Paypal Holding money after 240 day of Purchase

[funkyflamingo*]

I sold an item on 26/12/2016.  It was paid for and sent with a courier and delivered around the 2/1/2017. It has tracking and signature of the person who accepted the parcel.

On the 1/9/2017, I received and email from Paypal, saying my money is on hold due to the bank of the recipient of the item is an unauthorized transaction.

I had a look at the buyer’s feedback. It shows that the buyer had excellent feedback for the past six months from other sellers, but from 22/8/2017, the buyer has also sold two items at high prices, one for $2200 and a $500.  Their buyers have left negative feedback, saying that they are scammers, and buyer beware.  

I rang Paypal, and discussed the situation which they would investigate and get back to me, (who knows how long that will take), but I am also wondering how Paypal can hold my money, as I thought it was only for 180 days, not 240!

This has never happened to me before, and I am wondering, has something changed with Paypals policies or if this has happened to anyone else!

[kopenhagen5]

It is 180 days to open a case in PayPal.

So if someone opens a case at 170 days then the case time starts from that point.

And not surprised if a chargeback takes many months to sort out.

But gee, 240 days is a long time.

Keep calling PayPal and even advise them you will need to contact the FOS.

[digital*ghost]

Credit card chargebacks are actioned by the banks, and some will allow them to be opened up to 12 months after a transaction (I've even heard of them being initiated longer than 12 months after a purchase, sadly). 

As long as you provide to PayPal all of the relevant documentation you have (proof of shipping, to the address shown on the order records), you should be covered by Seller Protection. It can take a while to be resolved (I have two chargebacks being reviewed still, that were opened a few weeks ago by the same buyer for different transactions a couple of months apart - one was sent registered, the other was not, so by all rights I should qualify for protection on the registered one and eventually have the funds that are on hold restored to my account. However, the current status of both is still under review, and the last update was 19th August, so it's been going on for a while). 

[kopenhagen5]

DG keep in mind PayPal only require proof of postage not proof of delivery.

I won a case with PayPal having the postal receipt with the buyer's postcode on it.

[digital*ghost]

---

@kopenhagen5 wrote:

DG keep in mind PayPal only require proof of postage not proof of delivery.

I won a case with PayPal having the postal receipt with the buyer's postcode on it.

---

I know, the evidence I provided to PayPal for all 4 of the reversals that were initiated in the last few weeks primarily consisted of images, so nothing official in most regards - I've mentioned previously that I keep visual records of every single order I post out, so for each one at the very least I had a photo of the fully addressed packages, with the items that were purchased, and in most cases postage etc was applied (as in, they were full stamped and addressed).

I do this more for other reasons (it's such a relief to be able to look up past orders and see exactly what was packaged when someone contacts me about receiving incorrect items, or less quantity than ordered, it adds about 10 minutes to my packaging process each day, but has saved me $100's in terms of refunding or replacing items for liars 😉 ), but I also figured I had nothing to lose by providing these images in addition to the paperwork showing one of them was sent registered (that one was sent back in May, if memory serves, so tracking was long gone and all I had was the lodgement receipt, and the photo showing the addressed package with registered sticker on it). Nothing but $15 per CC chargeback to lose, that is, but I refused to just accept and refund the orders. If I fight - if people fight - maybe one day the banks will stop making it so easy for people to do this. One can only hope such things might make a difference, anyway.

The first reversal wasn't a CC chargeback, though, as the buyer was claiming unauthorised use of their PayPal account, and maybe my photo helped, maybe it didn't, but that was resolved in my favour. The last 3 are CC chargebacks, and I'm fully expecting to lose the cash on 2 out of 3 as I have no official proof of postage from Australia Post. Luckily for me, the amounts of those two aren't particularly high, at least, and I can only empathise with sellers who are dealing with this for hundreds (or thousands) of dollars worth of goods, even if they ultimately do qualify for seller protection, it can seriously mess with cash flow and the like. 

Sorry, went off on a bit of a tangent, but this topic is quite close to home at the moment.