Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever....

[wee_s2e-migration]

4.1 Receiving Personal Payments. If you are selling goods or services, you may not ask the buyer to send you a Personal Payment for the purchase. If you do so, PayPal may remove your ability to accept Personal Payments.

 

Copied directly from my User agreement via Paypal.com

 

RMA sounds about right to me...

 

And didn't we have a thread about Clink accepting Paypal Personal for comic purchases and how they were breaking the law/rules?

[Lazyboy]

 

Using personal to pay for goods or services is a violation of Paypal's TOS, and theft.

 

 

You can only arrive at that conclusion by reading the examples from the FAQ into the UA. No such limitation exists in the UA. Sorry, but you are still wrong.

 

Nope. Sorry, but it is, again, you who are wrong. Paypal's User Agreement, section 16 "defintiions":

 

https://cms.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=ua/UserAgreement_full&locale.x=en_US#13. PayPal Purchase Protection.

 

"“Personal Payment” means amounts sent between two individuals (not to or from a business) without a purchase. Examples of Personal Payments include sending a gift to a friend or paying a friend back for your share of a lunch bill."

 

Emphasis mine. Right there, in the Paypal User Agreement. Personal payment means "without a purchase." If I am purchasing a good or a service from you (note the verb), I am violating Paypal's UA.

 

That's ok, I still think you're the bee's knees.

No, you are wrong. The relevant section is this:

4.1 Receiving Personal Payments. If you are selling goods or services, you may not ask the buyer to send you a Personal Payment for the purchase. If you do so, PayPal may remove your ability to accept Personal Payments.

Nothing is mentioned about sending or receiving Personal Payments, only asking for them. If you ask for them, you may lose your ability to accept Personal Payments.

 

You only posted a definition. I wonder why "Bank" and "Regulation" don't have definitions in the UA... oh, right, because Paypal offers users a "free" option.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

Using personal to pay for goods or services is a violation of Paypal's TOS, and theft.

 

 

You can only arrive at that conclusion by reading the examples from the FAQ into the UA. No such limitation exists in the UA. Sorry, but you are still wrong.

 

Nope. Sorry, but it is, again, you who are wrong. Paypal's User Agreement, section 16 "defintiions":

 

https://cms.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?cmd=_render-content&content_ID=ua/UserAgreement_full&locale.x=en_US#13. PayPal Purchase Protection.

 

"Personal Payment means amounts sent between two individuals (not to or from a business) without a purchase. Examples of Personal Payments include sending a gift to a friend or paying a friend back for your share of a lunch bill."

 

Emphasis mine. Right there, in the Paypal User Agreement. Personal payment means "without a purchase." If I am purchasing a good or a service from you (note the verb), I am violating Paypal's UA.

 

That's ok, I still think you're the bee's knees.

No, you are wrong. The relevant section is this:

4.1 Receiving Personal Payments. If you are selling goods or services, you may not ask the buyer to send you a Personal Payment for the purchase. If you do so, PayPal may remove your ability to accept Personal Payments.

 

No, that's only half the story, because that section solely deals with receiving payments. Not asking for payment is in addition to, not exclusive of the other regulations governing sending and receiving Personal Payments.

 

Let me see if I have your logic straight: Paypal will allow Personal Payments, so long as the seller doesn't specifically ASK for them, and that's to get around banking regulations, even though they specifically state, in multiple places, that you're not allowed to use Personal Payments for purchases. So, a buyer of goods or services could, solely on their own accord (because a seller can't ask for it, after all), send a Personal Payment, even though that has no benefit to the buyer, and exposes them to significant risk...? Right? THAT is what Paypal intended Personal Payments to be...?

 

It couldn't possibly be that 4.1 is worded the way it is to avoid sellers being punished because they received a Personal Payment, unbeknownst to them, that they truly didn't ask for, right...?

 

Nothing is mentioned about sending...Personal Payments,

 

Well no, not in section 4, because that is the receiving payments section. It is, however, found elsewhere.

 

only asking for them. If you ask for them, you may lose your ability to accept Personal Payments.

 

You only posted a definition. I wonder why "Bank" and "Regulation" don't have definitions in the UA... oh, right, because Paypal offers users a "free" option.

