@Vinyl Fluff
I don’t remember the details, but I think PayPal starts getting curious about accounts after a single account has too many disputes, and I know that Credit Card companies SUPER don’t like that and start locking things down after too many consecutive disputes or reversals. So, for this to have been going on so long and having hit so many artists suggests that the person committing this fraud was spreading it around.
But, to show that, you’d need to get the actual transaction data from enough artists who were hit by this to start putting together the clues.
And, it seems like that’s something PayPal should be doing, but because of how they handle disputes and reversals, it seems like its easier and cheeper for them to just periodically lose a class action lawsuit.
PayPal does indeed do some stupid and shady stuff. I’ve been lucky to have never had a problem, but I’ve read countless stories from people who got screwed by them.
From their reputation, I doubt PayPal would do anything, but what should really happen here is the artists compile info, and submit it to PayPal. At the very least maybe they can get her banned.
@Vinyl Fluff
I don’t remember the details, but I think PayPal starts getting curious about accounts after a single account has too many disputes, and I know that Credit Card companies SUPER don’t like that and start locking things down after too many consecutive disputes or reversals. So, for this to have been going on so long and having hit so many artists suggests that the person committing this fraud was spreading it around.
But, to show that, you’d need to get the actual transaction data from enough artists who were hit by this to start putting together the clues.
And, it seems like that’s something PayPal should be doing, but because of how they handle disputes and reversals, it seems like its easier and cheeper for them to just periodically lose a class action lawsuit.
@Vinyl Fluff
With the remaining 2% being that she was using someone else’s credit card without permission, and THAT person refused the transaction, which is why she keeps claiming “she doesn’t know what happened” and it keeps happening over and over.
How she keeps getting an account with PayPal after this many reversed transactions is one of the problems with PayPal and why they lost that freaking lawsuit about how they handle all of this.
Has she come up before, and has a history of multiple PayPal accounts?
@Vinyl Fluff
With the remaining 2% being that she was using someone else’s credit card without permission, and THAT person refused the transaction, which is why she keeps claiming “she doesn’t know what happened” and it keeps happening over and over.
How she keeps getting an account with PayPal after this many reversed transactions is one of the problems with PayPal and why they lost that freaking lawsuit about how they handle all of this.
That moment when it turns out she was telling the truth and we were just hounding on someone who didn’t mean to do anything.
Except I’d be willing to bet money she did in fact do it intentionally. PayPal doesn’t work this way.
The artists getting chargebacks were told, by PayPal, “(GIRL’S FULL NAME HERE) has opened a dispute with this transaction.”
The user has to open a dispute. PayPal doesn’t do it themselves. If they think something’s fishy they just pull it. They don’t open an investigation into it, send the affected party a notice and a (small) chance to answer, before (usually always) taking the buyer’s side and refunding the money.
Then she used multiple excuses which made no sense.
She had multiple chances to make right on it. She could’ve refunded the money in a separate transaction. She never did. Not for one single artist.
Ergo, it’s with a 98% likelihood this girl was just scamming them.
Shes deactivated her account. If she hasn’t made right with you, be mindful of her showing up to continue scamming artists
Sounds like she thought she could scam a bunch of artists and get away with it free. She wasn’t expecting the backlash and spotlight on her actions.
PayPal does a lot of crappy things, and there have been countless people that’ve had issues with it. But from the evidence presented, this is not one of those cases. It’s just not how PayPal works in this situation. And she apparently started telling people it was “hackers” who got into her account.
As someone else said in dA comment, “hackers” aren’t going to get into your account and start issuing chargebacks. They’re going to burn whatever credit or bank account they can that’s attached to the ground while they have access.
I already linked that. Her response is bullshit because PayPal doesn’t start charge backs. The member has to do that. Vinyl Fluff covered it pretty good if you took the time to read the comments. PayPal does NOT work the way the accused is claiming it does. She is lying and stealing from these artists. No other way to see it.
If you read the comments more-thoroughly, that’s been addressed. People also posted screenshots of the emails they got from PayPal which say she initiated a dispute and began the charge back. PayPal doesn’t do that on their own.
I call bullshit on this. I know how PayPal works having used it for 4 years myself for business and personal so what is said in this journal entry is complete bullshit. That or this 18 year old girl doesn’t know jack about how banking and money transfers work.
Yup, bullshit. PayPal doesn’t initiate charge backs for no reason. And they’re set up to take the sender’s word over the sendee. If it were a transaction problem, it likely would’ve come up immediately or within a few hours. And people are posting the PayPal notices which state she initiated the charge back. If it had been a transaction failure, it would note it. The fact that the girl apparently had several commissions done in a row and suddenly they’re all getting charge backs? Complete bullshit. She’s stealing from them, no other excuse.
Be interesting to keep an eye on this, and see if the money suddenly “magically” becomes available or not, or if she tucks her tail between her legs and hides for awhile.
In the end she not only hurt herself and her reputation, but if she tries to repay them out of either pressure or fear from legal action, she’s now out an additional $20 per artist to refund the charge back fee that they’ll undoubtedly demand.
@Exedrus
Calling foul on the DA journal entry I linked. It’s an entry from the accused. She claims to be having issues with PayPAl and has no idea what is going on. Mostly bullshit in that entry.
