 

I have carried out some ground work and am currently looking into ebay/paypal in depth. I have serious concners about the number of unnecessary victims of crime that have been generated as a result.

 

I am hoping to create a one page blog with a survey attached giving people the opportunity to say yes they have been a victim of crime as the result of using ebay, the year they where a victim, the amount of financial loss they suffered, etc...

 

I am getting nothing but automated responses from ebay/paypal at the moment.

 

The good news, I have CCTV of my suspects, a car, and we are hot on their tails!

[noomill060]

Excellent- this is better than The Sweeny!

 

With a bit of luck we'll soon hear that DC Carter has dragged the crook from his crashed MK2 Jag after a high speed chase through an industrial estate, with the customary "You're nicked my son!"

 

(Or am I just living in the 70s?)

[perplexity]

It is incredible, the way that they fall for the hypocrisy of eBay to start with, the pretension of protecting to the members.

 

When a company seriously intends to be respected the first thing and the last thing to do is tell where the buck stops, who is responsible for any particular decision, who it is you deal with when they pretend to communicate, but this is the last thing that eBay ever wants to tell, and the same goes for the members.

 

The first and the last thing required by the consumer protection legislation is that a seller identifies himself, with his geographical address provided to send a summons to of need be but here again, this is the last thing that eBay wants to tell, for fear of bankruptcy should they rather deter their client base, the sellers of stolen goods or counterfeit carp, and the state benefit cheats determined not to declare their income.

 

The criminal element would be regulated well enough and soon enough if on every occasion that fraud is suspected eBay reported this to the Police, as is the duty of every honest citizen, to report a crime, but here again this is the the last thing that eBay wants to do, admit that eBay is a safe haven for criminal practice.

 

It ought to be easy enough to put a stop to this, with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations in place but the problem is then the same, who exactly do you intend to prosecute? With an international organisation where the buck is passed from here to there like hot potato this is not so easy, as is proved by the record.

 

The UK Distance Selling Regulations were already in place ten years ago and what came of that? For the first five years of it eBay took no notice whatsoever, as if there were no such thing, but was never prosecuted because of it. The OFT look the other way, with nothing ever done but the bare minimum, just enough to maintain a pretence of regulation but nothing more.

 

Were the letter of law to be strictly enforced something like fifty percent of the eBay members could have been convicted by now, for strict liability offences defined well enough by the legislation and the same goes for the eBay staff, but I am not going to hold my breath while we wait for that, not if this is how far behind the event the Police are.

 

[SQ1]

Ebays strength is with its cutomers. No customers, no ebay..

 

I dont think they regulate well enough. Despite emailing them and advising of my current position, I will get nothing in return apart from automated responses. I have just had one from paypal stating that they could not take the 197 pounds that I have had stolen, from my bank account. Funny that. I emailed them three days ago explaining that I had removed all of my bank account details.

 

Maybe if they read that, they may well understand why.