 

Not relevant at all. I posted PAYPAL'S definition of what a Personal Payment is, from THEIR UA.

 

Look, folks, you can hem and haw at the relatively weakly worded situation regarding Personal Payments all you want, but the situation is incredibly clear to anyone who isn't trying to get away with something: Paypal states, without qualification, that Personal Payments (note the NAME) are NOT to be used for PURCHASES.

 

The definitions section is just as valid a part of the UA as every other section. In that section, Paypal clearly defines what a personal payment is, with zero ambiguity: without a purchase.

 

And blob...it may not be theft legally (though the case could be made), but it certainly is morally....and the moral is the foundation of the legal, and is thus greater.

 

By they way....stating things like "you know what method I prefer, but I can't ask for it, wink-wink, nudge-nudge" is the same thing as asking for personal payment, which is a direct violation of 4.1.

[The Less Blob]

So, a buyer of goods or services could, solely on their own accord (because a seller can't ask for it, after all), send a Personal Payment, even though that has no benefit to the buyer, and exposes them to significant risk...? Right? THAT is what Paypal intended Personal Payments to be...?

 

It couldn't possibly be that 4.1 is worded the way it is to avoid sellers being punished because they received a Personal Payment, unbeknownst to them, that they truly didn't ask for, right...?

------------------------

 

a number of folks here have made personal payments to me without me even asking (and i don't ask, i just tell them which paypal account they need to send the money to depending on which option they use)

 

"And blob...it may not be theft legally (though the case could be made), but it certainly is morally....and the moral is the foundation of the legal, and is thus greater."

 

what's the morality? paypal is making money however you slice it, even if it's just the "float" from having that "gift" money in its "system" for a little bit. (i presume you know what i'm talking about when i refer to the float)* i'm supposed to have moral qualms when they hit me for 3% or whatever on a bank transaction or paypal balance transaction? A CC I understand, because MC/Visa/Amex are taking their ounce of blood.

 

(* at one point in history at least, though perhaps when interest rates were higher, brokerage firms made more money from the float than they did from commissions)

 

and no, a rational argument cannot be made that this is theft, at least in the criminal sense. a breach of contract, sure.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

what's the morality? paypal is making money however you slice it, even if it's just the "float" from having that "gift" money in its "system" for a little bit. (i presume you know what i'm talking about when i refer to the float)* i'm supposed to have moral qualms when they hit me for 3% or whatever on a bank transaction or paypal balance transaction? A CC I understand, because MC/Visa/Amex are taking their ounce of blood.

 

Sweet. Socialism.

 

It's not anyone's duty but Paypal's to decide what is and is not fair for them to earn. And yes, I know what the float is.

[lizards2]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

[The Less Blob]

no, it's not socialism, it's folks working the system the best they can, just like the big boys do to us.

 

do you have your life savings tied up in ebay/paypal stock or something?

 

i'm so sick of folks accusing people who are tired of getting reemed up the arse by big corporations of being "socialists". you sound like some jackas* on fox news. go watch that lunatic glenn beck, clearly you're on the save wave length in terms of $ (not so much i presume for other stuff ...not that there's anything wrong with that)

 

them and ebay f**k me and the rest of us whenever they can, i've got no problem with folks f**king them back now and then.

 

speaking of which, i'm kindah surprised there hasn't been some sort of anti-trust challenge to the ebay paypal requirement.

 

at the end of the day, it actually doesn't make a difference to me (and probably not for anyone who has 2 paypal accounts). i don't think you can make a personal payment with a CC, right? so my account that takes the personals only takes bank transfer/or balance transfer anyway, for which I wouldn't pay a fee. my wife's account is where i direct the folks who need to use CCs.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

 

Quiet, you!

 

 

[The Less Blob]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

 

Of course, you're right. I know I'm basically advocating something along the lines of drinking the soda and beers out of the hotel minibar and replacing them with stuff from the supermarket before maid service counts them up, but whatever. And, of course, if everyone overdoes it they're going to kill the golden goose all together.

