Comments on: Pocketing Police

By: GreyGeek

GreyGeek — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:45:53 +0000

Considering how many times PayPal has been hacked by thieves is it prudent to use them as a channel for the exchange of money and goods?

By: Eats Wombats

Eats Wombats — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 19:06:37 +0000

Anybody using PayPal needs to take a look at PayPalSucks.com and think very carefully about this.

I used it years ago when I lived in the far east and at one point my account was frozen for no reason whatever (that IP address?? You must be a criminal). At the time I read suggestions that a number of Paypal employees were helping themselves to funds. I did eventually get my money back by using a grapevine to track down an honest and helpful employee — absolutely unavailable via regular channels (I tried). What I had to go through to be my money back was AMAZING. Birth certificate, passport, driving license, contract of employment etc.

Since eBay has taken over I gather things have been cleaned up substantially but I would still be very wary of this company. Yes, it has been sinned against by crooks but it has also treated people abominably and engaged in all kinds of apparently capricious confiscation.

This story comes as NO SURPRISE.

If our banks were any good they’d have provided alternative services long ago.

By: Rambo Tribble

Rambo Tribble — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 15:46:13 +0000

Courts and the legal process are time consuming and expensive. Often what these laws and rulings represent are misinformed attempts to sidestep those costs. Such attempts are often poorly informed and rushed to completion.

Sadly, the legislative process is as broken as the patent one and vested interests end up calling the tune far too often. It is not a new problem; examples of public policy directed to private gain can be found throughout history. Change could be nice, though.

By: JohnK

JohnK — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 07:10:37 +0000

Well – did PayPal has given the money back they have stolen?

If not – when legal action is taken? PayPal are just ordinairy thieves in this case. They haven taken money away that they do not own and have no right to take, so this is a legal case fo sure. They have to be convicted as robbers or thieves.

Why the hell is this accepted as “buisness as usual”? I don’t get it…

By: Martin Owens

Martin Owens — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:15:26 +0000

Dishing out punishments, including the self authorisation of the freezing of account funds is not ethical nor a standard of justice I am willing to accept in a post enlightenment age.

The correct course of action is to collect the data and pass it on to the proper authorities where proper action can be taken and if need be escalated.

Do you think that it’s right to treat criminals so lightly and the innocent so harshly with the suspension of services or the freezing of access? It’s better that the authorities get in an actually investigate claims and resolve them. If this was done in those case then the money would be unfrozen by now wouldn’t it.

By: Elvin

Elvin — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:03:45 +0000

WoW…. you are one ethical dude… LOL

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 04:22:09 +0000

I stopped using paypal in 2002 after money sent to me from an ebay auction was held pending a fraud investigation. The facts were simple really,
I put a computer up for auction, the buyer won and paid through paypal. Shipping was easy since we only lived 3 miles apart, we just met at Cashman Caterpillar and I gave him the computer. The trouble was the difference between where paypal knew I lived when I made the account and where I lived at the time of the transaction. I figured since I was just going to keep the money in paypal in case a hot deal came up on ebay it would not be to big a deal, just confirm my ID and be done. No way in hell. To get my ID straightened out I needed the credit card number and exp. which I signed up with which I no longer possessed due to divorce plus no talking with the ex or I could start another account and have the buyer get his money back then repay on the new account. Let’s just say I chalked up the 200$ as lesson learned.

By: T. J. Brumfield

T. J. Brumfield — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 03:24:29 +0000

You’re correct that the problem is the government is placing responsibility on companies to act as a judge.

I don’t know the particulars of this case, but there federal laws (and laws in most countries that PayPal operates in) that require them to look for and report any suspicious behavior.

Legit companies can be used to launder money without realizing it. If PayPal notices irregularities in financial transactions, they are required by law to report them.

My only beef with this article (and most on the subject) is the suggestion that PayPal stole the money. If they’re merely freezing assets/halting transactions in accordance with the law, then they aren’t stealing anything.

Calling for people to boycott a company simply because they are following the law doesn’t seem very ethical to me.

By: Frank

Frank — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:55:58 +0000

I stopped using PayPal a hell of a long time ago after I read all the small print. If you thought credit card companies were bad just take a look at PayPal.

You are correct about service providers being the judge and jury. I recently had a copyright issue with my ISP and was disconnected with no explanation. When I called them I was informed that I was a thief and was lectured to about copyright law.

Yes, the law is broken. Big time. It is unfortunate that xorg’s funds were taken because of an assumption. As I have learned it is easy to assume something without real evidence. If I had any extra money laying around I would send it to xorg just for their inconvenience.

By: Some dude

Some dude — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 01:12:25 +0000

And where goes the money taken from other genuine scam accounts? In PayPal’s pockets?