Just want to start by saying that it's only for a $17 transaction, so financially it isn't a big deal. I'm more concerned about letting a potentially sketchy buyer go unchecked.
Had a chargeback opened yesterday, for a transaction at the end of December (as I said, $17). "The buyer stated that they didn't authorise the purchase".
So I do a quick transaction history check and find that the same buyer has purchased from me prior to December - in 2015 and 2016, in fact - with a different account, but with the same name, address, and the username almost the same as the chargeback username (the only difference being a full stop).
Not knowing exactly what the buyer is claiming (eg: whether or not they're claiming that their eBay was also hacked, and so forth) I messaged the buyer.
To summarise, my message was, "I see you've filed a chargeback. I can also see that I have previous transactions with your name, address, and similar username from 2015/2016, so I'm confused. Please advise, otherwise I'll need to send all relevant information, including the above, to Paypal regarding this case."
This was a bluff: I have no intention of contesting the case because I don't have tracking and I am not paying a $15 fee.
Buyer replies and says that he let his friend use his eBay and Paypal accounts to make purchases, and that his friend put his card on to his (the buyer's) Paypal. The buyer said that he didn't realise that his friend's card was set as default payment method on the Paypal account still, and that he had inadvertently made purchases and used his friend's card to pay. He said he was "sorting it out" with his friend.
Hmmm. So if this is true, then technically it IS an unauthorised transaction ...
sounds to me like the 'friend' is probably non existant & they have gotten an account/card in a false name or the name of a person who is deceased (happens alot) They maybe taken you're being reasonable with them as that you're a push over & they're going to get away with it.
I would play hardball with them & tell them you've been advised you should call the police because it sounds like you have both been the victim of online fraud. (play a little bit dumb, not blaming them & you've been advised sounds less 'attacking' than you thinking of the idea yourself), hopefully should sort them out quick smart.
Honestly, the whole episode is just bizarre. I mean, stealing someone's credit card to make a $17 purchase seems quite strange. I think, if I were a thief and stole someone's credit card, I'd be going for the high end, not the low end.
The buyer said that his friend's card was on his account because his friend had used his account to make (authorised) purchases. So, when I give these messages to Paypal, I guess they will look for other transactions using the friend's card on the buyer's account ... and if ALL of the transactions are disputed, then that suggests that the buyer has stolen this "friend's" credit card.
I've given him until close of business Monday to sort it out. I've communicated that to him, and told him that if it isn't sorted, I'm contacting Paypal and ACORN. And that's exactly what will be happening if I don't receive notification from Paypal that it's been withdrawn between now and then.
They could be making dozens or more purchases at say, under $20 a pop though to try not to raise questions, or still be 'testing the water' with smaller purchases
I'm kinda curious how the buyer would respond if you asked for their friend's name, or contact information. Also curious to see if they will either pay for the items (hey, if they were willing to work it out with their friend, why not be willing to work it out with you instead?) or send the purchase back since they are not the legal owner by their own admission - if they simply make payment to you, you can accept liability for the chargeback and have it all be over.
This kind of scenario is technically plausible, though much more commonly with partners / spouses, where they are happy to share accounts, spend each others money etc, until they're not together anymore and suddenly they're not happy to be paying for things their ex-partner purchased (which also tends to explain why the chargebacks aren't initiated until months after the fact - in other words, it was an authorised purchase, and the cardholder decides they want to de-authorise it retroactively).
I'm kinda curious how the buyer would respond if you asked for their friend's name, or contact information. Also curious to see if they will either pay for the items (hey, if they were willing to work it out with their friend, why not be willing to work it out with you instead?) or send the purchase back since they are not the legal owner by their own admission - if they simply make payment to you, you can accept liability for the chargeback and have it all be over.
This kind of scenario is technically plausible, though much more commonly with partners / spouses, where they are happy to share accounts, spend each others money etc, until they're not together anymore and suddenly they're not happy to be paying for things their ex-partner purchased (which also tends to explain why the chargebacks aren't initiated until months after the fact - in other words, it was an authorised purchase, and the cardholder decides they want to de-authorise it retroactively).
I have the friend's name because that was the name on the Paypal payment (with the "send to" name and address being the buyer's). With the previous purchases made by the buyer in 2015 and 2016, both names were the buyer's.
The friend's name is typed as (names changed, but format the same):
Mr. Reginald J. Smith
And MAYBE I'm reading too much into it, but that's how someone's name is written on a credit card ... but when you enter your own name into something like Paypal, you usually don't write, "Mr/Mrs" or your middle initial ... (or at least, I wouldn't, and I don't think most people would).
So, to me, it comes off as someone who never uses the internet/is an older person and thinks you need to type it like that, and/or someone is typing the name exactly how it is on the credit card ... which doesn't really prove anything, because if it's the former, that explains why this "friend" would use the buyer's account instead of making their own, and if it's the latter, it's because the buyer has stolen their card and thought they needed to type it like that ...
Was considering the idea of asking the buyer to pay for the goods via bank deposit, but I think they'd only do that if I agreed to not contact Paypal/ACORN and quite frankly, $17 is less important to me than stopping a sketchy buyer.