[lizards2]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

 

Of course, you're right. I know I'm basically advocating something along the lines of drinking the soda and beers out of the hotel minibar and replacing them with stuff from the supermarket before maid service counts them up, but whatever. And, of course, if everyone overdoes it they're going to kill the golden goose all together.

 

:: wow - I haven't seen one of those in about 10 years - I must be living cheap and clueless. I didn't know they still existed. You must be staying there on per diem?

[RockMyAmadeus]

no, it's not socialism, it's folks working the system the best they can, just like the big boys do to us.

 

Deciding that a company "makes enough money", and therefore you are justified in not following their rules and robbing them of legitimately earned fees is both of socialism and theft. (thumbs u

 

do you have your life savings tied up in ebay/paypal stock or something?

 

Don't own a single share. I think eBay and Paypal are horrible companies. That doesn't change what is right.

 

i'm so sick of folks accusing people who are tired of getting reemed up the arse by big corporations of being "socialists". you sound like some jackas* on fox news. go watch that lunatic glenn beck, clearly you're on the save wave length in terms of $ (not so much i presume for other stuff ...not that there's anything wrong with that)

 

Um. Wow, you really jumped off the cliff here. Tough day?

 

Fact: eBay was a tiny company at one point. When Meg Whitman took over in 1998, the company had 30 employees.

 

Fact: Paypal was a tiny company at one point. Things were quite dicey for the company until eBay bought them in 2002.

 

All companies started somewhere.

 

them and ebay f**k me and the rest of us whenever they can, i've got no problem with folks f**king them back now and then.

 

Well, at least you're open about advocating theft. It's justified because they "f**k" you. Even though, of course, you're not forced to use their services....

 

 

speaking of which, i'm kindah surprised there hasn't been some sort of anti-trust challenge to the ebay paypal requirement.

 

I agree, but anti-trust isn't where the Feds have been for a longggg time.

 

at the end of the day, it actually doesn't make a difference to me (and probably not for anyone who has 2 paypal accounts). i don't think you can make a personal payment with a CC, right?

 

Correct.

 

so my account that takes the personals only takes bank transfer/or balance transfer anyway, for which I wouldn't pay a fee. my wife's account is where i direct the folks who need to use CCs.

 

This doesn't change the facts of the matter.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

 

Of course, you're right. I know I'm basically advocating something along the lines of drinking the soda and beers out of the hotel minibar and replacing them with stuff from the supermarket before maid service counts them up, but whatever. And, of course, if everyone overdoes it they're going to kill the golden goose all together.

 

 

Your analogy fails. It makes no sense in this context.

[Beau]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

 

Of course, you're right. I know I'm basically advocating something along the lines of drinking the soda and beers out of the hotel minibar and replacing them with stuff from the supermarket before maid service counts them up, but whatever. And, of course, if everyone overdoes it they're going to kill the golden goose all together.

 

:: wow - I haven't seen one of those in about 10 years - I must be living cheap and clueless. I didn't know they still existed. You must be staying there on per diem?

 

A mini-bar is a machine that makes everything expensive. When I take something out of the mini-bar, I always fathom that I'll go and replace it before they check it off and charge me, but they make that stuff impossible to replace. I go to the store and ask, "Do you have coke in a glass harmonica? Do you have individually wrapped cashews?"

 

- Mitch Hedburg, RIP

[The Less Blob]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

 

Of course, you're right. I know I'm basically advocating something along the lines of drinking the soda and beers out of the hotel minibar and replacing them with stuff from the supermarket before maid service counts them up, but whatever. And, of course, if everyone overdoes it they're going to kill the golden goose all together.

 

 

Your analogy fails. It makes no sense in this context.

 

sure it does, they're not losing any money in either situation and if done cleverly, they're not going to figure it out (and as noted, paypal makes money no matter what...I have little doubt the personal payment program nets them a profit, though they'd be doing better squeezing the extra 3% and the float out of us). any time you have money sitting in your paypal account, paypal is making money. that's fine, i don't have a problem with that, such is life.

