?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Paypal Chargebacks

Quick question that I hope someone might know. My partner and I are looking at doing a chargeback on a fursuit maker who hasn't been communicating or updating with us for some time now. Unfortunately the payments were all sent around April-July last year. Obviously this is way out of the ordinary window for a chargeback. My partner has called both his bank and PayPal, which both said they couldn't do anything (bank because it wasn't fraudulent, PayPal because it was outside chargeback window.) I was wondering if anyone has been successful in disputing old transfers before or if we really are out of luck with this one and will have to chalk it up to a very expensive loss :/ I'm hoping someone here knows the right things to say to either bank or PayPal to get our $2k back.

Community Tags:

Before commenting, please read our Community Rules.
Do not go after persons posted about here, by leaving comments on their art pages.
If you have been posted about, please read I've Been Posted on Artists_Beware, Now What?

Comments

arinaca
Jul. 29th, 2016 05:07 am (UTC)
Thank you so much for the advice! From what I could hear on the phone that was pretty much what his bank said too, because it was authorised there wasn't anything they could do. On that note though we might be able to follow up the fraud route seeing they've been ignoring us so long it doesn't seem like they have any intention of finishing it.
spartanwerewolf
Jul. 29th, 2016 06:09 am (UTC)
I never understand this- yes, you authorize the charges, but it's with the understanding that you will receive the product you authorized the charges for. If you don't get the product, then you should be allowed to rescind that authorization.

But that's applying logic to banks.
arinaca
Jul. 29th, 2016 06:52 am (UTC)
:P pretty much this haha logic to banks just... doesn't seem to happen :C
greenreaper
Aug. 7th, 2016 08:59 am (UTC)
I can understand their position. It's not within their business or capability to evaluate the conduct of a remote party - that's up to the account-holder. They don't have the same access a court would have to compel testimony or demand documentation.

Instead, they focus on what is within their competence and responsibility: whether the account-holder authorized the payment while the funds were in their hands. After it's gone, you basically need the other bank to be willing to give the funds back, anyway - or for them to be forced to by a court order.

Profile

A_B icon
artists_beware
Commissioner & Artist, Warning & Kudos Community

Community Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com