I was thinking that putting the suggestion of paying you directly, or sending the item back, would stand as a gauge to how genuine the buyer is in what they are saying. Though the fact that they are aware the friend is pursuing a full refund from you, and they haven't already offered pay for it, is probably indication enough.
I was thinking that putting the suggestion of paying you directly, or sending the item back, would stand as a gauge to how genuine the buyer is in what they are saying. Though the fact that they are aware the friend is pursuing a full refund from you, and they haven't already offered pay for it, is probably indication enough.
I considered that maybe this entire mess started because the friend asked the buyer to pay, and the buyer said they can't afford it or that they'll pay at a later date, so the friend went ahead with the claim.
Which would also explain why they wouldn't offer to pay me. The items in question are consumables so I doubt very much that he hasn't already used them, although I will ask.
They have sent me several messages saying things like, "oh, what else can I do to help?". I told them to contact Paypal and they just replied about how stressed they are, and how they'd removed their friend's card from their account. No mention of contacting Paypal.
So I might just request a bank deposit payment, and see what happens ... will have to word it carefully, though.
I know a few sellers have been successful in not only getting the buyer to pay the goods cost, but also the chargeback fee, so it's worth a shot I reckon.
The situation is already well beyond the point where communications between you and the buyer leave any room open for exploring his feelings or actions EXCEPT for actions with regard to the chargeback situation.
You need to know one thing: to fight or not to fight the chargeback. (That you won't be fighting in any event is irrelevant and not information that the buyer needs to know.)
Pursuant to that one thing, you need to be satisfied that either ⒜ the chargeback claim is being dropped, or ⒝ that the buyer pays you the full amount of $17. That is it. No other exchange of information necessary.
Given that the buyer has said the friend is continuing with the claim, that makes it simple: the buyer must pay you the $17 immediately. They can do this via bank transfer or via PayPal using their own credit card. You must give the buyer a deadline and allow positively and absolutely no negotiations over it. You have a limited timeframe during which you can hold off PayPal and the chargeback fee ($15, I think?). Make sure the buyer is aware that any delay would result in escalated amount owed to cover any costs, so your offer to close the matter by their paying $17 is strictly limited until xx AM/PM on xx.xx.xxxx (and make sure you confirm with PayPal that they will hold back until that date and time).
You shouldn't give the buyer any reasons for the deadline or escalated amounts; simply state something along the lines of "Your payment of $17.00 must be remitted by xx AM/PM on xx.xx.xxxx at the latest; no extension of time can be granted".
Lots of back and forth between you and the buyer isn't necessary. In fact, it's more often than not a mistake because it gives the buyer a sense of "environment tin which to negotiate, defer, sue for terms, or deflect". Typical arguments from persons in these cases incluide "Could you let me off seeing it's only $---?" (sue for terms), or "I'll fix you up later with this..." (defer), or "What can I do? I didn't mean any harm" (deflect), "I've removed the card from my PayPal account" (deflect), "I'll keep trying to sort things out with my friend" (defer), etc.
Any of such communications is now irrelevant and time-wasting.
In my view, the fact that the buyer hasn't already told you he will pay the $17 directly to you immediately is a strong indicator that he doesn't intend to pay you. The buyer's already indicated that the "friend" isn't prepared to drop the chargeback claim, and if this were only over a single $17 transaction, that would not make sense. If it doesn't make sense, something more is going on. The likely possibilities are credit card fraud with the card-holder not known to the buyer, credit card fraud with the card-holder being known to the buyer (and friend putting card details on buyer PP account being a lie), or credit card fraud of multiple purchases (too many for the "it was an accidental use" excuse) adding up to a significant amount with the (friend putting card details on buyer PP account being true).
Frankly, from your perspective it doesn't matter very much which of these is true at this stage. At this stage, you just want to be paid so that you can tell PayPal to accept the chargeback. (Word that as "accept payment of $17 from you so that I can instruct our finance department to allow the chargeback claim without contest" or words to that effect.)
Once you have that sorted out, I'd be reporting this buyer to ACORN in any event. Had the buyer immediately paid you, there wouldn't have been the indicators that this was fraud, and hence it woulldn't have been necessary. But the deflections and assumed helplessness are indicators. Of course I wouldn't mention that to the buyer.
Haven't had a chance to come back and update 'til now:
The buyer agreed to pay me via bank deposit, and indicated that their friend had withdrawn the case. I did not receive any notification of the withdrawal, so I called PayPal, who called the bank, and a few hours later, I received an email that the case had been withdrawn.
So I sent the buyer a refund via PayPal (but I didn't use the refund option as I wasn't sure if it'd go back onto the friend's card or not. I just sent them funds).
They then indicated they didn't use the email attached to that PayPal any more (hmmmm ...), and instructed me to refund them to a different email/PayPal ... seeing as the first payment was still unclaimed, I cancelled it and sent it to the different email ... (once again, sketchy ... but the claim was withdrawn and I had their money in my bank account, so whatever).
I don't know if the buyer would've paid me via bank deposit/the friend would've withdrawn had I not indicated my intention to report to ACORN, etc. They both seemed to drag their feet until I explained the implications of proceeding with the claim.
Thank you very much to everyone who took the time to respond and offer advice.