 

the only reason folks have to pay a fee anyway on a bank/balance transfer is because they have been forced to upgrade their PP account to verified in order to accept CC payments (which, I'm pretty sure ebay requires, right? you MUST take paypal/CC payments...and then, EVERYTHING after that gets hit with a fee (without the personal payment option)...how convenient!). if you have two paypal accounts, there's no reason to even ask or want the personal option here or in another non-ebay scenario. honestly, i'm not even sure why i have even mentioned it as an option the last few transactions come to think of it because it makes no difference to me.

 

i don't think we're talking about ebay sellers trying to get paid this way...obviously that's B.S. on a lot of levels.

 

and stop calling it theft. theft implies "theft of services" or something along those lines, which is an actual crime. this is not an actual crime. maybe in loopy california ebay has convinced the governator to make skirting paypal rules a crime, but not anywhere else that i know of. heck, my governors use the personal payment option to pay for their hookers and girlfriends.

 

 

anyway, it is simple enough to claim the money wasn't for the goods, it was a gift to my friend, who just happens to be sending me stuff. should paypal get its piece of the action when I send Uncle Bill $50 to offset the costs of shipping a bunch of family heirlooms up to me?

[The Less Blob]

Never ever...ever...never...never ever ever...,

 

respond to RMA - you're asking for trouble.

 

Of course, you're right. I know I'm basically advocating something along the lines of drinking the soda and beers out of the hotel minibar and replacing them with stuff from the supermarket before maid service counts them up, but whatever. And, of course, if everyone overdoes it they're going to kill the golden goose all together.

 

:: wow - I haven't seen one of those in about 10 years - I must be living cheap and clueless. I didn't know they still existed. You must be staying there on per diem?

 

A mini-bar is a machine that makes everything expensive. When I take something out of the mini-bar, I always fathom that I'll go and replace it before they check it off and charge me, but they make that stuff impossible to replace. I go to the store and ask, "Do you have coke in a glass harmonica? Do you have individually wrapped cashews?"

 

- Mitch Hedburg, RIP

 

well, the key is just to drink the stuff that you can replace, like a can of coke or a generic beer. my wife won't let us stay at sh*tholes, so yes, where we go tends to have a well-stocked minibar and where I stayed in private practice tended to as well. at my current job they pay for a cardboard box when i'm on the road.

[passion4comics]

Since I only use Paypal for simple ebay stuff what the heck are you guys talking about in plain English?

 

You can't send a request for payment? What? I went to sleep at 5am and just woke up. Maybe I need to re-read this when I wake up a little.

[The Less Blob]

you can't ask for a "personal payment" (which doesn't get you charged fees), which i totally agree with. i say that's one of the many options someone has when i sell here, but i'm going to stop that because it doesn't make a difference to me now that i've thought about it. but if someone sends it to me this way I am not going to mail those lost fees to paypal. F 'em.

 

you really can't do it for ebay anyway because there'll be no record you even paid for the item, much less protection against a bad seller.

 

maybe a better analogy is declaring the value of something as $10 when i ship to canada and it's worth $100. the difference is, that is actually a bit trickier as you are filling out a government document, though the entity losing $ isn't the government whose form it is.

[Batty Scrooge]

you can't ask for a "personal payment" (which doesn't get you charged fees), which i totally agree with. i say that's one of the many options someone has when i sell here, but i'm going to stop that because it doesn't make a difference to me now that i've thought about it. but if someone sends it to me this way I am not going to mail those lost fees to paypal. F 'em.

 

What about letting the buyer pick and splitting the fees saved from sending personal?

[Green]

It may be a violation of the UA, but it isn't theft. At least not in a legal sense.

Just because a large company makes you agree to something, doenst make it law. There are tons of eulas that make things sound illegal to make whomever you are dealing with more money.

[The Less Blob]

you can't ask for a "personal payment" (which doesn't get you charged fees), which i totally agree with. i say that's one of the many options someone has when i sell here, but i'm going to stop that because it doesn't make a difference to me now that i've thought about it. but if someone sends it to me this way I am not going to mail those lost fees to paypal. F 'em.

 

What about letting the buyer pick and splitting the fees saved from sending personal?

 

Sure, these are common sense things a seller would do here in this community when someone does you a favor, throw in extras, bump up the shipping from media to priority, pay insurance out of your own end, etc.