Hmm, my only worry with this image is that the image itself doesn’t indicate that it’s trying to warn against this person. From the thumbnail I assumed it was just trying to prove that the avatar was from a particular image. Tho I’m not sure what amount of text ‘n’ such would be allowed on an image like this.
@Chaotic Mind
Err, are you calling foul on the entry you linked or the one in the image’s description?
I call bullshit on this. I know how PayPal works having used it for 4 years myself for business and personal so what is said in this journal entry is complete bullshit. That or this 18 year old girl doesn’t know jack about how banking and money transfers work.
It’s a single non-offensive image aimed at warning community artists about someone trying to take advantage of them. You need to recalibrate what it is you see as “annoying”, possibly put the interests of others over the minusculy trivial “inconvenience” this image somehow poses to you.
PayPal does indeed do some stupid and shady stuff. I’ve been lucky to have never had a problem, but I’ve read countless stories from people who got screwed by them.
From their reputation, I doubt PayPal would do anything, but what should really happen here is the artists compile info, and submit it to PayPal. At the very least maybe they can get her banned.
I don’t remember the details, but I think PayPal starts getting curious about accounts after a single account has too many disputes, and I know that Credit Card companies SUPER don’t like that and start locking things down after too many consecutive disputes or reversals. So, for this to have been going on so long and having hit so many artists suggests that the person committing this fraud was spreading it around.
But, to show that, you’d need to get the actual transaction data from enough artists who were hit by this to start putting together the clues.
And, it seems like that’s something PayPal should be doing, but because of how they handle disputes and reversals, it seems like its easier and cheeper for them to just periodically lose a class action lawsuit.
Has she come up before, and has a history of multiple PayPal accounts?
With the remaining 2% being that she was using someone else’s credit card without permission, and THAT person refused the transaction, which is why she keeps claiming “she doesn’t know what happened” and it keeps happening over and over.
How she keeps getting an account with PayPal after this many reversed transactions is one of the problems with PayPal and why they lost that freaking lawsuit about how they handle all of this.
Except I’d be willing to bet money she did in fact do it intentionally. PayPal doesn’t work this way.
The artists getting chargebacks were told, by PayPal, “(GIRL’S FULL NAME HERE) has opened a dispute with this transaction.”
The user has to open a dispute. PayPal doesn’t do it themselves. If they think something’s fishy they just pull it. They don’t open an investigation into it, send the affected party a notice and a (small) chance to answer, before (usually always) taking the buyer’s side and refunding the money.
Then she used multiple excuses which made no sense.
She had multiple chances to make right on it. She could’ve refunded the money in a separate transaction. She never did. Not for one single artist.
Ergo, it’s with a 98% likelihood this girl was just scamming them.
Edited
@Psyga315
Sounds like she thought she could scam a bunch of artists and get away with it free. She wasn’t expecting the backlash and spotlight on her actions.
PayPal does a lot of crappy things, and there have been countless people that’ve had issues with it. But from the evidence presented, this is not one of those cases. It’s just not how PayPal works in this situation. And she apparently started telling people it was “hackers” who got into her account.
As someone else said in dA comment, “hackers” aren’t going to get into your account and start issuing chargebacks. They’re going to burn whatever credit or bank account they can that’s attached to the ground while they have access.
I already linked that. Her response is bullshit because PayPal doesn’t start charge backs. The member has to do that. Vinyl Fluff covered it pretty good if you took the time to read the comments. PayPal does NOT work the way the accused is claiming it does. She is lying and stealing from these artists. No other way to see it.
If you read the comments more-thoroughly, that’s been addressed. People also posted screenshots of the emails they got from PayPal which say she initiated a dispute and began the charge back. PayPal doesn’t do that on their own.
http://beyondhergrave.deviantart.com/journal/PayPal-issue-and-money-636104351 By the way, this is her response.
Yup, bullshit. PayPal doesn’t initiate charge backs for no reason. And they’re set up to take the sender’s word over the sendee. If it were a transaction problem, it likely would’ve come up immediately or within a few hours. And people are posting the PayPal notices which state she initiated the charge back. If it had been a transaction failure, it would note it. The fact that the girl apparently had several commissions done in a row and suddenly they’re all getting charge backs? Complete bullshit. She’s stealing from them, no other excuse.
Be interesting to keep an eye on this, and see if the money suddenly “magically” becomes available or not, or if she tucks her tail between her legs and hides for awhile.
In the end she not only hurt herself and her reputation, but if she tries to repay them out of either pressure or fear from legal action, she’s now out an additional $20 per artist to refund the charge back fee that they’ll undoubtedly demand.
Edited
Ah, I see.
Calling foul on the DA journal entry I linked. It’s an entry from the accused. She claims to be having issues with PayPAl and has no idea what is going on. Mostly bullshit in that entry.
@Chaotic Mind
Err, are you calling foul on the entry you linked or the one in the image’s description?
Edited because: Forgot my original comment text.
Journal entry
Edited because: Link derp
like I said, past experience has images getting more attention than the actual forum thread.
for example, compare the regulars of the ‘wrestling thread’ and compare those who reply on wrestling related images.
“annoying”
It’s a single non-offensive image aimed at warning community artists about someone trying to take advantage of them. You need to recalibrate what it is you see as “annoying”, possibly put the interests of others over the minusculy trivial “inconvenience” this image somehow poses to you.
is annoying, take it to the forums
based on experience, images get more reactions than actual threads.
guessing artist scams potential pony commissioners based on the tags.