UnPaid (and not your) Pal

Posted Fri February 3, 2012 12:00 pm, by Ruth H. written to PayPal.com

Write a Letter to this Company

I recently sold a pair of jeans for charity. The entire sale, 100%, went to the charity. Paypal has placed a hold on the funds and will not release them until the buyer leaves feedback or 21 days, whichever comes first. I strongly suggest you begin releasing funds immediately for charity auctions when all of the funds are for charity and none are for the seller.

The 21 day float (when Ebay/Paypal makes money off of the seller or charity's money) is not acceptable, and one reason I almost never sell anything on Ebay on my personal account. [Planetfeedback note: there are two accounts; the other doesn't have the hold problem, but this was personal and not business-related.] If it weren't a fundraiser I wouldn't have this time either; your policies are frankly as seller-unfriendly as possible. It is not fair to either seller or charity to hold the funds.

Again, I strongly suggest you revisit this policy. It would go a small way toward rehabilitating your image. Sellers are already staying away in droves, and this business of holding charitable contributions can't be helping.

Log In/Create an account | 19 comments

del.icio.us      Digg this

PlanetFeedback Comments are subject to strict terms and conditions. We reserve the right to deny site membership privileges to any individuals acting inappropriately.

If it is for charity by MA Bellamy Posted Mon February 6, 2012 @ 4:28 PM then should it matter if there is a hold? So long as the money ends up where it is supposed to go would be the main concern, right? Reply True, but why should they have to wait? Ebay benefits from the wait. by The Original Nethead Mon February 6, 2012 @ 10:12 PM Well, the downside by MA Bellamy Tue February 7, 2012 @ 9:04 AM "Someone has the upper hand" ... generally Ebay. by The Original Nethead Tue February 7, 2012 @ 1:48 PM So who creates these horrible policies - eBay or PayPal? I don't by Steve OH (IO) Wed February 8, 2012 @ 12:35 PM Ebay owns Paypal by The Original Nethead Wed February 8, 2012 @ 4:54 PM Re: UnPaid (and not your) Pal by McJohn Posted Sat February 4, 2012 @ 4:52 PM How do they know its for charity? And whats to stop everyone from saying its for chartity just to get their money faster? How can you say its "money grubbing" (in the reply below)? How do they make more money by holding your money? Reply You have to use their Giving Works system - it's in the auction listing process by The Original Nethead Sat February 4, 2012 @ 10:22 PM I post alot of things but by McJohn Mon February 6, 2012 @ 10:17 AM This was for a local charity. by The Original Nethead Mon February 6, 2012 @ 10:10 PM Re: UnPaid (and not your) Pal by PepperElf Posted Fri February 3, 2012 @ 12:05 PM Here's the possible problem. 1) IIRC it won't matter if the other account is in good standing. If this is a new account with few transactions it will still be held to the same restrictions as other new accounts. The only time the other account will matter is if the other account is in *bad* standing. (like if someone made a new account to circumvent a block, or to harass someone) 2) What you plan to do with the money doesn't matter when it comes to the hold rules. I mean yes, it's very kind of you and applaudable to donate for charity like that. However it doesn't lift the rules and restrictions already in place. Reply It's not a new account - I've had it since 2001. The problem is greed - theirs by The Original Nethead Fri February 3, 2012 @ 10:37 PM Read their policy by fishbjc Sun February 5, 2012 @ 10:49 PM ah. yes why? n/t by PepperElf Mon February 6, 2012 @ 9:59 AM That's wrong - that's why. Delivery confirmation does not always release funds. by The Original Nethead Mon February 6, 2012 @ 10:26 AM i don't see anything in that policy about charity by PepperElf Mon February 6, 2012 @ 5:57 PM Exactly - hence the letter. by The Original Nethead Mon February 6, 2012 @ 10:16 PM well the license would be proof that it's a real NPO, but still there's no clause in the rules you quoted by PepperElf Tue February 7, 2012 @ 8:29 AM I never said there was, I said there OUGHT to be. by The Original Nethead Tue February 7, 2012 @ 1:50 PM