Discussion in 'Buy/Sell/Trade/Giveaway Forum' started by W1zzard, Apr 21, 2006.
mussels hands out infractions like candy. you take one but you want MORE!
i am happy to share my infractions with the community.
Yeah, I'm not too fond of paying any other way, just to protect myself. Paying as gift leaves me with no protection, and my bank account is not linked. I'll make exceptions for people I know and trust, but that's it.
If the thread requires non-CC paypal, I don't bother. Just adjust your prices to account for the fees if you are so concerned about them.
paypal mostly protects ebay transaction
i use cc paypal cause cc will cover my ass in case pp doesnt
unless i now the person
i dont think non CC is a gift, which is what he wants to clarify.
Its merely WHERE the money comes from - from your paypal account or bank account, NOT from a credit card (where extra fees apply)
Indeed, it's not a gift. You still use the regular "for goods" purchase option in PayPal and thus can still file PayPal disputes/claims in the even something goes wrong.
Wile E, why do you not want your bank account "linked" to transactions? (Honest question, I assume there is a good reason that I just don't know about.)
Being able to be covered by your credit card company in case PayPal won't cover a problem, is definitely good. But that's the buyer's choice. Just wondering here if TPU as a facilitator for trading will allow sellers to mention non-CC payments in their pricing.
Personally, if anything I would probably post prices assuming payment is going to be coming with a PayPal fee, and then add a line like "subtract 5% if paid via non-CC PayPal." Any problems with that?
3 people within 30 minutes, all breaching the same rule >.<
you arent alone with your new badge.
just for people who are joining the party now...
its kinda clear.
I do not believe it is proper to request non-cc paypal either. I know for a fact that ebay does not allow it (they closed one of my auctions where I was requesting it), but that doesn't mean it's the same as paypal rules.
Like it's been said a billion times: just add a couple bucks to the price up front to cover the fees.
That works if your account can accept cc, but if they don't then I think it should be fine to request non cc paypal. I use to have 2 accounts one for cc and the other was the simple account and wasn't allowed to accept cc.
Paypal has a rule against it, I believe, and that is why Hardforums forbids it.
But now, at times, PayPal will ask the sender of money whether or not they want to pick up the fee, or allow the seller to take the hit.
IMO, everything is working fine the way it is. I don't have a problem sending gift payment to people that I have done business with personally, or have good heatware. It's also an outstanding negotiation tool
I was referring to the only option that eliminates fees on the seller's end from my perspective, thus the mentioning of gift payments. Non-CC paypal is not an option for me, because I won't link my bank account for safety reasons. Only my card is on my account. Should've been more clear about that, sorry.
What safety risks are associated with this that are not with a credit card?
If my paypal gets hijacked, I don't lose money out of my bank account, that I may need before it's reimbursed. If I paypal anything, it's on a credit card, not a debit card, and is paid off at the end of the month. If I get hijacked now, it doesn't effect my actual cash.
Even tho I would likely only lose my money for a few days, that could be all the difference.
Just won't do it.
Why not associate your bank account with, and disassociate your credit card from, your PayPal account? Either way ends up the same in the event of a hijacking: you temporarily lose one source of funds to live on, while having the other compartmentalized/isolated from the attack. And, then you can take advantage of the many private forum sales (I especially see them at [H] a lot) that request non-CC PayPal.
That's going off on a tangent a bit but it does show that it's not unreasonable to request non-CC payments from buyers.
Because my bank account holds my actual money, not a line of credit. I have things that automatically deduct from my bank account, that I cannot use the CC to pay. No, it does not end up the same in the event of a hijacking for me.
It is unreasonable to ask for non-CC paypal in my eyes. It leaves the buyer with a lot less protection. There is no valid reason to ask for it. Just raise your prices if you are worried about fees. I don't want to "take advantage" of the non-CC paypal sales. They can keep their stuff, and I'll keep my money.
That makes sense, at least in your case. However, that just means you personally can't take advantage of the better prices potentially available from sellers who request non-CC payments; it doesn't mean a rule should be made about it to prevent anyone else from taking advantage of them.
How does it leave buyers with less protection? Both banks (Wells Fargo and a smaller local bank) and one of the credit card companies (Chase) with which I have accounts, have proven equally effective in resolving legal issues/scams I have had to deal with in the past. Banks can provide buyer protection equal to that offered by credit card companies.
There is a valid reason to ask for non-CC payments—it makes lower prices possible. Saying "just raise your prices if you are worried about fees" is just a nice-sounding mask over a policy that would force unnecessary fees on sellers and raise prices without valid reason. It's one more rule, one more thing mods have to enforce, one more layer of bureaucratic complexity and congestion.
Like you said, you don't want to take advantage of the non-CC PayPal sales—and that's fine. But that isn't a valid reason to argue for making a rule against such sales for everyone else.
Edit to add: all the above is submitted for discussion with sincere respect and zero animosity.
Extract from Paypal's User Agreement:
I'm in the UK, and I pay fees on transactions even though my bank account is linked to my account, and I know there are quite a few from the UK on the forums that do quite a bit of trading, so will have to pay fees as well.
I also know that other EU countries have to pay fees regardless.
So trying to make the distinction between who does, and does not pay fees is difficult. IMO It should either be negotiated via PM (As has happened with myself a lot of the time), or the price should be advertised slightly higher to cover fees (as long as you mention this following paypals user agreement) and then negotiate a lower price if you don't have to pay fees.
Don't know if this has been discussed already, can the between bumps in the FST thread be 12 hours instead of 24? Especially the FST section is covering almost everywhere in the world and the posts seem to go unnoticed
if its too much asking please don't beat me up
Alright, I have seen one thing that bugs me alot in the BST forum lately... People don't put a link to their Heatware, but only state what their Heatware is. Can we emphasize the link part? Is it a rule to have a link or stating your Heat is fine (I find that a link would be better)
^^ I definitely appreciate it when people provide an actual link to their Heatware. Going to Heat, clicking the directory and searching their name may not take a lot of time but it's still a nuisance.
I don't think it's a rule to link it, but honestly if the seller doesn't take the time to do so, then IMO they don't value their potential customers as much. I always do my best to provide a link so it's effort-free for anybody interested.
i dont see a reason for it to be a rule, its just one more reason to go for sellers that provide a link.
people do not have a right to buy/sell or trade on TPU. if you do not like it then go away.
How about for moderation? do you guys honestly check if the heatware exists if it isn't a link?
I thought it was a rule that's all, it says a LINK in the OP, not 'state your heatware', perhaps it needs clarification?
i don't check anything. if somebody has a problem with something and they report it i will look into it. but really it is up to the buyer to check and be responsible. we are not babysitters.
Separate names with a comma.